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: Smallpops7 who wrote (156888)	4/19/2005 12:16:52 PM
From: Elmer Phud	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 275872

Smallpops I for one believe that in the true sense of the word IPF is "superior" to x64. Let IPF does not outsell x64. Pentium-M is superior to Pentium-4 let it does not outsell it. I can go on and on with such examples. You yourself are using a word for which you provide no definition. What I am trying to counter is the notion here that Opteron is superior and benchmarks (mostly gaming) are the proof. I am trying to separate the design from the product because no matter how good a design may be from a technical standpoint, it still has to be manufactured and sold. AMD has done the first half but not the second. Thus it is not a "successful" product and that's where I get my definition of superior. It is not based on the design alone but the ability to sell at a profit, which is gated by manufacturing, marketing and other features not reflected in benchmarks. Reliability, serviceability, availability, commitment, roadmaps, company stability and track record etc all are factors that affect the decision to design in a "product". These are not taken into account here when making claims of superiority and they should be.