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: Scumbria who wrote (37468)	4/26/2001 3:35:18 PM
From: combjelly	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 275872

"I don't think that DDR will improve P4 performance. It will keep the performance constant, while allowing for much lower costs." Considering that Intel has PC1600 slated for the P4 and is unlikely to use a 128 bit bus, how is the performance going to be kept constant? Without memory bandwidth, the P4 as currently constituted, sucks rocs. Now, of course, they could move to PC3200 if and when it becomes available, but will they have a chipset for it?

To: Scumbria who wrote (37468)	4/26/2001 3:55:54 PM
From: Epinephrine	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 275872

RE:<If Intel can compete on a cost basis, why buy AMD?> Scumbria, Well if by compete you mean that AMD's cost advantage will be reduced to parity and Intel / AMD will actually compete at near parity cost and pricing levels with also near parity performance then I could easily turn that question around to ask: If AMD can compete on a cost basis (and performance), why buy Intel. I have always thought that AMD's historic problems were because they were behind in performance and had no high end. If AMD can maintain reasonable performance parity and can also maintain a product portfolio that covers the full low to high end then isn't a competitive pricing situation all that they could ever have asked for in the long run anyway? So if DDR + .13 will not improve P4's performance per clock and if AMD can improve Athlon just enough to keep it on performance par until they get to their own .13 process then aren't they in relatively good shape for a long long time to come? (ie. new core or major core improvements from Intel or widespread 64bit adoption) So I guess the real question becomes... Is it possible for AMD to scale Athlon enough to maintain performance parity with P4 despite P4's MHz scaling advantage even during the early stages of P4 on .13 or are they simply dead ducks as soon as .13 hits unless they have a .13 process of their own? Epinephrine