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: justaview who wrote (219570)	12/8/2006 2:02:38 AM
From: dougSF30	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 275872

How many of you know that a radical new core design has failed and was killed few weeks before the tape out. Can you provide any more detail on this?

To: justaview who wrote (219570)	12/8/2006 2:17:41 AM
From: bnsbhat	Respond to of 275872

Just another view: And yes everyone by now knows that gooey thing joins everything except broken heart, including four cores on a die. S. Bhat

To: justaview who wrote (219570)	12/8/2006 2:26:03 AM
From: Joe NYC	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 275872

justview, Intel's market share sliding is the thing of the past. Do you have Q4 info available. The quarter is not even over yet. As of Q3, Intel was still losing share. The best CPUs have always won. Intel has the best products now It seems Intel has a lot of them sitting in the inventory. Intel's ASPs are lowest they have been in a very long time. And, even as low as the ASPs are, they are still luxuriously high compared to AMD. and at least 3-5 years into the future. The future was supposed to be 10 GHz Netburst. It would help the AMD fans to realize that AMD’s recent successes are due in large measure to a perfect streak of Intel screw ups -- Netburst, RDRAM and the biggest of them all the cloning of AMD64. I see. Intel should have gone Itanium, damn the ... err ... icebergs. Meanwhile years of new core development were flushed down the toilet. How many of you know that a radical new core design has failed and was killed few weeks before the tape out. This is why all AMD can do now is to put four K7s on a die and pray. It took Intel 6 years to catch up to K7/K8. Considering where Intel was before K7 and where it is now, I would not exactly be grinning awaiting its last punch. Joe

To: justaview who wrote (219570)	12/8/2006 6:57:01 AM
From: j3pflynn	Respond to of 275872

justaview - Keep on whistlin'!

To: justaview who wrote (219570)	12/8/2006 12:18:17 PM
From: smooth2o	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 275872

re: How many of you know that a radical new core design has failed and was killed few weeks before the tape out. K10? If so, why hasn't the INQ reported it? Link or FUD? Smooth

To: justaview who wrote (219570)	12/8/2006 12:29:04 PM
From: neolib	Respond to of 275872

perfect streak of Intel screw ups -- Netburst, RDRAM and the biggest of them all the cloning of AMD64 If intel had not cloned AMD64, they would still be in dire straights.

To: justaview who wrote (219570)	12/8/2006 12:29:50 PM
From: Elmer Phud	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 275872

justaview ow many of you know that a radical new core design has failed and was killed few weeks before the tape out. Not many. Not me either. That's a pretty strong claim to make. Can you point to even a single rumor about it? I can't believe that could happen without word leaking out. Not that I'd mind....