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: Charles Gryba who wrote (71765)	2/17/2002 4:36:19 PM
From: Gopher Broke	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 275872

Yes, but those kind of stopgaps are what have kept AMD at < 30% market share. Like the early P3's, the early P4's etc..... Agreed. It would have been a disaster had Intel not brought forward the launch of the P4. It was a successful stopgap. Even so, those first six months must have been uncomfortable, with the P4 underperforming on the .18 process and not being accepted as rapidly as they would have wished. But P4 had the advantage that it was designed for clock frequency scalability and would eventually become competetive on the .13 process. As for Yamhill, I don't see it can have any such advantage. I think there is substance behind the rumors that to bring it to market ASAP they are basing it on the P4 core. If that is so, then it is 32 bit internally. They will be able to say it is x86-64 but it will not perform anything like as well as Hammer. OTOH, if the new core has been designed as 64 bit from the ground up, then it will take 3 years to produce and will be too late to compete with Hammer. Unless Intel have been working on it for two years, which I doubt. Let's hope we get some more concrete info soon to end all this speculation.