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: Tenchusatsu who wrote (95332)	2/26/2000 9:54:00 PM
From: Dan3	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1576909

Re: how do you know that Willamette's L2 cache was ripped from Coppermine? Does it even matter?... For more than 6 months now, just about everything from Intel has failed to meet expectations except Coppermine's L2, which greatly exceeded them. (In very high tech, leading edge production, this is neither unexpected nor indicative of problems. As has been pointed out, Dresden and multiprocessor Athlons have been pushed out, too) If that great L2 was a result of bringing forward part of Willamette, it's not a big deal. If it was secret performance enhancement project, there could be others. All I can do (you are in a positon to know more <VBG> ) when making investment decisions is to read the formal and informal company announcements, and the tests and rumors from websites and magazines. This is why I focus a fair amount of attention on the Coppermine cache - it seemed to come out of nowhere, but it came within the time frame for Willamette on some of the earlier roadmaps. Coppermine as Coppermine worries me, while a 3/4 Coppermine 1/4 Willamette hybrid would be more predictable and less of a concern. Dan