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 : Advanced Micro Devices - Moderated (AMD) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Petz who wrote (348)	7/10/2000 9:31:59 AM
From: milo_morai	Respond to of 275872

Because INTC needs more sales.. RMBS is hitting INTC's pocket book. Lets not forget the BIG recall of i820's. I doubt many smart business users want another i820. If I didn't have a choice of AMD I would want a i815 for work. Milo

To: Petz who wrote (348)	7/10/2000 9:40:18 AM
From: milo_morai	Respond to of 275872

3DNow! Optimized C Compiler amdzone.com Reported by: Chris Tom At: 9:06 PM idiot also let me know about a new C compiler, VectorC, which has optimizations for 3DNow! and the Athlon. It is available from the Codeplay website. codeplay.com BTW, AMD Zone also has a poll up about how AMD should handle the chipset business. Results so far: Yes, AMD needs to take control of its own destiny - 61.14% At times, Via, ALi, and AMD should all have chipsets to make business competitive and make sure the timeline between chipsets is shortened for newer technology - 34.55% No, AMD should allow third party companies such as Via and ALi to worry about the chipsets - 4.31% Number of votes: 1786 I hope someone in charge at AMD takes a careful look at these results! Kind regards, ABurner. Thanx to Aburner on RB Milo

To: Petz who wrote (348)	7/10/2000 10:15:54 AM
From: Daniel Schuh	Respond to of 275872

Er, I'd agree somewhat that Intel's data hurts Rambus, but Rambus the memory mostly hurts itself by providing no gain for a significant incremental price. Money for Nothing, as the PCWorld article said, I should have got a patent on that line in the Rambus context. But... why would Intel want to make the 815 look less than its best, regardless of Rambus? By all indications, the 820 is dead, it never sold that well in the first place. Another nail in the coffin is no big deal. I'd say that from Intel's point of view, convincing people that they still knows how to build a decent chipset is more important that Intel's so-called relation with Rambus. You might recall also an old dialog between Elmer and I, where Elmer was bragging about P3/800 spec numbers, and it turned out that Intel had published both 820/Rambus/133 FSB and BX/PC100/100 FSB numbers for the P3 800. The 820 was better, but by an insignificant margin. Those numbers were put out long ago, before any of the current strum and drang. Aside from which, unless an atypical surprise route hasn't made it onto the roadmaps, Intel is still dependent on Rambus for the Willy launch. Maybe they've decided to kill off the 820 real good to make the best of limited bs-ram production for Willy. Or maybe they have any number of other motivations, but the simplest explanation still seems that the 815 works pretty good, and it's in Intel's interest to make it known that that's true. I'd feel a lot better about AMD if I had confidence that any of the numerous chipset vendors could build something as good as the BX or the 815. Cheers, Dan.