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: Milan Shah who wrote (35377)	4/10/2001 6:42:00 PM
From: dale_laroy	Respond to of 275872

"I think the problem is that a top-tier vendor is not able to offer a complete suite of products based on Athlon - eg., quad-proc (or higher) machines, machines with large built-in cache (XEON style) etc." This explanation only makes sense if vendors are worried about supply. There is no redundant engineering if the entire uniprocessor product line is AMD based while the higher end products are Intel based. But, if vendors are afraid that Intel will put their supply of server chips on allocation and/or AMD can not supply sufficient chips to service their entire uniprocessor market, AMD needs not only the ability to cover the entire product range, possibly even with Itanium priced Alpha solutions, but also enough production capacity to meet all of that vendors demands (plus meet their other commitments) in order to free that vendor from concerns about obtaining chips from Intel.

To: Milan Shah who wrote (35377)	4/10/2001 8:24:04 PM
From: Epinephrine	Respond to of 275872

RE: <I think the problem is that a top-tier vendor is not able to offer a complete suite of products based on Athlon -eg., quad-proc (or higher) machines, machines with large built-in cache (XEON style) etc.> Milan, But AMD could offer a complete desktop solution, one from the low end all the way up to single processor workstations and they have failed to get a single design win in a top tier corporate desktop line. Large business dont just have that "top tier" requirement for servers. Workstations and pc's are under that requirement in a lot of places and AMD's failure to get a single top tier business line design win is why they have virtually 0% market share in fortune 500 desktop sales. At this point it has very little to do with stability, speed, infrastructure or price. AMD isn't even in the running they don't even get considered at all because they don't meet that first requirement of top tier status. Again just my 2 cents =) Epinephrine

To: Milan Shah who wrote (35377)	4/10/2001 10:38:14 PM
From: Joe NYC	Respond to of 275872

Milan, I don't think this is a catch-22. I think the problem is that a top-tier vendor is not able to offer a complete suite of products based on Athlon - eg., quad-proc (or higher) machines, machines with large built-in cache (XEON style) There is just absolutely no technical reason for this. A 3 year old quad Xeon Server in Slot 2 configuration with oddball EDO memory has about as much in common with 66 MHz FSB / SDRAM Socket 370 (first version), 133 MHZ FSB 820 / RDRAM based Piii, Socket 370 (the current generation), BX 100 MHZ FSB / SDRAM Piii with Slot 1, and version of notebook chip, as it has with AMD 760 / DDR based Athlon. That is absolutely nothing in common, no continuity, no leverage of common resources / parts. The only reason for this imagined necessity to offer complete line is the fear of Intel vendetta. If an OEM offers AMD business line, Intel may retaliate by cutting off supply in the segments where Intel has a complete monopoly. This would of course be illegal, but when a product is in short supply Intel has wide discretion in whom to allocate the scarce parts. Joe