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: Charles R who wrote (43423)	6/8/2001 2:58:15 PM
From: Dan3	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 275872

Re: AMD should have cut over the production to Palomino by now. AMD almost destroyed itself when it switched all K6-2 production over to a new stepping. They will never, ever do that again. Regards, Dan

To: Charles R who wrote (43423)	6/8/2001 3:14:35 PM
From: THE WATSONYOUTH	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 275872

Don't you think there is something is wrong with the picture? You are assuming these two parts have the same channel length?? . Note the 1.3GHz Q4 Palomino is also 1.5V. The 1.1GHz Q3 Palomino is just at a longer channel length than the 1.1GHz Q2 T bird. It should then scale higher. THE WATSONYOUTH

To: Charles R who wrote (43423)	6/8/2001 3:32:31 PM
From: andreas_wonisch	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 275872

Chuck, Re: If Palomino is in fact binning well and yielding well, AMD should have cut over the production to Palomino by now. It makes no sense to keep going with Thunderbird if Palomino is performing per expectations (8% die size penalty is not a big deal given all the other advantages the die offers) I agree. There is something fishy about Palomino, otherwise it hadn't been delayed for almost a year. Bin split problems are the most reasonable explanation since there's some evidence for it. However, it doesn't look like that these problems are terrible (like e.g. K6-III), since there are already 1.2 GHz Palominos available. However, the 20% reduction in power consumption apparently doesn't allow an equal increase in clock-speed. That's probably why Palomino won't go above 1.6 GHz this year according to unofficial AMD roadmaps. IMO it would have been a better decision for AMD to focus on clock-speed instead of performance. The average customer isn't interested in high IPC. And cheap 2 GHz Pentium 4s with SDR memory couldn't be a compelling buying argument for those (although they will perform terrible, of course). Andreas