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: dougSF30 who wrote (196636)	5/13/2006 3:53:21 PM
From: DRBES	Respond to of 275872

given Hector's predisposition for understating and over delivering, we will just have to wait till then to see just what AMD has waiting in the wings

To: dougSF30 who wrote (196636)	5/13/2006 4:00:55 PM
From: mas_	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 275872

We are still unsure whether the 2MB Conroes will be single or dual core. I agree with your earlier remark about AMD probably being surprised with NGMA Core's overall performance. I kind of figured it would be in that ballpark and was the reason I was plugging a 90nm tri-core from last year. It would have provided AMD with a high-end product pretty immune, by virtual of its unique multitasking/threading properties, from dual-core Conroe/Woodcrest etc. With a small 512KB cache it wouldn't have been that big either at 90nm, ~250 sq mm. AMD now however needs 65nm asap to push K8 well above 3 GHz to compete effectively with the 4MB Conroes. Hopefully there might be an increase of cache to 2MB to also help. This is of course assuming there will be a dumb shrink and we won't go straight to K8L.

To: dougSF30 who wrote (196636)	5/13/2006 8:11:39 PM
From: Dan3	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 275872

Re: It looks like Intel's low-end 2.13GHz Conroe ($239 @ launch) will be at performance parity with an X2 4800+ or 5000+. (4800+ currently $632 @ newegg). That's quite a price cut. There will be plenty of benchmarks that show IPC parity or close to it for the two parts. For most notebook, server, and desktop buyers a 2.4ghz X86 64 is far more desirable for two reasons - it's faster (2.4ghz vs. 2.13ghz) and you can tell it's 64 bits bacause it says so in the name. I'm nervous about being long anything, right now, because the Republican Congress (with plenty of help from W) has bankrupted the nation at every level; public financial, private financial, moral, and military - I just can't believe how quickly those b@stard pig Republicans turned a gigantic surplus into a huge deficit, leaving the US cornered and exposed. That still doesn't do Intel any good, and AMD is still in a great place right now. I'm just a bit worried that it may be in a great place at the wrong time.

To: dougSF30 who wrote (196636)	5/13/2006 10:11:06 PM
From: heatsinker2	Read Replies (4) \| Respond to of 275872

"It looks like Intel's low-end 2.13GHz Conroe ($239 @ launch) will be at performance parity with an X2 4800+" But this is impossible. If the Conroe is this good, why would they sell it for $239? This might work if Intel had the capacity, but it's going to be a slow changeover. So if you have a limited number of chips to sell, you sell at a high price. Either the Conroe 2.13 is not that good, or the price goes up between now and launch date. Anything else is nonsensical. The only other possibility is that Intel has a secret megafab ready to flood the market, which seems mighty unlikely.