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: Mani1 who wrote (2824)	7/28/2000 8:48:49 PM
From: RDM	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 275872

WOW! WOW! WOW <IMO very negative stuff about P4. 25% lower performance compared to equally clocked PIII!!! Volume ramp delayed? To stay below radar to avoid comparison with Athlon and Coppermine?> inqst.com If you read presentation, it is really important news for AMD. AMD will have no Athlon competition other than .13 micron P3 whenever that arrives. Doesn't this conflict with Scumbria's "it's the pipeline size that matters" argument (20 is better than 12)?

To: Mani1 who wrote (2824)	7/28/2000 9:33:01 PM
From: Charles R	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 275872

Mani, <IMO very negative stuff about P4. 25% lower performance compared to equally clocked PIII!!! Volume ramp delayed? To stay below radar to avoid comparison with Athlon and Coppermine?> Don't you think these issues have been widely discussed on this thread before? - IPC is expected to be low but no one really knows how much magic Intel is going to with new instructions, new compilers, new benchmarks, etc. - Volume ramp was never expected to happen before 0.13 shrink. So, unless this means Wilamette 0.13 implementation is delayed I am not quite sure what McComas is saying. <Pretty big stuff if true, IMO! What do you think it will happen if these claims are accurate and street finds out about them! > The street is very soon going to find out that Wilamette is not going to destroy AMD anytime soon and AMD has extremely competitive product line for the time being. <What PE would you give to AMD's $6 of earnings? 20? 30? 40?> As I have said before I would be happy with a range between 20 and 30. More than that is not sustainable. Right now, I am looking forward to seeing us pass a PE of 15. Cheers, Chuck

To: Mani1 who wrote (2824)	7/28/2000 9:34:07 PM
From: DRBES	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 275872

To put things into perspective (mine at least) inteL lost more in market cap today than AMD's total market cap at its all time high at $97/share. It ain't over till its over. By the way, my limited understanding of the deficiencies of the p4 are that they derive from the sacrifices made to enhance its ultimate highest speeds. Speeds that early evolutions cannot yet, if ever, reach. For example, its very deep, 20 stage, pipeline may be a programmer's nightmare since it obligates timing of calculation parallels to nightmare proportions. Ho Hum, if inteL dictates, the world will follow...unless, of course, there is a viable alternative. Regards, DARBES

To: Mani1 who wrote (2824)	7/28/2000 9:42:13 PM
From: niceguy767	Respond to of 275872

Mani: Re: "Pretty big stuff if true, IMO!" Comment: Yeah...AMD delivers performance, INTC delivers promises...Now even the delivering of promises seems to be jumping up and biting them...Are you ready? Are you ready? The next 2 weeks...It's all AMD the next 2 weeks!!!

To: Mani1 who wrote (2824)	7/31/2000 2:02:42 AM
From: Petz	Respond to of 275872

Mani, re:<20-25% performance penalty for P4> In the old days, I'd expect Intel to get this down to 10% by forcing the industry to use new benchmarks. But I suspect that its almost impossible to find benchmarks that are immune to the 20-cycle pipeline of the P4. With P4 optimizations its probably a good gaming machine, especially with a 100-200 MHz advantage for a few months. Maybe Sharkey can sell this dog. The Inquest presentation makes it seem like the P4 will be low-key until mid-2001, but that Intel has plans to push the P3 up to 1.5 GHz. That makes a lot of sense to me and is probably accurate. How could Intel be increasing production at the same time they are switching to the larger die P4? A: They can't. They'll make a few P4's so they can claim the GHz lead for a few months, but their P3's (the ones actually produced in volume) will still be 100-200 MHz behind the TBird and Mustang. Wish I could load up on more AMD, but most of my non-AMD stuff, except Rambus puts and WM calls, is underwater. If the RMBS puts get to be a triple, I'll sell them and buy some more AMD. Petz