News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Perhaps it is simpler to say that Intel was disrupted. Parent comment

Re:Perhaps it is simpler to say that Intel was disrupted by farseer on Monday July 02, 2018 @02:02PM (#17443971)
Sorry to nitpick but Pentium 4 was a temporary flop until the HT version came along for which AMD had no answer. And I don't think the K6 beat Pentium II. Having bought a $2000 K6-2 computer in 1998 with maxed out RAM and graphics, I instantly regretted that decision as all my friend's mediocre Pentium II's ran applications and games better than my K6-2.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Perhaps it is simpler to say that Intel was disrupted by loser777 on Monday July 02, 2018 @02:27PM (#17444204)
Not even a nitpick, the claim that P4 HT had "no answer" from AMD is just false.

https://www.anandtech.com/show/1517

Intel never definitively reclaimed x86 until Conroe/Core 2.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Perhaps it is simpler to say that Intel was disrupted by beagle3 on Monday July 02, 2018 @02:42PM (#17444323)
The original HT implementation was so incredibly bad that people would turn it off to improve performance on multithreaded loads.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Perhaps it is simpler to say that Intel was disrupted by georgeecollins on Monday July 02, 2018 @02:45PM (#17444344)
So true! It only worked on example code, it was very difficult to get an improvement in a real world app.
[ Parent | on HN ]