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: Charles R who wrote (113202)	5/29/2000 12:02:00 PM
From: crazyoldman	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 1573220

Hello Charles, Re: I would be surprised to see a launch past 1.2 in June. Regardless of the speed bin distribution, there is simply no reason for AMD to push speed grades at this point - Intel has just gotten to 933 so why bother? Wasn't it you who in the last couple of months posted about AMD's "lack of killer instinct"? Perhaps it wasn't you but someone on SI has recently made such observations. Talk about putting the hammer on someone, this would just about do it...if the 1.5 GHz talk is true. Kindest regards, CrazyMan

To: Charles R who wrote (113202)	5/29/2000 12:08:00 PM
From: Dan3	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 1573220

Re: I would be surprised to see a launch past 1.2 in June. Regardless of the speed bin distribution, there is simply no reason for AMD to push speed grades at this point - Intel has just gotten to 933 so why bother? Good point - and here's a blast from the past setting up a similar situation: Message 10773951 "for the first time AMD builds a faster cpu than the market leader. With a clock rate of 600 MHz athlon leaves all pIII‘s behind" Of course, in the actual event, "K7" was released at 650MHZ. Although 1.1 or 1.2GHZ keeps AMD solidly in the lead, it may not be enough to grab a big piece of the mono-processor server and workstation markets away from Intel. This is the market AMD now needs to grow into. Database, engineering, and applications server software is often licensed on a per processor basis, at prices that can be several thousand dollars per processor per year. It's a conservative market, but one where a processor fast enough to run uniprocessor instead of dual processor pays for itself in a matter of months. A difference in performance that large would guarantee AMD a solid presence in those markets. Immediate availability of a 1.4 or 1.5GHZ system would also disperse the cloud of anxiety brought on by the pre-announcement of Willamette at those speeds. Another thing: Does Intel usually make such clear pre-announcements of future clock speed availability? Could it be that Intel knew such an announcement was coming from AMD and tried to lessen its impact? So there is some justification for leapfrogging Intel instead of nosing them out. By the way, have you noticed the substantial downside that will be faced by AMD investors if there is a 1.4 or 1.5GHZ announcement? Within weeks of shouldering the burden of approving one 3 for 1 stock split, we'll be faced with the aggravation of approving another one! Regards, Dan

To: Charles R who wrote (113202)	5/29/2000 4:04:00 PM
From: Joe NYC	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1573220

Chuck, Looks like someone has taken two pieces of data - AMD is seeing some 1.5G product and Athlons are yielding at about 70% and put them together. I had the same first reaction when I read it. The author (Innsbruck) confirms in a follow up post: German: von innsbruck 29.05.00 14:58:45 betrifft Aktie: ADVANCED MIC.DEV.DL-,01 1006536 Hi Joniger Danke, daá Du Dich eingeschaltet hast. Deine Ausfhrungen erstaunen mich sehr. Sie widersprechen meinen Infos diametral, ich m”chte sagen unaufl”slich! Schon bisher hat mich gewundert, daá nicht mehr aus Dresden durchgesickert ist ber diese von mir geschilderten 1500 MHz. Sie sollen ja technisch nach meinen Infos kein Problem darstellen und werden nach meinen Infos schon l„ngst produziert, also kann es innerhalb der FAB30 auch kein Geheimnis mehr sein. Andererseits, wie ich schon gepostet habe: Meine Quelle MUSS das wissen, ein Miáverst„ndnis ist m. E. nicht m”glich. Ich habe weiterhin keinen Anlaá, an der Integrit„t meiner Quelle zu zweifeln, insbesondere fehlt ihr m. E. jedes Motiv fr eine absichtliche Desinformation. Gráe Innsbruck Zur etwaigen Klarstellung: Ich habe nie gepostet, daá alle CPUs 1500 MHz haben, ich habe keine Prozentangaben ber die Ausbeute der 1500er innerhalb der Wafers gemacht. Die Zahlenangaben (70%, 800 Wafer, 200 Stck) beziehen sich auf die gesamte Ausbeute, also auch auf niedriger taktbare CPUs. Neben dem Umstand, daá natrlich bei weitem nicht alle produzierten CPUs 1500 MHz schaffen (das war in Relation schon frher in Austin so und ist auch bei Intel immer so gewesen) ist auch nicht gesagt, daá AMD auf jede CPU, die nun 1500 schafft, auch 1500 draufschreibt (letzteres wird Liefervertr„gen und Marketing-Politik gesteuert). Bablefish English: Rear Joniger Thanks that you switched yourself on. Your remarks astonishment me very much. They contradict my information diametrically, I would like to say indissolubly! Already so far it surprised me that no more did not ooze from Dresden over these 1500 mc/s described by me. They are not to represent and become technically after my information a problem after my information already long produced, therefore it can be within the FAB30 also no more secret. On the other hand, as I already gepostet: My source MUST know, a misunderstanding is not possible for m. E.. I have further no cause to doubt the integrity of my source especially is missing their m. E. each motive for intentional disinformation. Greet Innsbruck To any clarification: I do not have never that all PCUs has 1500 mc/s, I percentage figures gepostet over the yield of the 1500er within the wafers made. The number specifications (70%, 800 wafer, 200 pieces) refer to the entire yield, thus also to lower clockable PCUs. Beside circumstance that naturally by far all produced PCUs does not create 1500 mc/s (that was in relation already in former times in Austin like that and also with Intel always like that was) is also not said that AMD on each CCU, which creates now 1500 also 1500 draufschreibt (the latter is controlled supply contracts and marketing politics). wallstreetonline.de Joe