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: Elmer Phud who wrote (156538)	4/16/2005 1:40:03 AM
From: dougSF30	Respond to of 275872

Intel can likely produce millions of Celerons, too.

To: Elmer Phud who wrote (156538)	4/16/2005 1:48:17 AM
From: AK2004	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 275872

re: a real corner. from the same article: "It is important to note that AMD only announces products when we are able to immediately begin shipping for revenue and that we have been shipping dual-core AMD Opteron processor production samples to customers and partners since January," the statement added. "When all is said and done, the simple truth is that AMD leads this market with superior innovation, superior architecture and an unwavering vision with dual core. For 2005, if customers want a dual-core product with performance and user-friendliness, they need to buy AMD64." seems like everyone thinks that intel dual core is a joke .... intel is betting that its overcapacity will compensate for lack of innovation :-))

To: Elmer Phud who wrote (156538)	4/16/2005 3:17:06 AM
From: Buckwheat	Respond to of 275872

[RE: According to Intel's Love, Intel will ship "millions" of dual-core parts this year] Wonder if these will move as fast as those first Prescotts moved? Get ready for another 3rd and 4th quarter inventory scare. Elmer, Smithfield is a feint (a poor one at that). If Hector falls for this, I'll never buy another share of AMD. If AMD misses the opportunity to point this out to the buying public, I’ll be highly disappointed. It is true that AMD can’t produce volumes high enough to keep pace. AMD is already producing enough rubber dog shit gag toys in the Asian FASL plants. I hope they don’t feel compelled to produce more in FAB 30 or 36. The initial DC Intel machines (that one can place an order for on Monday) are high end desktops that sell for around $3000. Not a huge market. Probably a much smaller market than the server/workstation market. At best, Smithfield is a low end workstation cpu hoping to fool a few gamers and “high roller” desktop users along the way. Even if Intel moves the price down, the cpu alone is not the total cost. What about the heat and power issues. 65nm might fix this or perhaps it won’t. Looks to me that people are moving to smaller, faster, cooler, less noisy, more economical systems in game, desktop, and media center systems. I can’t see one of these in a cube that’s stuffed in a bookcase or shelf in a dorm, apartment, small study, or TV room. We have recently heard game writers express reluctance about writing to multi-cores/processors/threads. Hyperthreading has been around for quite some time. Has there been a rush to take advantage of that in general? Intel has always been one to milk an architecture for every last penny before moving on to something else. Smithfield and other recent efforts leads me to believe that the marketing people at Intel are still standing firmly on one of Intel’s rudder pedals