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: THE WATSONYOUTH who wrote (82569)	12/10/1999 12:11:00 AM
From: Charles R	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1572208

<Intel will demo a 1GHz IA-32 room temp processor at ISSCC in Feb. This is no rumor.> So how long do companies take to deliver processors that are demonstrated at ISSCC? What is Intel's track record on that issue. <I have yet to see proof of 1GHz Athlons - little alone 1.4GHz.> AMD's CEO was on CNBC saying they will beat Intel to 1GHz. That is not a rumor either. What that means to different people is a different story. <If it is generally believed that Willamette could be ready by Oct 2000, what is AMD waiting for?> Wilamette? At launch I do not think there is more than 50-50 chance that Wilamette will lead in MHz - unless it is done on 0.13. Just my opinion. <Why only 750MHz as the initial .18um release?> Very simple. A larger jump would devalue other CPUs, including AMDs. I doubt an OEM would have risked ASP erosion on their entire product line by launching something substantially higher than 750MHz when that system forms may be 5% of their overall revenues. This situation, of course, will change as AMD builds volume. <Why only a rumored speed bump to 800MHz?> I think that should be "at least 800MHz". Keep in mind that, of late, AMD has learned to set low expectations. <If the consumer will not buy 800MHz processors now, why will they buy 1.2GHz processors 4 months from now???> I haven't heard anyone say consumers will not buy a 800MHz processors now and neither have I heard anyone say that 1.2 GHz systems will be bought by consumers 4 months from now. Is it possible that the higher frequencies will go to business workstation and server segments before they get to consumer systems? And, that could be AMD's competitive advantage to break-open that segment from Intel? <But, maybe the real reason is that neither company can get much past 1GHz and this race will be a lot closer than previously thought.> May be. But that ignores AMD downbinning 0.25micron 650MHz Athlons to 500/550MHz. It also ignores a lawsuit-shy CEO who is demonstrating Fab25 Al 900MHz at analysts meetings and trade shows and who is going around telling people that AMD will beat their competitor to 1G. Chuck

To: THE WATSONYOUTH who wrote (82569)	12/10/1999 12:34:00 AM
From: Dan3	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1572208

Re: Why only 750MHz as the initial .18um release?... Either or both companies (or neither) could have faster parts ready to go. A lot of boxes have been built by OEMS for an XMAS market that could vanish if an announcement made 500MHZ to 600MHZ machines look pathetic. Intel OEMS have a lot of PIIIs to move at these speeds and AMD has some Athlons. Neither company wants to antagonize the retail channel at this point. Just my take on things, Dan PS - From a very small sample - what I've seen in stores seemed to show that AMD may have cleared out most of the sub 600 Athlons (I've seen ads for 500MHZ Athlons "while quantity lasts" - stores I visited had mostly 600s in stock with some faster and none slower. There were a fair number of 450, 500, and 550 Pentiums with few faster. I'd expect the retailers would hate to be sitting on a pile of expensive sub 600MHZ Pentiums (or Athlons) come January 1!

To: THE WATSONYOUTH who wrote (82569)	12/10/1999 2:28:00 AM
From: Mani1	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1572208

WATSONYOUTH, Re <Intel will demo a 1GHz IA-32 room temp processor at ISSCC in Feb. This is no rumor.> Then what is it? Fact you say, then post the proof. Re <I have yet to see proof of 1GHz Athlons> Unless you work for AMD, I wouldn't expect you to have. I have not seen one either, what is your point? 900 MHz was demonstrated in public, pretty good. Re <Willamette could be ready by Oct 2000, what is AMD waiting for?> For Oct 2000. Re <Why only 750MHz as the initial .18um release? Why only a rumored speed bump to 800MHz?> Because 750 MHz is next speed grade after 700 MHz. 800 MHz is also the next one after 750 MHz. Re <If the consumer will not buy 800MHz processors now, why will they buy 1.2GHz processors 4 months from now?> Consumer does not buy 800 MHz because there aren't any. If there was some, they would buy it. Re <just my take> Very bad takes, IMO. The fact is that AMD has the highest MHz CPU and is selling all they can make at a high ASP. A higher MHz one does them no good at this point. Mani