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: andreas_wonisch who wrote (30299)	3/5/2001 8:26:20 AM
From: fyodor_	Respond to of 275872

Andreas: Probably the most biased article I ever read. Even worse than Sharky. Like the Dell rumor and the 1.3GHz Athlon release rumor, the "Intel will now crush AMD" rumor makes its rounds at regular intervals. Now just happened to be one of those times ;) -fyo

To: andreas_wonisch who wrote (30299)	3/5/2001 9:57:32 AM
From: jcholewa	Read Replies (4) \| Respond to of 275872

> The Pentium 4 has currently the best price performance ratio, particularly because it's even cheaper than a comparable Athlon. > Those who doesn't believe that, should have a look at the pricelists from Intel and its distributors: An Intel 1.3 GHz Pentium 4 with > 128 MB Rambus memory and a CPU cooler costs about 544 Mark while an 1.2 GHz Athlon with 128 MB SDRAM memory costs about 600 Mark." Is not making sense. Why are they comparing the prices of two disparately performing processors? Is it not considered that the 1.20GHz Athlon is at least on par with the 1.50GHz Pentium 4 (in general, that is -- each of the two have strong wins in specific categories, but it is difficult in my opinion to dissuade the idea that they're in the same performance ballpark)? This would more or less put the 1.30GHz Pentium 4 more in the performance area of, say, the 1.00GHz Athlon. So, how many marks is the 1.00GHz Athlon with 128MB SDRAM and soforth?

To: andreas_wonisch who wrote (30299)	3/5/2001 1:46:42 PM
From: Win Smith	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 275872

The purchase must have taken place quite recently, since Tom's IDF coverage was less that adulatory. But first of all, the prices this Frank Voelkel guy is quoting seem somewhat at variance with reality. 544DM converts to about $260, allegedly for a 1.3 P4 + 128mb PC800 RDRAM + fan. Sounds like a good deal, since the best on pricewatch currently is about $350 for a 1.3 P4 alone. Also at variance with the prices noted in the Register today: theregister.co.uk Speed (GHz) Cache (KB) Before Now Cut (%) 1.50 256 $644 $637 1 1.40 256 $440 $423 4 1.30 256 $336 $332 1 Meanwhile, from Tom's IDF coverage: tomshardware.com So, as far as we got the gist of Intel's thinking: PCs ain't PCs anymore, folks. They are rich clients. And handhelds, PDAs, MP3 players etc. they're all clients, too. Intel's got clients, baby! You can't have clients without...? You got it, Intel's got severs! Which also means... Intel's got networking stuff! Which also means... Intel's driving the digital world (so is just about everyone who is reading this on the Web, but let's not quibble with Intel's marketing team). There's a whole lot going on at Intel. It's the Mud Theory of Management - throw enough products at enough markets and eventually enough of them will stick to make it seem like a great strategy. In the meantime, Intel was adamant that, despite the rumblings in the press, RDRAM was it. If you don't like it, bear this in mind, Intel will drive prices down, get volumes up, and phase out the desktop Pentium III market before the end of this year. This is not too different to the way that Intel forced the PC world to go from 286 to 386 processors. The company said as much. And again, the press was left in no doubt, "Get over it guys. It's RDRAM, and the other stuff just isn't going to be worth it in the Pentium 4 space unless you are just interested in running Word." They didn't quite use those words, but you could sense the impatience of executives whenever the specter of Athlon was raised, and the high cost of RDRAM. The good news is that now, every performance freak, and hardware enthusiast can rest easy. They have a choice. There's Intel and there's AMD, and it's really okay to just say no to Intel because, all their corporate buyers, and their OEMs, are going to make up for the fact that Intel has, to some extent, abandoned the hard core user, the early adopter, the connoisseur of performance. Yeah. Intel's busy building the digital world. From tomshardware.com Intel makes the argument that companies are building P2P infrastructures, and they should be planning ahead by buying a high performance PC now so that it can meet the demands of future applications. Of course, this is not too different to what Intel has been saying in the past. In the past, it was always frustrating to think that what you bought this week was out of date next week. The trouble recently has been that Intel's competitors have done a better job of selling a safe performance bet than Intel has.