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 (61730)	11/2/2001 12:22:03 PM
From: fyodor_	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 275872

Wanna: 2) The difference is that when Intel has a show-stopper, the response is immediate, and satisfactory. So far, I have not heard anything justifying the instabilities that occurred in ALL of the AMD chips in the review, but NONE of the Pentium 4 chips. If the AMD chip is not at fault, replacing it won't fix the problem. Similarly, replacing the processor on an Intel i820+MTH isn't going to solve the issues there. I don't know the source of the problems Tom's Hardware encountered - and, yes, it is alarming that a site as reputable as Tom's can just let a comment like that hang there, with absolutely no additional comments or clarifications. What we do know is that a non-standard memory timings was used (CAS2 for DDR266) and while the memory may support it, the motherboard may not. The symptom of "random crashes" would fit very well with the memory timing issue. -fyo

To: wanna_bmw who wrote (61730)	11/2/2001 12:33:17 PM
From: Epinephrine	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 275872

<RE:I'll try to do better in getting my message across. Might I suggest you do a better job paraphrasing?> WBMW, Ok, maybe I was being a little sarcastic with my paraphrasing but when you make statements like this what do you expect: "If AMD wants to improve the perception of their products, they really ought to make sure that buggy motherboards don't end up getting in the hands of reviewers that make can make statements about the instability of the platform." "AMD's perception of a second-rate supplier is only reinforced by these kind of reviews" So you are claiming here that AMD messed up because their product was featured in a review in which their products performance was world class but in which some minor instabilities were mentioned and that somehow makes them deserve a reputation as a "second-rate supplier" to a company who has had just as many reliability issues in the recent past of a much graver nature (data corruption). I understand that AMD has somewhat of a reputation problem but I think that has been recently undeserved and is more a vestige of the past, and I sure don't think Intel is any more reliable than AMD at this point. Your contention seems to be that AMD is messing up and deserves it's reputation and that Intel's mess ups don't matter. and I find that to be ludicrous bunk. I am not saying that AMD is perfect, both AMD and Intel have had their issues. What I object to is your putting AMD's minor issues under a microscope while ignoring Intels issues and using that distorted perpective to justify AMD's undeserved reputation as a "second rate supplier." Epinephrine