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: hmaly who wrote (89089)	1/23/2000 12:45:00 PM
From: crazyoldman	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1572605

Hello hmaly, Thanks for the great post. Re: "Now will this lead to the demise of Intel? NO!!!! But it will erode Intel's monopoly position and this erosion could cost them dearly in lost sales and licensing fees. Furthermore it will lead to an erosion of confidence by oems in Intels superiority in technology; whether justified or not. The "Intel inside" logo will start to stand for mediocrity." A key point to Intel's past successes has been their power to control the chipset/bus standards and exercise that power to control any and all competition. Intel could never be judged to be mediocre since no one could compete "up front", instead all were hopelessly left behind in the dust. I believe this has left a bad taste in the mouth of the whole industry but what other choice existed? In the mid 1990's AMD starts to figure out how to "get out of the dust", the AMD we see today is a result. For the first time there's a competitor "up front" and now both companies can be judged relative to each other. I think we are eye witnesses to the "erosion of confidence by oems in Intels superiority in technology". Another point I see in AMD's favor is in most/all of Intel's history it has had the luxury of time on its side. A foul up here, a disappointing result there, what did it matter. Progress was just pushed out on the time line a little more and all the foul ups were buried from public view. Not so now that AMD is running up front. Lots of people fold under pressure. It will be interesting to see how Intel handles this new experience. My money is on the new young dark horse up front named "Spry Athy". Kindest regards, CrazyMan

To: hmaly who wrote (89089)	1/23/2000 4:51:00 PM
From: Process Boy	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1572605

hamly - <I have been reading both yours and Mani's post on copper and I believe both of you are right. Yes, 6 months ago it didn't make sense to go copper, now it probably does.< Intel made the decision years ago to go to Copper. Also years ago, Intel decided not to implement Copper at .18. PB

To: hmaly who wrote (89089)	1/23/2000 5:08:00 PM
From: Elmer	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1572605

Re: "With AMD's abilty to improve speed by using copper and put cache on die, Intel could find themselves 2 -3 sgeed grades behind until Willamette or .13 um." Reality check. AMD has not demonstrated any such ability. No copper production material has ever been seen and no improved speed has ever been demonstrated and to date all AMD has shown regarding on-die cache has been low speeds and poor availability. Please try and distinguish between reality and your hopes and dreams. EP