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: Joe NYC who wrote (38943)	5/10/2001 4:49:34 PM
From: that_crazy_doug	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 275872

<< Too bad the it's only the shareholders who have no idea at this point what the real story is. If AMD thinks they are keeping any of this from Intel, they are kidding themselves. The only ones in the dark are the shareholders, small OEMs and white box vendors. >> Perhaps they keep us in the dark, because they know we'll be disappointed when they turn the lights on. The most logical reason why AMD hasn't said palomino will have SSE, SSE2, and hardware prefetch or whatever other fancy features everyone is arguing about is because it doesn't. Yes, it's possible that it has all these things, and AMD isn't telling us, but I think it's exceedingly more likely that it has none of these things.

To: Joe NYC who wrote (38943)	5/10/2001 6:44:43 PM
From: dale_laroy	Respond to of 275872

>1.8 GHz .18u Palomino with power management and lower power consumption would indeed be very interesting.< The 1.8 GHz Palomino will be desktop only and therefore not feature power management.

To: Joe NYC who wrote (38943)	5/10/2001 6:59:01 PM
From: Petz	Respond to of 275872

Joe,re:If AMD has a 1.8 GHz Palomino up its sleeve, then "the only ones in the dark are the shareholders, small OEMs and white box vendors." I'm perfectly happy to be "in the dark" about any such plans. CPQ, HWP, etc would only know that such a chip exists, not when it will be manufactured or with what volumes. With a new core, there is no need for the OEM's to know ahead of time what the maximum speed may be, only the minimum speed and the price. I don't think Compaq would complain if the $300 chips AMD promised and sampled turned out to be marked 1.7 GHz instead of 1.5 GHz. I could easily see that kind of info witheld from all but two or three employees at each OEM. As far as Intel sniffing out secrets, a bunch of employees at AMD would know little pieces of info, but few know the whole picture. If I were AMD sniffing out Intel info, it would be more productive to take a P4 and measure actual power consumption, Tj failure points at various Vcc, frequency etc. than to try and talk to a few disgruntled employees who can't really be trusted anyway. Petz