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: tejek who wrote (123114)	8/27/2000 10:26:49 PM
From: hmaly	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1584760

Ted, Re..<<<On the surface it seems to be pretty grim news. However when you start looking at the facts behind this fact, its not as bad.<<<<<>> Ted, I agree wholeheartedly with that statement, but I would like to add several reasons why it is not so bad. 1) Only 1-2% of desktop sales are the highest performance processors. The vast majority are sold at 3 -6 speed grades below the top. Amd is =to or surpasses Intel clock for clock all of the way down to low end; with a higher price performance ratio. Getting 30% of market is very achievable once AMD achieves a modicum of business sales,( I believe the Duron, with its huge performance lead over Celly, will get business skews.) 2) Itanium, at this point looks more and more like a disaster waiting to happen. Compaq's server chips, the alpha series, will be running over 1 gig shortly, and IBM's powerfour chip will eat Itanic for lunch; once it is available. Several yrs ago, Itanium looked like it would be the only option OEM's had. Now everyone seems to have a better chip. I consider it highly unlikely Itanium will achieve the critical mass needed to sell enough software, to make changing OS's necessary. By the time successor to Itanic arrives, Powerfour will be here, which just may put the Itanic under. Why do we care, first Intel will lose that aura of invincibility it had just 3-4 yrs ago. Intel will be just another brand, not a brand of excellence. Secondly, I think the failure will hasten Intel's focus into other venues. Intel will have lost the monopolies in IA-64 and x86 markets. I believe Intel will look for another area to monopolize; rather than get in the trenches with AMD; as Intel itself feels the x86 market is doomed. Without focus, Intel is likely to lose eventually to a highly focused AMD. 3) While the P4 may or may not be a great chip, the future of computing I believe will be in multi processors on a chip such as Hammer or Powerfour. Just as Cray was done in by multi-processsors in a box, P4 will likely succomb to multicores on a chip. While P4 may still outdo Hammer with 2 cores, what happens when .10 or .05 allows 4 cores on a chip? I am not a engineer, but if Hammer is doable, 5 yrs from now, most high end systems will be multi-cores like Hammer. MHZ SELLS will change to benchmarks sell.