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: Eric K. who wrote (106936)	8/3/2000 7:10:09 PM
From: Elmer	Respond to of 186894

Re: "Perhaps I'm missing something in your argument, but hasn't AMD repeatedly said it will produce 3.6M" OOOPs I think you're right about this upcoming quarter, so double those numbers for AMD. Still is hard to figure. And why only 1.8 last quarter? Re: "Didn't Austin & Dresden produce ~5M K6-2s in Q2, in addition to the 1.8M Athlons? Of course, Dresden was at < 10% output capacity and didn't produce k6-2s. Are you trying to criticize yields, slow ramp, not making the fabs put out flash, or what?" Yes AMD did produce some K6s as I stated, calling them other parts, but they are much smaller so you must factor that in when considering the output. Dresden at < 10% capacity is hard to understand after 3 1/2 years from groundbreaking. Most fabs are online in 2 years or less. I am trying to get you to look at AMD's output goals in light of their fab capacity. I think their goals are very modest if everything is running smoothly. Our friends over on the AMD thread were always quick to blame Intel's supply shortfall on yield problems, regardless of Intel's record total processor output. I am looking at AMD's significant fab capacity and wondering why they don't produce more with their (claimed) great yields? EP