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: Monica Detwiler who wrote (79499)	5/6/2002 3:11:29 AM
From: tcmay	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 275872

Quoted report on Intel's lead is _worrisome_: "....The disparity in performance is growing larger and AMD is still weeks (months?) away from getting out their own .13m part. What’s worse; again,....compared to their Athlon counterparts, but Intel never failed to execute on a launch and only deviated from their roadmap when they introduced parts earlier than expected. "...Well, I can’t give Intel more credit. They are executing like champions and bring us better and faster processors. They are now clearly out in front of AMD in nearly every category. With the introduction of Tehama, Intel is now in the driver’s seat of the CPU wars. " (much deleted about how far AMD is behind on all fronts.) This is beginning to worry me. Essential to The Strategy is that Intel have a somewhat credible, but not too credible, competitor. This was part of the Strategy to head off SEC/FTC/EU actions to break up Intel, a la the attempted break up of Microsoft, a far less formidable company. But AMD is not doing its part. It is failing on all front and now risks vanishing into a Transmeta-like level of insignificance. Anyone remember how MicroUnity was going to eat Intel's lunch? With AMD falling to the wayside, Intel needs to set up another stalking horse as a would-be competitor. Any ideas? --Tim May

To: Monica Detwiler who wrote (79499)	5/6/2002 8:13:10 AM
From: Dan3	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 275872

Re: What is worrisome about the course Intel is now sailing Intel's 2.53 part, on a dual channel motherboard, is faster on many apps than AMD's 2100 part on a single channel motherboard. If Intel is willing to sell those for $200, AMD is in trouble. But if Intel sells them for $200, Intel is also in trouble. The last 10% of performance is important enough to only a few buyers to get them to spend for that marginal increase in speed. If this weren't the case, AMD would have killed off Intel last year, when it was dominating. Now, the big mystery: with its $18 Billion in capex in the past 3 years, why are Intel's top three speed ranges limited to half (or fewer) the number of pages AMD's fastest chip has on pricewatch?

To: Monica Detwiler who wrote (79499)	5/6/2002 9:51:51 AM
From: Yousef	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 275872

Monica, Re: " ... They had quite a lead when they introduced the 2.40GHz Northwood but now they are "piling on" their advantages ..." It really is the "process thingy" !! <ggg> ... I'm sure we are about ready to hear from the AMDroids how there is no "need" for additional performance. <ggg> Make It So, Yousef

To: Monica Detwiler who wrote (79499)	5/6/2002 11:13:09 AM
From: Cory Gault	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 275872

"What is worrisome about the course Intel is now sailing (if you’re an AMD fan) is that Intel is driving home the .13m advantage down on AMD like a stake in the heart of Dracula. The disparity in performance is growing larger and AMD is still weeks (months?) away from getting out their own .13m part. What’s worse; again, talking to the AMD fans, Intel has now introduced their new motherboard platform to take Pentium 4 to the next level of performance." This is impossible.....are all these hardware reviewers not listening to Niceguy and DRBES?