Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

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 -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: kash johal who wrote (70931)	9/3/1999 4:26:00 PM
From: RDM	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1575706

Copper I also have respect for Paul's sources. It was not clear what was the timeframe of the copper process problem reporting. Was it May? or August? Was it continuing? Motorola is rolling with this process and delivering volume. AMD has access to Motorola help. AMD did change the head guy in Dresden and it may been with a good reason.

To: kash johal who wrote (70931)	9/3/1999 4:48:00 PM
From: Tenchusatsu	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1575706

<Also the fact that Intel failed to show any coppermine benchmarks vs PIII leads to me to believe the new core sucks and offers no higher performance than PIII.> Isn't is normal for Intel not to release benchmarks until the product is actually released? Tenchusatsu

To: kash johal who wrote (70931)	9/3/1999 8:57:00 PM
From: Elmer	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1575706

Re: "Also the fact that Intel failed to show any coppermine benchmarks vs PIII leads to me to believe the new core sucks and offers no higher performance than PIII. Which is great news allround." Kash, if that were true then Intel wouldn't bother with Coppermine. Why would they add the die area for L2 if it offered no performance improvement? They would simply compact the PIII for .18u and be done with it. EP