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.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Tenchusatsu who wrote (278323)	3/4/2006 11:35:43 PM
From: Elroy	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1571924

Otherwise, what does AMD have going for it, other than being a perennial second source? Larger opportunity for market share gains? If the technology development is nearing an end, why wouldn't AMD's share head toward 50% instead of 20%?

To: Tenchusatsu who wrote (278323)	3/5/2006 4:21:32 AM
From: AK2004	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1571924

Ten re: I think AMD needs some sort of architectural advantage in order to survive. did intel philosophy changed that much? Intel used to say that they need an "architectural advantage in order to survive" - remember that bit about only paranoid survives re: Otherwise, what does AMD have going for it, other than being a perennial second source? what about lower margin requirements? -AK

To: Tenchusatsu who wrote (278323)	3/5/2006 10:44:35 AM
From: Taro	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1571924

It is my belief that processor architectures have matured. Maybe in the current INTC/AMD/MSFT domain. But certainly not for processors in general, check here for some creativity coming up: pasemi.com Taro

To: Tenchusatsu who wrote (278323)	3/5/2006 7:39:11 PM
From: tejek	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1571924

It is my belief that processor architectures have matured. Any improvements from here on out are going to be very minor or require a lot out of software, more than what software developers are willing to put up with. What about Moore's Law? It is also my belief that because of this, the game of leapfrog between Intel and AMD will come to an end. And that's bad news for AMD, because I think AMD needs some sort of architectural advantage in order to survive. Otherwise, what does AMD have going for it, other than being a perennial second source? That's true if AMD's chip architecture is no better than INTC's, but that's not what I am hearing. The Opteron is supposed to be much better than anything INTC has. Of course, under your thesis, if Pentium five leapfrogs the improvements in Opteron, then INTC will have won the architectural war. Then again, AMD no longer has Jerry around its neck. I think this one may be too close to call. ;-) ted