Scumbria-- Re: Intel is rushing their product introductions, and looking very poorly in the process.
Unfortunately, I don't think this is the case. Four months after the 1 GHz "release," it is still not possible to get a 1 GHz P3 system from anyone but Dell and IBM. Yet, the people on this thread and most articles written insist that Intel is at least at parity speedwise. Even if a person acknowledges that AMD is slightly ahead, he or she makes the absurd assertion that who has the highest speed processor available in the best volumes is irrelevant because, of course, processor distributions don't follow a normal distribution and there is no correlation between the highest speed grade available and the average speed grade available.
I'm not really sure what AMD should do though. There is certainly some merit to letting Intel stay slightly ahead in the speed race-- "revenue rights instead of bragging rights" as Sanders said on a cnbc interview a while back, plus Intel does have the $500B market cap and might feel the need to do something dangerous if Mr. $11B were publicly acknowledged to be outperforming it in its core business. Hopefully you're right, and the fluff investors receive isn't reflective of what the oems think.
However, since the main upcoming danger for AMD is stalled marketshare increases due to the absence of corporate penetration, and corporate opinion (and, hence, demand) is largely affected by what it reads about AMD's long term viability and competitiveness, this Intel-ectually dishonest campaign has worked fairly effectively so far.
-Eric |
