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: jcholewa who wrote (60185)	10/25/2001 2:23:19 PM
From: Elmer	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 275872

In order to figure out when the McKinley and when the Hammer will ship at volume production levels, we have to try to avoid jumping into speculation like this. We don't know anything about Hammer's development. If you think you do, you're just putting too much faith in Mike Magee. Speculation is all we have at this point and I think a reasonable person would conclude that a visible McKinley is more likely to ship sooner than an invisible hammer. Schedules from both companies are available and Intel's schedule calls for McKinley about a year ahead of hammer. With McKinley silicon maturing a reasonable person would also conclude that hammer has a greater chance of slipping. Schedules are more accurate the closer you get to intro. With hammer so far off, the current schedule is really just a wag. With a probable time frame of about 1 year from first silicon to product, it is unlikely hammer has silicon. Speculation of course but reasonable, imo. EP