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 : Rambus (RMBS) - Eagle or Penguin -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: mishedlo who wrote (54950)	9/24/2000 2:27:50 PM
From: Estephen	Respond to of 93625

Seems a fair and balanced review on amd's current situations.... scum seems to be recommending I short AMD big time....This may be partly why, - from your post....... " Intel is thinking several years into the future. They know the kinds of things they will need to be able to support, what kinds of markets they are going after, 5 and 10 years out. The P4 core is designed to take them 5 years out, perhaps to the end of the 32 bit processor. Timna is the low cost processor, and it also is designed to be used with RDRAM in value systems. AMD is taking advantage of the weakness in Intel right now, as they switch from the old product to the new, but a black eye is not the same thing as a death blow, and you can expect Intel to recover quickly. Now Intel will recover, and Intel's focus has been on the future. AMDs has been on the near term and even the status quo. Who do you think will be better positioned 6 months from now, when the P4s are in full production, Timna is being introduced, and RDRAM is within 20% of the cost of SDRAM (while providing better granularity for small systems and better performance all around)? The sad part is that all the information to make their processors compatible with RDRAM has been available to AMD all along. Intel even paved the way, using its muscle to help get the new standard ramped into full production. Instead, they chose to go with lesser suppliers and manufacturers who were backing a short-term non-standard standard, and those suppliers and manufacturers - for whatever reason - have not been able to deliver. "