🚀 go-pugleaf

RetroBBS NetNews Server

Inspired by RockSolid Light RIP Retro Guy

Article View: comp.os.linux.hardware
Article #858

Re: P4 vs Athlon for Linux latexing, is gcc-2.95 responsible?

#858
From: gaffo
Date: Sun, 16 Jun 2002 00:33
49 lines
3477 bytes
"David Kastrup" <David.Kastrup@t-online.de> wrote in message
news:x5ofecf7vi.fsf@tupik.goethe.zz...
> "Jack" <jack@norealaddy.net> writes:
>
> > "andrew" <andrew@killspam.gi0nwg.freeserve.co.uk> wrote in message
> > news:bJBrtJA$H4C9Ew$t@gi0nwg.freeserve.co.uk...
> > :
> > : I'm not trying to rub salt into your wounds, but anyone thinking of
> > : buying a P4 should first read the article in the link below and then
ask
> > : themselves if they really want a P4.  Let's just say that the article
is
> > : not very complimentary to the P4 or Intel.
> > :
> > : http://www.emulators.com/docs/pentium_1.htm
> >
> > That was a very interesting article...very eye opening.  I learned a
> > lot.  So can we surmise that people who buy P4's (in lieu of
> > Athon's, or even PIII's !)  are either clueless dolts buying with
> > the "huddled masses" mentality, or that Intel's marketing machine is
> > really **that** good?
>
> Or that people buying a P4 have the attention span necessary for
> reading the given web article through to the last installment which
> says that recent versions of P4 beat the Athlons in performance, their
> design problems notwithstanding.
>
> --
> David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum
> Email: David.Kastrup@t-online.de


Only due to FSB hike and 512-cache........the core remains
ssssssssllllllllllllllooooooooooowwwww. IF the new athlons ever show the
ability to overclock to around 2.2 ghz, the p-4 will again be second
rate...................until then the p-4 is a little faster in general.
Barton will probably (maybe) change this.



--
An unjust king asked a devotee what kind of worship is best? He replied:
'For thee the best is to sleep one half of the day so as not to injure the
people for a while.'

I saw a tyrant sleeping half the day.
I said: 'This confusion, if sleep removes it, so much the better;
But he whose sleep is better than his wakefulness
Is better dead than leading such a bad life.'
Technical Details
Message-ID: <S1RO8.43614$UT.2974230@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net>
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!wn1feed!worldnet.att.net!bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net.POSTED!not-for-mail
References: <3D0B57CB.5060406@nospam.com> <bJBrtJA$H4C9Ew$t@gi0nwg.freeserve.co.uk> <aeghpc$42k$1@reader2.wnet> <x5ofecf7vi.fsf@tupik.goethe.zz>

Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: f9e16,ea3300a83f1f851c
X-Google-Attributes: gidf9e16,public
X-Google-Thread: 102b32,ea3300a83f1f851c
X-Google-Attributes: gid102b32,public
X-Google-Thread: 1045b9,ea3300a83f1f851c
X-Google-Attributes: gid1045b9,public
X-Google-Thread: f65d0,ea3300a83f1f851c
X-Google-Attributes: gidf65d0,public
X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2002-06-15 17:33:54 PST
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!wn1feed!worldnet.att.net!bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: "gaffo" <gaffo@usenet.net>
Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.hardware,gnu.gcc,comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips,comp.text.tex
References: <3D0B57CB.5060406@nospam.com> <bJBrtJA$H4C9Ew$t@gi0nwg.freeserve.co.uk> <aeghpc$42k$1@reader2.wnet> <x5ofecf7vi.fsf@tupik.goethe.zz>
Subject: Re: P4  vs Athlon for Linux latexing, is gcc-2.95 responsible?
Lines: 53
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200
Message-ID: <S1RO8.43614$UT.2974230@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net>
Date: Sun, 16 Jun 2002 00:33:54 GMT
NNTP-Posting-Host: 12.86.111.147
X-Complaints-To: abuse@worldnet.att.net
X-Trace: bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net 1024187634 12.86.111.147 (Sun, 16 Jun 2002 00:33:54 GMT)
NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 16 Jun 2002 00:33:54 GMT
Organization: AT&T Worldnet