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: plantlife who wrote (212051)	9/30/2006 4:51:04 PM
From: eracer	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 275872

Re: I can't believe that you held that opinion and didn't state it. I wouldn't be able to answer it anyway because I was limited to 5 posts. You were new to the board at the time and I had little evidence of what your history or motivations were. Of course my opinion shouldn't be much of a surprise as you pretty much said the same in this post: Message 22647137 At first glance, this looks like a horrible move, but we know the AMD Board is too smart to make such a deal without a compelling reason. It is entirely possible that ATI and/or Nvidea refused to redesign their chips to be Co-processors, so AMD was forced with a choice of building their own, or discarding what looks like an overwhelming strategy ----- Clearly, I didn't know if it was or wasn't a Physics chip, and I still don't. I also didn't know if it was or wasn't the 1900 that they were referring to. I put up a casual post based on a link from the Inquirer that I thought people here would find value in, and didn't expect to incur a hostile reaction from such am innocuous comment. There were no hostile comments from me, just questions and statements of fact/opinion, but you on the other hand... siliconinvestor.com Sorry, but I don't record every link from every article I read, nor does anybody that reads a significant amount. If you want to find it, it will be easy enough to do, i.e. Google! I am not your hand maiden, and if you wish to dispute that post, do it at your own peril. I believe you are implying that I am making this up, of which I am not so creative as to speculate on such an occurence. ----- As for ATI, I knew very little about that company other than their Video Cards were competitive with Nvidea. I did know about Torrenza, and when the Physics chip was mentioned on Inquirer, I made the logical conclusion that this was what AMD wanted. I guess if that was true, you would agree with my conclusion. So, I still don't know whether it's true or not, but with this new Stream computing system, it doesn't matter. That will do just fine, and it looks like the Co-processor candidate AMD is looking for. I'm sure AMD is interested in the processing power that ATI could bring to future AMD processors and platforms. I just wanted to eliminate the confusion on how AMD/ATI was getting there.