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: Cirruslvr who wrote (50138)	8/7/2001 12:25:07 AM
From: Dan3	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 275872

Re: Do you believe what you write? Yep. What's so different about the thunderbirds AMD FABs now compared to the ones they were FABing then? I think yields at those speeds would have been terrible if they'd had to tune their process for such speeds last winter (they've doubtless had time to perfect their process controls in the meanwhile). And there were a couple of "active cooled" P4 overclocks very early this year that hinted at the speeds we should soon be seeing from Intel. I keep thinking back to those incredibly credible sounding posts on Yahoo from 1.5 years ago where someone who claimed to work at Dresden said he'd seen Athlons running at 1.5GHZ - then he got very apologetic and disappeared when it was pointed out to him that revealing such data could mess up AMD's marketing plans. Were those posts frauds? Who knows? But that's almost exactly what we're seeing now for copper thunderbirds, and it seems to be pretty close to the max for thunderbirds on the current process (certainly within 20%). It's the same core on the same process, if they'd pushed the process and tested die instead of wafers for speed, why shouldn't they have gotten a few 1.5GHZ parts back then?