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: Road Walker who wrote (52938)	8/29/2001 8:17:20 AM
From: andreas_wonisch	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 275872

John, Re: I can think many, many ways that this can backfire, and really hurt AMD's brand. I agree. It's a thin red line AMD is walking on but what other options have they left? Desperate times call for desperate measures ... it's better than doing nothing. And with ASPs already in the toilet (I'd guess <$70 right now), they haven't much to lose. However, I wonder how the OEMs will handle this new rating? Andreas

To: Road Walker who wrote (52938)	8/29/2001 8:54:30 AM
From: Dan3	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 275872

Re: I can think many, many ways that this can backfire, and really hurt AMD's brand What, and start paying barely $100 for an AMD processor that outperforms Intel processors that cost 5 times as much? Get real, the fact is (as I've posted before) that 90% of consumers can barely associate the one number with performance, much less critique the quality of that one number, and most of the rest know AMD makes the better chip. (The remaining few percent are Intel stockholders or employees, motivated by personal interest).

To: Road Walker who wrote (52938)	8/29/2001 9:03:09 AM
From: Charles Gryba	Respond to of 275872

JOhn, I think it's good. No need to explain anything to the consumer since all they understand is that a number tells them how fast their machine is. They don't know what it means..... Constantine

To: Road Walker who wrote (52938)	8/29/2001 12:22:02 PM
From: Joe NYC	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 275872

John, This scheme will create a very confused, and probably distrustful, consumer. They are taking a standard industry benchmark, and adjusting it to what "AMD considers" to be meaningful. There are a lot of reason to be mistrustful of the MHz as a benchmark for performance. Suppose you have 3 computers that are similarly equipped, but 1st 1 GHz Piii, 2nd has 1.2 GHz Athlon and 3rd has 1.3 GHz P4. 1.3 GHz P4 is the worst performing of the 3 of them on just about all of the benchmarks. Don't you think that it is Intel that has an obligation to warn people of the fact that P4 is slower than other processors rated at the same clock speed in order to maintain the trust in Intel brand? I can think many, many ways that this can backfire, and really hurt AMD's brand. How can it backfire? Will AMD lose any corporate or server wins? Or not gain any? Joe