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: Elmer who wrote (57015)	10/3/2001 11:49:25 AM
From: Petz	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 275872

Nearly every Pentium III laptop ever sold does not run at it's rated speed when running off of batteries. But Intel's OEMs actually use MHz and GHz to market them. This is a much clearer case of abuse than a PR rating. Petz

To: Elmer who wrote (57015)	10/3/2001 12:22:39 PM
From: fyodor_	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 275872

Elmer: AMD will need a conspicuous disclaimer to avoid charges of fraud. BS! That's 100% FUD. Now who's spreading FUD? AMD is selling a processor with a number associated with it. The public is used to seeing a number and it's always been MHz. The new number is in the range of what the public is expecting. It's certain that the public will see the number and assume it's the MHz, just like it's been in the past. First: It isn't FUD. If for no other reason that the "Fear" element is completely absent. What you are spreading is FUD. Second: Your much vaunted public is used to seeing a number that has historically been indicative of performance. What they expect from it is exactly that. They don't know squat about oscillations. You could very well argue that the P4 is further off base in this respect. -fyo

To: Elmer who wrote (57015)	10/3/2001 1:24:12 PM
From: Milan Shah	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 275872

Have you ever bought a package of hotdogs that are "91% fat free" only to find out they are still 80% fat? I wonder when they will be accountable as well. Good point. Another case in point is milk - 1% and 2% milk sounds like tremendous reductions in fat content, but no-where will you find that full-fat milk is 3% milk! Milan

To: Elmer who wrote (57015)	10/3/2001 2:37:58 PM
From: TimF	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 275872

Have you ever bought a package of hotdogs that are "91% fat free" only to find out they are still 80% fat? I wonder when they will be accountable as well. I have never seen that in hot dogs. What they do have is "reduced fat" (with reduced meaning it went from 90% fat to 80% or whatever). If AMD advertised a 1.53ghz chip as a 1.8 ghz chip then it would atleast need a serious disclamer. But calling it a model 1800+ with no refrence to mhz or ghz leaves about 0% chance of a fraud charge, or atleast about 0% chance of the charge sticking. Many BMWs have been number designations that include the engine size. a 750iL has an engine that is aproximately 5 liters. A 535 has an engine size of about 3.5 liters. If BWM put a new engine that was only 4.5 liters but was more powerful then the old 750 engine in a 750 and called it a 755 or a 760 they would not be in any way commiting fraud. Another example. When Intel produced a 386SX it had the same internal interger and floating point (no intergrated floating point unit) as the 386 (which came to be called the 386DX after the SX release). Then later Intel had a 486 chip and they introduced a 486SX. The 486SX did not have the same FPU capabilities of the regular 486, its FPU was disabled. Was the term SX a fraud in this case? I think not. Could someone sue AMD if an Athlon XP didn't offer any eXtra Performance over a T-bird? Well they could try but its not likely they would win. If you call a chip an x mhz chip, then you are making a specific claim. If you don't make a specific claim in the name of the chip then you are not commiting fraud. Even if an Athlon XP 1800+ performed like a 8088 its unlikely that you could sue AMD based on the name either because of the XP or the 1800+, but you might be able to sue them based on the promotional material saying that the chip perfromed like 1800mhz chip. Of course if that really happened it would be unlikely that AMD would have any money left to pay off the lawsuits because there chip sales numbers would fall off a cliff... Tim