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: Tenchusatsu who wrote (32756)	3/22/2001 12:45:54 PM
From: Joe NYC	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 275872

T., I don't understand what you're trying to say. AMD said months back that large-cache CPUs wasn't necessary for SMP. Now they're saying Palomino for SMP has more cache. I ask again, what has changed from then 'til now? I think you have it backward. SMP is necessary for a large cache processor to have any appeal. Large cache is not necessary for SMP, but it can be very useful. You realize, of course, that Cascades-based servers normally have many gigabytes of memory, and that the DOS memory space is hardly ever touched? My comment on large cache processors and DOS is completely unrelated to servers. It was just an observation that what once was a total main memory of a computer, now is becoming an L2 cache. I think withing 10 years or so, L2s for servers will be what once used to be a hard drive - 10 to 20 MB. Joe

To: Tenchusatsu who wrote (32756)	3/22/2001 1:01:29 PM
From: pgerassi	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 275872

Dear Tench: I believe that it is far more likely that server vendors after trying out Palomino at 384K exclusive in dual configs, asked AMD for a larger cache version sample either at 640K (512+128) or 1152K (1024+128). After looking at the performance increase on the 760MP for typical server loads, they decided that large cache Palomino makes sense for servers thus reconstituting Mustang. Now that there is demand for it, AMD will now start producing it. Since Tbird is fine for high end desktop and low to mid workstations, there is no need for Palomino at current cache. They think to use Palominos in high ASP areas, server and mobile. Once Intel gets desktops to near Tbird limits, desktop Palomino can use all the experience from the mobile and server versions and come to the rescue. The power users will jump to high end workstation grade Palominos on dual boards anyway. All in all, AMD is trying to maximize profit by increasing the revenue for each processor's R&D investment. This is what we as shareholders want in the long run. Lots of profits per share of investment and a predictable rise in both revenue and most especially profits. Since we are capacity constrained (if we can supply all of the market for CPUs, going for the throat makes more sense but, if we can't, increasing profit per wafer makes more sense). AMD seems to have decided on the second for now. When infrastructure (fabs, assembly, chipsets, motherboards, and distribution) allows a complete takeover, they may change their tune. Pete