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: kash johal who wrote (16002)	10/26/2000 10:46:41 AM
From: pgerassi	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 275872

Dear Kash: I was attempting to give an example of how Intel could (should they desire to) sell slower parts without anyone on the outside being the wiser. But, I used an example that people say Intel would just not do (they would have said that they would not ship a CPU grade before it could come out in volume (WRONG!), that they would not release a CPU before it was ready (WRONG!), and Intel would never lose the high end (WRONG!)). But, I have one that absolutely refutes your claim that Intel would not release a CPU grade that was not at or below their highest yielding speed bin. Intel released 1 GHz P3 in March, April of this year. There was no shipments of 866, 900, or 933 at that time. From subsequent data, the peak speed bin was far below 1GHz. The same will be true wrt P4. If there were substantial amounts of 1.6GHz P4 (in quantities of 1K even), Intel would launch it (They have for all top speed grades so far since Athlon came out). They even state that it will not be the mainstream processor until the year after next. All these other complaints are cover for your error ridden P4 qty and speed bin yield assumptions. Pete