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: milo_morai who wrote (74923)	3/19/2002 1:24:29 AM
From: Joe NYC	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 275872

Milo, Good points. For this to happen, AMD needs to maintain parity in L2 size / speed, and with memory interface performance. My prediction from long time ago, (probably a year or more) was that Intel will force AMD to increase die sizes in order to place a cap on AMD production, and therefore on the potential market share AMD could gain. One part was proven to be true (Intel moving to bigger L2s), but so far, AMD has not responed. In fact, AMD is boasting about small die sizes. Something does not add up here (at least for 2002) AMD's recepe to profit has been matching or exceeding Intel's performance. I am having hard time believing this will happen without bigger L2, yet AMD is predicting low die sizes (most likely resulting in losing performance crown or even a match) and good profits in 2002. Is it possible that AMD added 256K L2 and kept the die size at 80 mm^2? AMD has 3 additional layers of metal available in the .13u process. Are they using them for Athlon? I guess that would take a more serious redesign / layout work than just a dumb shrink. I wonder which route AMD took with Tbred and Barton. The rest of 2002 depends on Tbred and Barton, but collectively, we have no clue about what's going on with them. Joe