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: Petz who wrote (97251)	6/12/2003 8:50:04 PM
From: DRBES	Respond to of 275872

I think that otellinI's denial is evidence that he is in denial i.e. #3 . Regards, DARBES

To: Petz who wrote (97251)	6/12/2003 9:42:05 PM
From: niceguy767	Respond to of 275872

Petz: "Their strategy is to soft-pedal 64-bits until Itanium can be made cheap enough to take over the desktop." AMD not only already provides 64-bits as a "consumer freebie" with its Opteron, but also, AMD provides for a "consumer freebie" transition of its 32-bit software base to 64-bit processing...Opteron's 64-bit is here, and it's now, and INTC's usurious toll bridge to 64-bit computing is no longer required to get there!!! Throw in Opteron's memory controller which reduces memory latency and throw in Hypertransport which allows the consumer to build systems that scale well and you end up with an economic value equation which is real obvious!!! Looks to me like INTC's 64-bit "production strategy" has been snookered by the Opteron's economically superlative and superior consumer-friendly features and that, consequently, INTC's remaining defense will once again have to rely on strong-arming of distributors combined with a healthy dose of PR misinformation!!! (Note: INTC's strong-arming of distributors and PR control of the technology media have proved insurmountable by competitors in the past...Also, in the past, INTC has been able to successfully pejoratively characterize, in a subtle manner, AMD as a "wannabe INTC" inasmuch as AMD's products were basically INTC clones (i.e inferior to INTC products)...Well, this time 'round, not only can INTC's 64-bit offerings not compete with Opteron on any rational price/performance basis, but also reliance by INTC on their time-tested successful distributor strong-arming and media dominance tactics can no longer position AMD as a "wannabe INTC" owing to Opteron's unique architecture which represents a radical departure by AMD from its previous copycat characterization, a characterization so essential to the previous success of INTC's distributor strong-arming and media dominating tactics...) A "new era" in technology has been introduced by AMD's Opteron, an era in which its major competitor would appear to have been defanged on all fronts (i.e no competitive product, diminution of distributor control and signicantly reduced media dominance)!!!

To: Petz who wrote (97251)	6/12/2003 10:30:29 PM
From: crazyoldman	Respond to of 275872

Prez, Re: Comments? You Bet. I go with #3...Pure "shortsightedness". And I might mention a very high degree of arrogance on Intel's part. I also go with NiceGuy...Intel with its Itanium has built a "64-bit Bridge to Nowhere" and they can't sell the damm thing and never will. Intel has screwed Up Royally...even worse than the Rambus farce. They have missed the market this time...Big Time! Now all that is left for them is their damage control unit, and that is Not what the marketplace needs or demands. If is difficult to present solid evidence right now...but IMHO...and amazing as is seems AMD is in the "cat's seat" for the foreseeable future...even while suffering the market's distain for the last several weeks. And Intel...well they have their damage control unit...perhaps their customers will be happy buying their propaganda, instead of a viable performance product at a affordable price. Then again, perhaps Not. Otellini is Our friend as always he was. I remember a time when Sears ruled the retail market...only to be displaced but a highly unlikely little fellow from Arkansas...a man named Sam Walton of all things. It can be done and it has happened in my lifetime. I watch with great interest as this AMD story unfolds. And I watch with bags full of "popcorn" as Darbes would say. Kindest Regards, CrazyMan

To: Petz who wrote (97251)	6/12/2003 11:37:54 PM
From: Joe NYC	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 275872

Petz, If I were in Otellini's shoes, my goal would be to do what AMD did - to have a chip that runs both IA-32 and Itanium IA-64 instruction sets. In case of AMD64 and IA-32, there is a great deal of overlap, and leveraging of silicon resources, which would not be there in Intel's IA-32-64 beast, but at 65nm, or even 90nm, it may not matter. So the way for Intel to succeed in making IA-64 THE 64 bit instruction set the way 386 instruction set became THE 32 bit instruction set, Intel has to give it away for free, the same way you will get 64 bit mode in Hammers for "free" once Athlon 64 becomes mainstream chip. So basically, Intel is still at least 2 years away from fielding IA-32-64 chip, so the name of the game is to stall the market for now. I think Intel will have to reveal its cards in September, to undermine adoption of AMD64. I wouldn't be surprised if they started emitting some vapor about the IA-32-64 beast, so that third parties don't invest in AMD64 support. I am surprised that Intel has not done it yet. Itanium has this odor to it, that would go away quickly if Intel said that they are going to be selling a chip with IA-64 instruction set for $150 in some near future. Then, there is a fundamental question if IA-64 is the way to go for computing, if it will deliver performance scaling at the rate as x86 has been able to do. I am not sure. It seems that Intel is hiding an underwhelming core under the blanket of Megabytes and Megabytes of cache. Joe

To: Petz who wrote (97251)	6/13/2003 3:46:28 AM
From: mozek	Respond to of 275872

Petz, It seems to me that Intel made a strategic mistake and AMD is taking advantage of it. I suspect Otellini may see quite clearly right now, and the question is... what can he do about it? I wouldn't necessarily assume shortsightedness at present, but their strategy certainly seems to have been shortsighted. As far as your take on the current situation, I generally agree, but I also wouldn't be surprised to see a desktop Itanium, whenever it does come to market, include decent performance and compatibility with IA32 software. Without that, I think it's going to be hard for them to get competitive compatibility with AMD, which I believe will matter for desktop users even after 64 bit Windows is released. JMO of course, Mike