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.

Technology Stocks : Intel Corporation (INTC) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Process Boy who wrote (97909)	1/31/2000 12:31:00 PM
From: Road Walker	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 186894

PB, Following was posted on the AMD thread, any truth, or just more speculation? theregister.co.uk Posted 31/01/2000 4:26pm by Mike Magee Intel to go for McKinley before Merced Chipzilla's follow up to the Merced-Itanium platform, McKinley, is likely to beat its predecessor to the market, informed sources told The Register late today. McKinley is close to taping out and the IA-64 development team believes that limited clock speeds on Itanium yields have forced Intel to this conclusion. The Merced-Itanium has so far failed to achieve over 600MHz clock speeds on the part, although Intel and its partners want it to clock at at least 1GHz. McKinley, when it tapes out, a technical chip developer's term for a chip design coming out, will hit 1GHz "straight out of the starting gate", the source added. Over the weekend, persistent rumours and insider emails have suggested that Intel is ramping up Willamette far faster than it originally wanted, and that competition from AMD on the Athlon has forced a re-visiting of its chip development strategies. According to these sources, Willamette did tape out only a few weeks ago. This may also explain why there is a sudden lack of ramp-up to the Coppermine platform. ©

To: Process Boy who wrote (97909)	1/31/2000 2:52:00 PM
From: Gary Kao	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 186894

PB: thanks for the URL...while it does relieve my anxiety a bit, I am still concerned that while a new standard is evolving in a business that Intel is deep into, Intel appears not to be at present participating in the highest echelon of the standard- and decision-making (and therefore the highest potential of profits). What about profit margins? I don't know Intel's margins on flash...but while Sandisk's profit margin is <10%, I am willing to hazard a guess that Intel's StrongArm and flash margins are probably not much better than that. Also, remember that 6.7% of a multi-billion dollar industry may still add up to many tens of millions of profits. While this will still be a fraction of the profits from CPU's, those added pennies per share may be incremental and help Intel achieve "record profits". Feedback? Thanks in advance, Gary