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: Sarmad Y. Hermiz who wrote (193848)	4/14/2006 11:09:31 PM
From: combjelly	Respond to of 275872

That was obvious. Do end users care about power consumption? No, and they shouldn't. But the design engineers do. Power used needs to be dissipated. That requires volume and/or fans. Volume requires sheet metal and plastic, which costs money. Fans require fans and power. Both of which costs money. Power consumption requires power, which costs money. Now there are all kinds of ways to balance heat vs. longevity and noise, but that takes design resources, which costs money. See the recurring theme? There is a certain amount of tradeoff. If the volume is high, then it pays to throw resources at the problem to cut materials cost. And that means that commonality of components can pay off. But if the volume is equally high, then the one that requires less resources win. As it stands, AMD wins over Intel because it can have equal volume but require significantly less resources. This translates to lower prices for the consumer for equal performance, which ups the demand. Ok, but what about NGA? The difference in projected resource requirement is a lot less for NGA vs. K8 than P4 vs. K8. It still favors NGA, but the window is very narrow because K8L and 65nm is not that far out when compared to NGA. Given the design cycle and availability of NGA, there isn't a pressing reason to design it in except for low volume applications.