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: wanna_bmw who wrote (61655)	11/2/2001 12:15:42 AM
From: hmaly	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 275872

Wanna Re... Wasn't clock frequency the argument that AMD had when 1GHz athlons were alleged to have the performance crown? Nope Wrong again. Only in your and Elmer's mind did the non working PIII have the performance crown. But all we heard then was how much more stable the Intel system was, even with your i820 fiasco and later with your 1.13 ghz. That seems to be the only argument you Intellibees can come up with at times. Ignore the stick in your own eye and point out the sliver in the others.

To: wanna_bmw who wrote (61655)	11/2/2001 1:35:26 AM
From: peter_luc	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 275872

wanna_bmw, "Wasn't clock frequency the argument that AMD had when 1GHz athlons were alleged to have the performance crown?" This is a very important point which is often invoked against AMD these days. Many reviewers used exactly this argument to criticize AMD's Quantispeed rating. But this argument is wrong and I want to make it absolutely clear: It was not AMD but Intel who tried to play the GHz-trump card early last year. Intel tried to make a 1 GHz stealth release in order to celebrate to have beaten AMD again. Of course, there had been practically no chips available but that didn't matter. Intel was secretly preparing the big GHz event. It was only in the last moment that AMD heard about it and since they had the 1GHz chip already at hand (and had already been working with OEMs in this regard) AMD was able to counter Intel's attack in the very last moment. So, AMD released the 1 GHz chip earlier than planned in a matter of "self-defense" against an imminent, huge marketing trick (stealth launch) by Intel. (Unfortunately, Intel's PR tactic backfired big time leaving the 1GHz-victory to AMD and resulting in a serious supply problem for Intel...) So I repeat: It was Intel who wanted to trumpet the GHz-victory last year (without having sufficient quantity of product to ship to sustain an ordinary launch, therefore it was a typical stealth launch - I think you might agree here). With the release of the 1.13 GHz PIII later in 2000 it was the same story again. Intel tried to make another stealth release in order to celebrate the MHz lead. So it was Intel who started the MHz war last year. Of course we can argue with late 1999 when AMD released the 700 MHz Athlon, then Intel countered with the 733 Coppermine, AMD answered with the 750 Athlon and finally Intel made the 800 stealth launch (IIRC, the term "stealth launch" was invented exactly then). But during 2000 Intel was more aggressive with new speed grade claims than AMD (although being in a much worse position than AMD prior to the release of the P4). Peter