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: Dan3 who wrote (86218)	8/1/2002 9:45:03 PM
From: Yousef	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 275872

Dan3, Re: "Yousef and Wanna keep confusing AMD's 64-bit chip, which has barely slipped from its earliest schedule, with Intel's 64-bit chip, which was a full 5 years late." Glad to see that you have "given up" on your faulty heat flow "ANALysis". The FACT is Dan3, AMD is losing market share and is behind in performance. Sorry to have to be the one to "break the news" to you. Make It So, Yousef

To: Dan3 who wrote (86218)	8/1/2002 9:58:54 PM
From: Yousef	Respond to of 275872

Dan3, Re: "AMD's 64-bit chip, which has barely slipped from its earliest schedule ..." But Dan3, the schedule is NOT competitive ... AMD is losing market share and performance. This will only get worse --> Despite Spending Slowdown, Intel 90nm Process Still on Track In mid-2003, Intel is expected to begin shipments of Prescott, Intel's first processor in 90nm (0.09-micron) process technology ..." Make It So, Yousef

To: Dan3 who wrote (86218)	8/1/2002 11:23:38 PM
From: maui_dude	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 275872

Dan, Re : "Intel's 64-bit chip, which was a full 5 years late." It hard to defend Intels 64-bit (Merceds) chips record for its timeliness to the market. But, I would have to say it is a lot harder to respect you for your obsession with altering reality. 5 years delay would put Merced shipping to mid 1996. Tapeout to mid-1995. Would you care to present evidence (based on Intels announcement) to prove your point ? Maui.

To: Dan3 who wrote (86218)	8/2/2002 12:10:40 AM
From: Jim McMannis	Respond to of 275872

RE:"Yousef and Wanna keep confusing AMD's 64-bit chip, which has barely slipped from its earliest schedule, with Intel's 64-bit chip, which was a full 5 years late" That really doesn't matter. What does matter is that AMD is getting clobbered by Intels higher megahertz chips and in a down market no less. So AMDs inability to ship a high Mhz or quantispeed chip is killing them. They have no pricing power. On top of that they let Intel clobber them with optimized benchmarks. AMD appears to be masochistic. I just hope they can make it to Hammer...and even then they better learn how to promote quantispeed and 64 bit because they will still be behind in megahertz. Jim