63 Quotes by Nathan Brookwood

When they did the Pentium M, they were under tight constraints on power. Now, desktop and server are facing similar kinds of constraints. It's not so much battery life as it is noise, just the physics of cooling a really hot, small chip.

What Intel is trying to do is put some distance between multiprocessor configurations, which will be Xeon-based, and Pentium 4 chips for the desktop and low-end workstation environments,

Tualatin is a dynamite server chip. One of the reasons (Intel) decided not to go forward with the Foster-based Xeon chip was because Tualatin, with its larger cache, had better performance in server environments.

Tualatin is a dynamite server chip, ... One of the reasons (Intel) decided not to go forward with the Foster-based Xeon chip was because Tualatin, with its larger cache, had better performance in server environments.

There are 25 years of PC industry and 40 years of computer industry history that says there is never enough performance. My article in faith is that you will never have enough computing performance for things you want to do. Having said that, there are clever software people somewhere who are thinking of even cleverer things to do.

The original theory was Netburst would show increasing performance benefits with increasing frequency. It didn't work quite the way Intel had anticipated.

As soon as you let up, even for a quarter or two, you're in trouble.

As I look at Intel's product line-up versus AMD, it's clear that Intel is weakest in servers and strongest in notebooks. So from that standpoint I can see why Intel would want to create an impression that says they are closing that gap.

These different firmware environments will separate OS X and Windows environments almost as effectively as instruction set architecture did when Macintosh software ran only on PowerPC chips.