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: that_crazy_doug who wrote (15725)	10/24/2000 1:10:22 PM
From: Dan3	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 275872

Re: << Scalability of both chips remains a big question mark, but Mustang may end up scaling better than P4 >> Would you bet on that, or do you just think it's an outside chance? My WAG at this point is that they will scale at similar rates. Don't forget that P4 is actually an older design than Athlon - P4 just took a lot longer to be released. In terms of cleansheet designs, Athlon is the newer core, and Athlon was originally conceived with higher clock speeds in mind. Intel has been suffering from a Soviet style lysenkoist approach to technology in recent years. The party line is Rambus, and Intel designs for nothing but Rambus. The party line is copper isn't needed, and Intel holds off on implementing copper. Perhaps the long gestation of P4 isn't due to the need to work around some architecture diktats from the Intel central planners, but I doubt it. I think P4 might even be less scalable than Athlon, but Intel's resources should let it keep the race close to a tie - which is OK for Intel and a big win for AMD. The PPro core came out at 180mhz and scaled to around 900 without too much trouble. Athlon came out at 600 and should scale to around 3GHZ without much trouble. Just my opinion. Regards, Dan

To: that_crazy_doug who wrote (15725)	10/24/2000 1:21:01 PM
From: 5dave22	Respond to of 275872

Doug <By December, AMD will most likely have lost the MHZ crown, and will have to try and convince people that performance is made up of more then mhz while fighting the intel propaganda machine.> And all that "fastest processor in the world" crap will bite AMD right in the ass. They were saying that with the classic Athlon, when PIII performed better in almost all benchmarks - so all the arguements I've heard here are entirely bogus. If I could get $30 for my shares, I think I'd sell them all and not look back. Undervalued as it is, AMD lost their opportunity to pick up momentum. I don't see how they can ever gain it back and trade above the SOXX. Regards, Dave

To: that_crazy_doug who wrote (15725)	10/24/2000 1:38:31 PM
From: jamok99	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 275872

Crazy Doug, <<By December, AMD will most likely have lost the MHZ crown, and will have to try and convince people that performance is made up of more then mhz while fighting the intel propaganda machine>> Given that AMD couldn't get their story across when they had an unequivocally superior product, and that story was simpler, success at this more complex task does seem dubious. McMannis' 'Mhz Sells' (TM) would appear to be the proof of this argument: Of the average computer buyer, Mhz is certainly the most recognized characteristic of a computer. I'd guess their most common definition of Mhz, assuming they're familiar with the term, is that "it means how fast the computer is". I'd be surprised if even 5% of computer buyers even have heard of IPCs or FPUs, or benchmarks. While supply constraints and increased costs (Rambus) may be limiting factors on how badly AMD gets mauled in this scenario, both are temporary conditions, given the increasing ramp of p4 in 01 and the move to DDR. So I guess the bigger picture is the discussion that seems to be the topic of the day on the thread - how will Mustang scale compared to P4. You sound pretty pessimistic about this - is this based on your oft-used principle that until a product is actually available for testing/inspection there's little point in speculation, or do you have other concerns about why AMD's future competitiveness is questionable?

To: that_crazy_doug who wrote (15725)	10/24/2000 2:06:55 PM
From: hmaly	Respond to of 275872

that_crazy_doug Re..<<<By December, AMD will most likely have lost the MHZ crown, and will have to try and convince people that performance is made up of more then mhz while fighting the intel propaganda machine.<<< You seem to feel that the OEMS and people will automatically drop AMD once Intel reclaims the speed crown. I would consider that highly unlikely. Previous to the K7, AMD did have a problem with delivery and reliability. Now lately, Intel has been having problems. Even if the p4 performs up to your expectations, I would consider it highly unlikely that Intel could do more than stop AMD from getting more market share until AMD itself starts having problems. There are always people who will go with AMD no matter how good the p4 is; especially when you consider AMD will have a better CPU at almost every speed grade below P4. According to your theory, Duron will kill the Celeron because Duron is faster, and T-bird will kill PIII because T-bird is faster. So yes, P4 probably will have high end speed grade. AMD will have the rest and that is where 95% of the CPU's are sold. In addition, I would consider it highly likely that AMD will eventually get 10 - 20 % of corporate market, because of AMD's price/performance advantage. The average corporate user doesn't need a p4, and I consider it is highly naive of us to think some IP managers won't try AMD once highly reliable systems show up at a lower price.

To: that_crazy_doug who wrote (15725)	10/24/2000 3:02:13 PM
From: Pravin Kamdar	Read Replies (5) \| Respond to of 275872

that_crazy_doug, By December, AMD will most likely have lost the MHZ crown, and will have to try and convince people that performance is made up of more then mhz while fighting the intel propaganda machine. There are a couple of things working in AMD's favor. The cost of P4 systems will keep them out of the mainstream consumer market for several quarters. Also, the media seems to be catching on to the fact that P4 has low performance relative to clock. If P4 performance is disappointing, it is going to become a huge story in the press. AMD's ponies are going to compete very nicely. The big opportunity for AMD is in the two processor server market. From the Register story: Four way servers based on the ServerWorks chipset will jump from 700MHz PIII Xeon with 2Mb cache to 900MHz at the end of this year, while lowlier dual CPU servers move from 933MHz to 1GHz at the same time. In Q1, AMD will have dual 1.5 Ghz Mustang servers. I suspect that these servers will match the performace of 4-way Intel Xeon servers. This level of performance will not be ignorable and is currently AMD's biggest opportunity. I suspect that P4 in 0.18u will scale to around 2.2 to 2.4 Ghz. But, power and heat will be major issues. Combined with die size issues, P4 does not become viable until 0.13u -- or 2H, 2001. So, how will AMD be able to compete with a 3 Ghz P4 in, say, Q4 of 2001? My guess is that AMD will have a 0.13u (possibly SOI) 2+ Ghz Clawhammer in production by that time, and that it will perform favorable againts the speedy P4. Clawhammer die size will be much smaller than P4 and AMD will continue to be able to offer a price/performance advantage. Then we get Sledge with its dual core design and LDT that will provide 2, 4, 8, 16+ way high performance 64-bit servers. Combine this with AMD's flash business and you have a powerful combination. I was getting a little worried about how AMD would fill their new flash fabs, but the strategic alliances with TI and LSI have removed this fear. AMD is here to stay. Pravin.