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: Tenchusatsu who wrote (62711)	11/7/2001 5:56:16 PM
From: milo_morai	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 275872

That's not a equal wager as for one I hate the blazers and the cost of me losing dollar wise having to buy a overpriced ticket to the Blazers compared to a cost of T-shirt for you is nowhere near the same. You should have thought that one through. But my statement more likely leads to a infinite draw. As Hammer will not be cancelled and if Itanic is replaced by McKinley before Hammer is Released, same result. M.

To: Tenchusatsu who wrote (62711)	11/7/2001 9:09:22 PM
From: Dan3	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 275872

Re: If I lose, I have to wear an AMD T-shirt to work for a day We wouldn't want to put you in that position, and I think you've misunderstood what AMD is doing. The hammers are just AMD's next mainstream chip - they suffer about a 5% die size penalty to support the 64 bit extensions (much less than the die size penalty Intel faces with the 32 bit P4, much less McKinley) and give up zero in terms of performance and compatibility with the installed base. The on die memory controller reduces latency, and that's going to be quite significant as chips move to and beyond 3GHZ. The on die memory controller also significantly reduces chipset cost and complexity and reduces power consumption by a few watts. There will be an installed base of tens of millions of 64 bit AMD processors within 2 years. How many will actually run any 64 bit code? I have no idea. But you keep viewing it in the context of AMD going after the markets Intel is going after with Itanium and expecting AMD to fail at such an endeavor - which is reasonable within the constraints you've put on the problem. But what AMD is doing is to put a 64 bit chip into everything they support with their next generation, standard IBM PC compatible, CPU. Mainstream desktops, entry level desktops, notebooks, workstations, SMP servers, everything. It will be inexpensive to support these moderate power, no north-bridge-necessary, 64 bit AMD chips, so they'll be able to put them into cheap PC's and still make plenty of money on them. Just like SUN has been shipping sub $1,000 desktop systems for some time now (we buy a lot of them) that use the same 64 bit instruction set and architecture that the big 64 bit multiprocessor servers use. If palomino hadn't come out when it did, and if Intel had been able to sell systems that performed nearly as well as AMD systems do during this year's peak selling season, AMD might without the resources needed to ramp its next generation CPU (which happens to be 64 bit). But palomino completely dominates P4 in terms of performance, AMD's core market knows and appreciates that fact, and AMD will be in fine shape to ramp Hammer next year. As long as AMD exists at all, there will be 10s of millions of 64 bit Hammers flowing into the market. Due to P4's awful performance (be honest with yourself - it's much larger, a newer core, uses more power, and can't begin to keep up with Athlon, even on obscure, tweaked code) AMD will be sailing through this period in which Intel has "the new core" without significant losses. And next year, it's AMD's turn to have the new core.