SI
SI
discoversearch

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: THE WATSONYOUTH who wrote (72183)9/18/1999 2:47:00 AM
From: Elmer  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 1572860
 
Re: "I mostly agree. I think I can claim timely execution implies availability. But, I'm not sure AMD needs to match cost at the high end desktop market. There is a huge margin on these chips. "IF" AMD can maintain a performance advantage, they should be able to sell enough high end K7s to return to profitability. That's a win for them. Now, if Intel is willing to cut prices so steeply that even at the high end, AMD can't be profitable because of their higher cost structure,then I suppose cost will matter also. I DON'T think Intel is prepared to do that. "

Please forgive the tone of my last post. I don't think AMD will hold the performance lead for much longer. They (AMD) have yet to demonstrate that they can produce this device in quantity and they certainly haven't ever demonstrated that they can produce any design of their own at a anything but a huge loss. Without a meaningful performance advantage their price structure will suffer terribly. The 650 MHz K7 is nowhere to be found and it looks like Intel will soon be delivering 733 MHz CuMines that might outperform Athlons clock for clock, even if AMD could match the speed. Motherboards don't work reliably and OEMs are gunshy after years of AMD f*ckups. Bottom line is, benchmarks are for foil fliping and academic presentations, availability and cost are what counts. Count on more losses for AMD.

EP