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 (45290)	6/26/2001 7:01:01 PM
From: Tenchusatsu	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 275872

Paul, funny how the posts on this thread are starting to resemble this one by GVTucker: Message 15991648 The sad thing is that GV was joking around, while the posters here are serious. Tenchusatsu

To: Paul Engel who wrote (45290)	6/26/2001 7:46:00 PM
From: niceguy767	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 275872

Paul: Once again, looks like INTC is pulling out any and all quivers in attempt to shore up its server presence...Sorta reminds me of when they finally had Gelsinger step up to the plate at P3 700 MHz in attempt to recapture P3 credibility after several 700 MHz P3 aborted launches...Sorta reminds me of all the P4 unrealized hype while AMD's spry Athy was kicking sand in P3's face... INTC has lost its edge in both the consumer and mobile spaces now despite their all out effort to block AMD's market penetration...What INTC has found out the hard way is that AMD's superior products cannot be denied in the marketplace...It is premature, even in the face of CPQ's announcement, to suggest that AMD will be kept out of the server/workstation space...OEM's are notorious for their flip-flopping...It shouldn't surprise anyone when OEM's line up for AMD server/workstation products once they become a reality assuming an AMD price/performance product advantage... Comparative Q2 results are gonna be real interesting and are likely to shed some light on the flurry of INTC server announcements over the past month...Like the P3 700 Mhz and like the P4 unrealized hype, could all this server stuff before q2 release be tailored to mask what is in all likelihood to be yet another even more dismal quarter than q1??? Is it possible that AMD's q2 profit is going to exceed that of INTC??? If so, it's gonna take a lot more than the current barrage of server hype to mask such a financial outcome in q2!!!

To: Paul Engel who wrote (45290)	6/26/2001 7:56:25 PM
From: Gopher Broke	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 275872

And you think Intel has the "choice" to sink the ITanium ? Do you really think Intel has no choice at this stage but to press on with Itanic? I agree it would carry a huge cost, but it is still an option. However, Intel has not shown much of an inclination for taking sensible courses of action recently. (For example, killing their P3 revenues this quarter by entering a price war with a high-end product unacceptible to the corporate market was sheer lunacy.) Anyway, in three or four quarters they will no longer have the luxury of floating Itanic on barrels of money. Then Itanic will sink. The technology is too poorly conceived for any amount of marketing to save it. Of that I am convinced.

To: Paul Engel who wrote (45290)	6/26/2001 8:01:45 PM
From: Gopher Broke	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 275872

And another thing. .. signed on with the Intel ITanium for ALL OF COMPAQ's FUTURE ENTERPRISE SERVERS If you think Compaq would sign a contract on those terms then it is you that is having the mind trip.

To: Paul Engel who wrote (45290)	6/26/2001 9:18:31 PM
From: Dan3	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 275872

Re: Compaq just vacated the Alpha - and signed on with the Intel ITanium for ALL OF COMPAQ's FUTURE A year ago it was Alpha forever, a year from now it may be AMD X86-64 forever. We're still waiting to see how a real shipping Itanium runs on real code instead of one-off, hand tweaked benchmark exe's with all the error checking stripped out. Thanks to Reinhard for posting about some new Itanium SPEC CPU2000 results published by c't. The new results are the first independent CPU2000 figures released for Itanium which also include the full subtest scores. Also interesting is the inclusion of results for the chip running in x86 compatibility mode. The performance difference between the native IA-64 binary and the x86 binary is roughly one decimal place, with x86 SPECfp2000 Base coming in at 86 to the 694 of the native IA-64 binary. Native SPEC Base integer performance is 360, while the x86 version scores 113. Needless to say, if you're looking to run some x86 apps on your Itanium workstation, you might be better served by your 233 MHz Pentium II box. It was also mentioned apparently that c't tried to compile SPEC on their own, but couldn't get the compiler to produce an error free binary. As a result, they used the binaries supplied by Intel. Since no full SPECint2000 results which include the subtest scores have been published by Intel yet, this is our first glimpse of how Itanium performs on each of the benchmarks in the SPECint2000 suite. As you know, Intel originally published a benchmark comparison against various Sun systems, including a SPEC comparison. However, Intel has since changed the score for the 800 MHz Itanium from 403 to 370 Intel bought some more time for Itanic, but quite a bit more bailing is required. This chip was expected to be in production 2 years ago. Intel paid out $3.8 billion more than they took in last quarter - they're going to have to start cutting their losers at some point. Tualatin looks OK - putting server versions into the roadmap was a good idea, but may have been the kiss of death for the Foster program. Maybe Intel can stretch PIII till Itanic is ready for the desktop, if Itanic is every ready for the desktop. Meanwhile, P4 is looking like it has about the same life expectancy as Alpha...

To: Paul Engel who wrote (45290)	6/26/2001 10:43:31 PM
From: combjelly	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 275872

"And you think Intel has the "choice" to sink the ITanium ?" Sure they do. Remember the iAPX432? You see, the thing that I have been wondering is what on earth Intel is going to do with the Alpha compiler technology. They have made a big deal of it in press releases, but it doesn't make a lot of sense. Optimizations for EPIC and Alpha have nothing in common, the code generators don't look anything alike, there is really not a lot that can be carried over. But what if the architecture gets migrated to a proven, working platform, the Alpha? Then they would need the compiler technology...