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 (227201)	3/2/2007 2:05:56 AM
From: Petz	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 275872

re: As for the first article, you admit errors in it, yet want to draw fantasy conclusions. They quoted AMD as saying this: AMD claims that the typical TDP factor of its new CPUs will be about 15% lower than the current TDP provided with Intel's dual and quad-cores, but then made the following silly statement: which would make for power consumption of less than 58 watts in the case of a Barcelona CPU. The fact that they make a false conclusion from the statement made by AMD does not imply anything whatsoever about the reliability of AMD's statement. But "15% lower than the current TDP provided with Intel's dual and quad-cores" is "about 15% lower than 120W X5355 (Clovertown) = 102W or about 15% lower than 80W Xeon 5160 (Woodcrest) = 68W." In retrospect, I think the 58W is a typo and was supposed to be 68W. I strongly suspect that the TDP of the quad core remains 95W, but certainly no more than 102W, and the TDP of the DC version will be 68W. But that DC will probably be clocked higher than 2.3 GHz, just as Intel's 5160 is clocked 12.5% above X5355. The fact that AMD has 120W Opterons is irrelevant since AMD said that TDP will be ~15% below Clovertown's TDP of 120W. So I apologize for an irrelevant error. Petz