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: Tony Viola who wrote (133148)	4/23/2001 12:30:50 AM
From: Cirruslvr	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 186894

Tony - RE: "Neither Tualatin nor Palamine are even on the shelves, but I don't see that Intellabees are proclaiming the Intel chip to be the be-all and end-all of µPs. Pally might be a great chip, might not, but you guys are assuming that because Athlon is good, AMD is guaranteed to deliver nothing but great ones from now on. Let's wait and see." I don't understand why people are arguing the benefits of mobile Palomino vs. Tulatin and how these benefits will affect market share. All that matters in the long run is price and availability. If it ever comes out, AMD will price mobile Palomino significantly below Tulatin and AMD may get a few design wins. That's basically how AMD's survived, by keeping prices lower than Intel's or by taking advantage of a lack of supply by Intel (late '99 - early '00). Having said that, even if it doesn't amount to much in the big picture, it is still fun to brag one processor is better than the other. ;)

To: Tony Viola who wrote (133148)	4/23/2001 12:37:27 AM
From: dale_laroy	Respond to of 186894

"Pally might be a great chip, might not, but you guys are assuming that because Athlon is good, AMD is guaranteed to deliver nothing but great ones from now on. Let's wait and see." The question was asked, will Palomino be able to compete with Tualatin. My answer was essentially no. Palomino will be a great chip. Hell, mobile K6 was a great chip, and mobile K6-2+ was even better. But neither was inherently as good as mobile P-II or mobile P-III. They became great chips because of AMD being willing to accept lower margins. I think however, that simply stating that, while mobile Palomino will be able to compete with mobile Tualatin with regards to peak speed grade, it will do so at the expense of consuming more power than the current 1.0 GHz P-III, and thus not be truly competitive does not tell the entire story. The complete story is that sales of notebooks using AMD processors, including mobile Spitfire, will be insignificant in Q2. AMD will have significant penetration in Q3, with Tualatin slowing penetration in Q4. Then, as volume shipment of mobile Thoroughbred begins in Q1 2002, Tualatin will have a powerful competitor, but still an edge in some implementations. It is not until the volume shipment of the SOI variant of Thoroughbred in Q2 2002 that Tualatin will have nowhere to hide except with Intel loyalists. This technical superiority of AMD mobile solutions will continue until the introduction of mobile P4 in 2003. Here's something to think about. Why would Intel be designing a processor for the mobile market from scratch if they did not consider AMD's upcoming mobile Athlons to be a threat?