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: hmaly who wrote (80297)	5/20/2002 8:05:30 AM
From: Dan3	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 275872

...Sun will indeed use AMD's K8 processors, according to this source, whether you call them Opterons or Athlon 64s, in a range of Cobalt servers it will release. theinquirer.net

To: hmaly who wrote (80297)	5/20/2002 10:56:18 AM
From: wanna_bmw	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 275872

hmaly, Re: "Which man hasn't had troubles going to 13 um. They all have, including your sacred Intel. Intel in fact, with all of their new fabs, and process tech. etc. seems to be having a hard time producing P4 above 2.2 ghz" Intel isn't at all sacred, but it does seem that the money that they invested in manufacturing has paid off, giving them a year's lead over most of the industry in volume .13u production. I don't believe it's been a perfect ramp, but they started shipping products in May 2001, and yet the rest of the industry still hasn't yet caught up. If you want to gripe about Intel, there are plenty of ways to do it. Manufacturing doesn't seem to be one of them, though. Also, I don't see any evidence to back up your assertions that Intel has problems producing CPUs above 2.2GHz. Like the first couple quarters of Pentium 4 production, a lot of people here seem to be looking at retail sales, and coming to premature conclusions. Intel already has 4 full pages of 2.4GHz products on pricewatch, and 533MHz FSB based chips aren't going to appear in volume until Intel launches their updated i845 DDR chipsets. And besides the channel, all major OEMs seem to be carrying Intel's newest chips, and you know that they don't deal in low volume as much. So I don't see any direct proof of Intel's .13u problems, except for speculations from people who would have liked to see it that way. Re: "Why worry about an interim chip, when the future looks so promising? Isn't that what we do when we invest in stocks? Invest in the future?" If you are investing long term like I am, then yes, it's less of a problem. However, there are plenty of people that trade on short term volatility, and AMD stock still has the possibility of falling to single digits before the year ends. Although, I'll admit that after that, their future product lines could take them very far. It still all depends on how well they execute. Current evidence seems to suggest that they are putting 80% of their efforts into Hammer, leaving Thoroughbred and other projects trailing. But if this is true, then maybe we can expect a very early time to market with Hammer, and maybe future prospects are very bright. On the other hand, it's also possible that their execution screwups are inherent, making their future quite a bit darker. Are you satisfied in ignoring that possibility in favor of bliss? I should hope not, which is why I will continue to speculate in both directions, and keep the door open that AMD may not be sitting as well as people think. wbmw

To: hmaly who wrote (80297)	5/20/2002 12:26:03 PM
From: Elmer	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 275872

It isn't that I don't believe AMD's schedule has slipped. It is that I really don't care all that much right now. Who's schedule hasn't slipped. Surely you aren't trying to tell us Intel's hasn't. Which man. hasn't had troubles going to 13 um. Intel has been in volume production on .13u for about a year now. They've pulled in schedules, not slipped them and shrunk their devices beyond the first introductions. Perhaps you don't see the significance of that but others in the industry do. That's a sure sign of a process that's healthy. They've brought 300mm wafers into volume production as well when nobody else has even really hit volume on 200mm. Intel's high volume for a year certainly paints a different picture than Jerry's lies about "World Class Yields" and essentially zero volume but I don't expect it to be believed here. Why not drop this discussion and talk about the wonderful money making opportunities investing/trading AMD? EP