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: Scumbria who wrote (128999)	3/3/2001 9:16:08 PM
From: Dan3	Respond to of 186894

*Re: The yield crash came because AMD was forced to push K-6 way past it's natural top clock rate.* No argument here. Like what happened to Intel last year when PIIIs disappeared from the retail market. Dan

To: Scumbria who wrote (128999)	3/3/2001 9:43:32 PM
From: Elmer	Respond to of 186894

Re: "Let me nit-pick. The yield crash came because AMD was forced to push K-6 way past it's natural top clock rate. K-6 was not designed with MHz in mind" Let me nit-pick. Unless they were extremely aggressive with their channel lengths, that would not cause a yield crash but it would cause a bitsplit problem.<G> EP

To: Scumbria who wrote (128999)	3/3/2001 9:53:53 PM
From: Jim McMannis	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 186894

RE:"Let me nit-pick. The yield crash came because AMD was forced to push K-6 way past it's natural top clock rate. K-6 was not designed with MHz in mind." True but not exactly. AMD screwed up trying to push the K6 Mhz too far too fast. The CRT core was pushed to 350, 366 and 400 in an attempt to stay up with the Celeron As which were pushed to those levels by Intel. Might have been a 380 in there on a 95 Mhz bus,too. Those original CRT chips had to be downbinned and sold off as 300 and 333 to the likes of e-machines while AMD went back to the drawing board. It was a wonder AMD even survived that debacle. Things were looking pretty good for AMD up to that point. If I recall they actually made a profit in Q4 of that year...then the CRT core hit the wall and Intel delivered those Celerons at higher speeds with cannibalized the Pentium IIs for a couple quarters... Jim