Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: Process Boy who wrote (86252)	1/10/2000 12:03:00 AM
From: Cirruslvr	Read Replies (2) of 1572416

PB - RE: "Any thoughts as to how the above might tie in to discussions we've recently had regarding capacity, etc.?" If Geyserville processors have held up production of desktop processors I think Intel didn't make a right decision when allocating Q4 production. But I'm using hindsight. Who knows what Intel forecasted for Q4... Hmm, Geyserville was DELAYED from '99 to 2000. If these processors require their own "stuff" and introduction was pushed back, there is a possibility initial production didn't turn out well and valuable wafers/processors had to be thrown away. Oops, there went the extra PIII 450/500s Intel could have sold to Gateway. AMD is supposed to have their own version of Geyserville, but it isn't supposed to be as advanced. Changes are made in BIOS. But future mobile chips are supposed to be able to change within Windows, or so that one article says.

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next