Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : Intel Corporation (INTC) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: 993racer who wrote (77381)	3/29/1999 8:17:00 AM
From: JDN	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 186894

Dear 993: I am certainly no technical expert, but I do subscribe to PCComputing and have read similar stuff. However, when you read the FINE PRINT it usually shows that whenever the k6-3 is faster it is in a specific application and not in general. JDN

To: 993racer who wrote (77381)	3/29/1999 11:31:00 AM
From: Paul Engel	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 186894

racer - Re: "it seems that that the k-6-3 was faster than the PIII by 12%...any comments?? " Under certain conditions, a K63 - usually with an additional 1 or 2 MegaBytes (!!) of external L3 cache - have been shown to have perhaps one and maybe two benchmarks - out of perhaps 6 or 8 - faster than an equivalently clocked Intel Pentium II or III with only 512K of L2 cache. However, on the MAJORITY, the Intel products are superior. Further, on APPLICATIONS, such as CAD tests or games, the Intel chips almost universally swamp AMD's best parts. Paul