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: Pravin Kamdar who wrote (121757)	5/18/2004 11:42:26 AM
From: dougSF30	Respond to of 275872

Pravin, if the footnote is up to date and accurate, it may just mean another "family" range up to 104W. That's not bad compared to Prescott, which is at 105W "Intel-TDP" (probably 115W-120W "AMD-TDP") right now, at "3200+/3400+" pereformance levels. Doug

To: Pravin Kamdar who wrote (121757)	5/18/2004 12:09:59 PM
From: eCo	Respond to of 275872

Pravin:Most interesting, however, is the small footnote below the roadmap which claims the FX-55 and Athlon 64 >4000+ (presumably 4200+) will require 104 watts/80 amps. This is old news. X-bit broke this last December... xbitlabs.com But I fall in the camp with those who think this spec applies to the whole family (including larger cache versions? ...dual core??). According to Rick Whittington of ATR: "Our preliminary calculations indicate that a 3-4GHz clock rate is possible, without exceeding the current 85-90W spec." (http://www.theregister.co.uk/2003/11/14/silicon_on_insulator_key/) This may still be valid, and in that context, I think Anand's assertion that "Intel's incredibly high power consumption [is] also valid for AMD" is a bit over the top. Regards, eCo