<Sigh> Sometimes I dont know why I bother, but posts like this are getting out of hand...Rod keeps posting CRAP that has no basis in reality and I feel that it is simply an attemp to scare investors on this and other threads who do not know the technicals that well.
> Why the K6 is Doomed
>
> The scavenging parasite which is causing the uncertainty >will soon be
> exposed and Intel can continue on its merry way to $233 >by the end of the
> year and $266 shortly thereafter.
>
> Why AMD is doomed:
>
> 1. Overclocked 200 Mhz samples sold at a loss to >establish a market presence
> 2. Complete lack of built-in support for SMP means no >servers.
> 3. Complete lack of a viable notebook solution.
> 4. Minuscule capacity, even at 166 Mhz
> 5. Pathetic floating point performance.
> 6. OEMs want software only modems
> 7. OEMs want volume in all models
> 8. OEMs want Pentium II in volume
> 9. OEMs want notebooks, period
> 10. OEMs want servers, period
> 11. OEMs want Merced
Rod:
Why do you keep writing posts like this when you have not even responded to my last response to your post? Did you miss it? Here it is:
techstocks.com
Perhaps you will explain to me why even though I have clarified to you points 2,3, and 5 above, you simply continue to post lies? I will address your points above now and I hope you actually pay attention this time:
1. What proof do you have that AMD is using overclocked 166Mhz model to demo it's 200Mhz line? Aren't all processors above the base model in a way being overclocked? For example a Pentium 200 is simply a 166 running at 3*66 instead of 2.5*66 so in a way it's being overclocked? Of course not...if a company rates their processor as being capable of running at a certain speed then you are not overclocking it by running it at that speed....so until you have proof that AMD is using their chips that only tested at 166Mhz and selling them as 200Mhz (which would be quite a scandal I'd like to know about as an investor) then I would apreciate it if you didn't spread unsubstanciated LIES! In addition to your overclocking claim, you say that AMD is selling them at a loss just to establish a market presence....Where are you getting this privledged information? Last I saw the published pricelist (which I'll admit is not the final word) the 166Mhz K6 will sell for $244 and the 200Mhz for $349. Now they have sold parts that have larger dies for less than that (ie. the K5) and I'd assume they're making a profit on those, why wouldn't they be making a profit on the K6 line? Your reasoning and logic deceive me.
2. I have already responded to this claim, it does not mean no servers are possible with this processor. It means that no motherboard takes advantage of the OpenPIC spec. Besides Multi-CPU servers aren't necessarily the most efficient way to increase performance (adding CPU's does not, in most cases ,linearly increase performance).
3. As I said before, Intel is doing no better putting PPros into notebooks. Who cares if they put a Pentium 200Mhz into a notebook if AMD can manage to put a Pentium-Pro-like performing chip into a notebook later.
4. Where are you getting your information??? You claim they have miniscule capacity at 166Mhz ??? They have been producing these processors for MONTHS now since they started sampling for partners. I would guess that in that time they have worked out many of the bugs in the process. In addition to that they are using their newest Fab25 for production which has an output of 6000 wafers/week (which I'm not sure if they've reached yet), I would hardly call that miniscule capacity.
5. Where do you keep comming up with this pathetic floating point performance? I have already told you what the specs show, to be more precise here is what is on the K6 Overview publicly available at:
amd.com
Processor FPU Multiply/ADD Latency:
AMD K6: 2/2
Intel PPro: 5/3
I wont say that those numbers guarantee that the K6 will have a faster FPU than the PPro, but I will say that those numbers are hardly pathetic.
6. What the hell does this have to do with anything? Software modems? Intel? AMD? Please show me the connection.
7. OEMs would not give a damn if all AMD could produce was the K6, as long as the K6 is what there is demand for.
8. Why would OEMs only want Pentium II in volume and nothing else? I believe they want any processor that will run their customer's software faster. If that turns out to be the K6 and the customer knows this, the customer will ask for the K6 and the OEM will provide. I realize there are a lot of people out there who buy intel only and will not bother looking at an alternative, but if the K6 turns out to be performing the way it is reported to, you will see that on the front cover of every PC related magazine in the US.
9. OEMs want notebooks period? Well then for the Pentium class notebooks they will go to Intel, but what do they do when the customers want PPro performing notebooks? Wait till Intel releases the mobile PPro? As far as I can see (due to power use) the K6 has a much better chance of making it into a notebook than the PPro does, and probably before the Mobile next generation processor does (the Mobile Merced? is that what it's called?).
10. If the K6 turns out to be the fastest CPU arround, and there is demand for faster Mutli-CPU servers, then some smart company will begin to produce OpenPIC compliant motherboards that the K6 can use. Server's are not out of the reach of the K6.
11. OEMs want Merced? They want whatever runs faster and is cheaper. The less they have to spend on the CPU the more they can spend on other things like harddrives or monitors. and things the consumer will actually notice a difference in.
I await your response and please use logical reasoning based on FACTS not lies.
Alex |
