Tench:
Check your "facts"! Look at the source document. AMD has it posted on their website as a .pdf file:
amd.com
This, and I quote, "48. HP. In 2002, when AMD set out to earn a place in HP’s commercial desktop
product roadmap, HP demanded a $25 million quarterly fund to compensate it for Intel’s
expected retaliation. Eager to break into the commercial market, and to earn a place in HP’s
successful “Evo” product line, AMD agreed instead to provide HP with the first million
microprocessors for free in an effort to overcome Intel’s financial hold over HP."
Evo, the line, was not a server. It was a desktop commercial PC line.
This is your lie, not HP's, AMD's or CJ's. You are the one who is lying. BTW, the statement is on the bottom of page 18 of the document. Evidently Magee got it wrong or made an unverified assumption that was easy to check.
Second, none of its redacted now. And I remember that part when I read the full document. It was even well discussed on this thread way back in 2005 for many days.
Notice that this was 2002, a year before the launch of Opteron in April, 2003. This had to be an Athlon, either a Throughbred, Palomino or Morgan of some version launched in 2002. I had a 2GHz Throughbred Athlon XP 2400+ with a 133MHz FSB on a IWill Via KT-266A chipset RAID MB with 4 IDE channels on it (6 HDs and 2 burners) in a tower case towards the end of 2002, 3-6 months after its launch. They ran circles around the competing P4s (Northwood max at about 2.8GHz at 133MHz FSB) with RAMBUS at the time. You remember RAMBUS, that expensive power hungry POS RDRAM RIMMs? Most figured that the 2400+ was the equivalent of a 3-3.6GHz P4 at the time. A quiet cool compact HSF Tbred versus a jet engine sounding wind tunnel HSF Northwood (Buddy's P4 PC). Yes, AMD at that time was faster than Intel at a cheaper price. Both were 130nm CPUs with AMD using Copper bulk and Intel still using Aluminum bulk, IIRC. Intel went to Copper bulk for their 90nm process, again IIRC. AMD went to 130nm Copper SOI for Opteron that same year, 2003.
CJ was right and you were flat wrong!
Pete |
