SI
SI
discoversearch

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: stak who wrote (50583)8/9/2001 9:00:49 PM
From: Dan3Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 275872
 
Re: The highest Gigahertz hasn't prompted any meaningful demand.

That was when P4 was relatively new, rare, and expensive - buyers for systems like that are usually not ignorant of what's really going on inside their computers.

But as P4 moves into the $800 price points, it is being considered by buyers who barely know that MHZ has something to do with one of the thingies inside. Explaining per-clock performance to this group is impossible.

Labeling the chips to reflect performance will have to be done, unless 50% of AMD's wafer starts are SOI by Q1, and the SOI parts all run at 3GHZ or higher.

And I don't think either of those is about to happen.



To: stak who wrote (50583)8/10/2001 9:42:11 AM
From: that_crazy_dougRead Replies (1) | Respond to of 275872
 
<< It's not only the economy, it's just the plain fact that folks don't care to ante up for the highest CPU speeds. Price sells not frequency. >>

We could change this to: Intel sells, not AMD, and we'd be a lot closer. The majority of the Intel chips selling seem to be p3s which cost more and are slower then the AMD chips.