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: Process Boy who wrote (70971)	9/4/1999 12:21:00 AM
From: kash johal	Read Replies (4) \| Respond to of 1575114

Cirrulsvr, Re:"The following is a purely hypothetical question for the sake of argument: What if one processor beats the other in benchmarks clock for clock but the other processor equals or beats the performance at a higher MHz, and great availability? Again, just for the sake of argument. I don't know (and neither do you :-))the Coppermine benchmarks, so any following discussion would have to be in a hypothetical sense." As we all know this is likely to happen if Intel can get Cumine up to 700 plus range as advertised therefore their 0.18 micron will match AMDs 0.25 micron K7. Basically in Q4 AMD will sell every Athlon they make and Intel will sell every cumine they produce. The big battle is Q1/Q2 2000 when AMD's 0.18 comes on line and dresden comes on line. If Intel cannot match the Mhz ramp of AMDs 0.18 micron Al and Cu process then u better get ready for a stock implosion. Of course no-one truly expects AMD to ramp flawlessly to 5-10M cpu/qtr in 0.18 micron within 6-8 months. Except maybe the kamikaze boys. regards, Kash At this point AMD's K7

To: Process Boy who wrote (70971)	9/4/1999 2:56:00 PM
From: Cirruslvr	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1575114

PB - RE: "This is really hard for me to answer, at this point, because the Coppermine benchmarks aren't known yet. You make a valid argument, in a purely hypothetical sense...." I see no need to speak hypothetically about Cuontimemine's overall performance because it won't be as good as the Athlon's overall performance. And there is no way my opinion is going to change until I'm proven otherwise. "The following is a purely hypothetical question for the sake of argument: What if one processor beats the other in benchmarks clock for clock but the other processor equals or beats the performance at a higher MHz, and great availability?" There is no doubt Intel's chips will be more easily available compared to AMD's chips, so the only hypothetically speaking there is to do is MHz. Intel says 7XX this year. Sharky says Intel 733 in mid-November. AMD says Athlon 700 in Q4. AMD's 700 is expected in early October, according to Sharky and Paul. AMD has said nothing officially about 750. They also said nothing about the 650's exact release date other than Q3, and it turns out it was announced in August and availability cam in about 2 weeks. So if AMD wants to retain their crown they will announce a 750 this year. What will Intel do to retaliate? Usually their chips are available when announced, but they may go the PIII 550 route and announce the 800 with availability later in the year (but there won't be much time left in the year). Of course, they could have availability of 800 when it is announced... I don't see why Intel would do a 750 if one of the hypes of the Camino platform is the 133MHz bus, not to mention that a 733 w/PC133 (if Camino even supports PC133...)might be faster than a 750 w/PC100. (Who cares about RamBUST DRDRAM this year if only Dell will be using it this year?) Does ANYONE think Intel 750 makes sense?