<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Arial, Verdana">quote:</font><HR><font face="Arial, Verdana" size="2">Originally posted by GT2k:
When you plan something for the future, at least have it perform better then existing processors now to and future technologies</font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
I disagree. Sometimes, you have to trade the short-term benefits to the long term advantage. Just look at the Pentium Pro. It run 16-bit Windows 3.1 code like sh*t, but it spawn a slew of successors to make Intel's most successful line of CPU which took AMD more than 3 years to beat. U do know that the Cel/Cel II/PII/PIII/CuMines are all essentially the same architecture, dun u?
It is no surprise to me that Intel's brand new P4 architecture is slower than a similarly-clocked PIII in Integer ops. The P4 successor is planned to be released by next year Q3 with 2Ghz and .13 micron. The architecture will prove itself once the clockspeed goes up because internally, it's quad-pumped. Just look at the Radeon. When u overclock the memory, the fps goes up rapidly.
Moreover, who needs to worry abt opening a Windows or document in Win9x anymore. The future is 3D/multi-media. The P4 has proven that it can handle MPEG-4 and Q3A nicely, so it proofs that it has plenty of potential given the right compiler. Mark my word, SSE2 will kick ass!
------------------
Dual Celeron 300A oc 450, Radeon 64MB VIVO 166 oc 180, 256MB SDRAM, IBM DS 34GXP 20.1GB, Pioneer 10x Slot-in DVD, Yamaha 8424 CD-RW, Yamaha YMF744 XG sound, W2K SP1, Mitsubishi Diamond Pro 900U.
[This message has been edited by E_T (edited 12-10-2000).]