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: Paul Engel who wrote (41287)	5/27/2001 9:46:12 AM
From: dale_laroy	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 275872

>Here it is - you tell me what it means about how late the SLudgePumper is going to be.< What I was saying is that K8 is apparently 18 months late. If I recall correctly, it was in a Tom Halfhill interview with Atiq Raza published in MaximumPC Magazine that the one and only reference that I have seen claiming Q1 2001 was published. This was during a flurry of articles presenting how great the AMD K7 & K8, and the Cyrix Cayenne and Jalopeno were going to be. The Cyrix Cayenne was particularly impressive, having a very small die size and twice the floating point performance of the PIII. There is however, a strong indication that the Sledgehammer never was the K8 core that was supposed to ship in Q1 2001. For one thing, if I recall correctly, their was no mention of a single processor variant at that time. K8 is very late, by about 18 months. But Sledgehammer appears to be only one year late.