Author: Jorge Pichard
Date: 07:16:48 12/16/02
Go up one level in this thread
On December 16, 2002 at 10:03:25, Jorge Pichard wrote: >On December 16, 2002 at 09:33:55, Dan Andersson wrote: > >>It's not that simple. In every case there is complex reasons for any decision. >>While it is true that the bottom line is money. In this case the P4 design is >>having trouble scaling in frequency. They designed it for speed and hoped that >>the much older Athlon design would not scale as it has done. And Intel sees the >>x86 as a dead end. The research and design costs would be prohibitive if they >>launched a crash program. Better to wait on AMD and try a broad range of >>possible improvements. >> >>MvH Dan Andersson > A california based chip giant has produced this transitor, but it will NOT be commecially available until 2005. > >http://www.siliconstrategies.com/story/OEG20001211S0006 > >http://www.pcworld.com/news/article/0,aid,36348,00.asp
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.