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: pgerassi who wrote (71776)	2/17/2002 3:11:16 PM
From: Charles Gryba	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 275872

Pete, I don't know where to begin. "THere will be more Hammers sold in the first 3 months after introduction than all IA-64 CPUs combined. Second, given the low sell rates of IA-64, Intel can not use allocation to restrict where Yamhills go as OEMs would switch to Hammer and thumb their noses at Intel. Any allocation even would sell more Athlons and improve ASPs for AMD to boot. " First, who cares about sales of hammer vs IA-64? They are NOT in derect competition. It's hammer vs P4, P4 Xeon and at some point vs P4 Yamhill. So when we're talking about allocations, we're talking about ALL P4 allocations. Oems cannot afford to be without P4's. "would switch to Hammer and thumb their noses at Intel. Any allocation even would sell more Athlons and improve ASPs for AMD to boot. Third, Yamhill can not be incompatible from x86-64 because such would delay availablity by a year at least beyond where it could be done now. Fourth, even with full compatibility, Yamhill will not be available till H2 03 at the earliest since a FSB change would be necessary. Fifth, without those FSB changes, 64 bit mode has too few enhancements to justify the increase in code size required with 32 bit physical addressing and that would remove any hope of full compatability with x86-64." I don't understand why x86-64 incompatibility would delay Yamhill by an additional year. As far as P4 enhancements, you have 533Mhz FSB coming up, probably more cache and probably some other things. Besides, yamhill will probably be a Xeon at first so more cache is a given. "Seventh, with an integrated NB, motherboards with Hammer will be available much sooner than you think as many state that Hammer MBs would be sampling Q2-3/02 and in production Q3-4/02. Finally, Yamhill must be in the open at least 1 year before the target market could accept it and that would virtually end IA-64 at that point which Intel is loath to do even now." I want to see Hammer MB announcements. It takes >= 1 quarter from MB announcement to shipment. Again, Yamhill and Hammer do NOT compete with Itanium. I think all AMD supporters should stop focusing on IA-64. It has no bearing on the success or failure of Hammer. C