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 (228823)	3/24/2007 4:07:15 PM
From: dougSF30	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 275872

The K10 design has been praised by reviewers. No one has been given a part to review. I guess they have AMD's slide-ware... I think seti's point was that Intel is hardly standing still. The K10 might be good relative to 2006 Clovertown, but how does it stack up against Penryn? Against Nehalem?

To: Sarmad Y. Hermiz who wrote (228823)	3/24/2007 6:44:03 PM
From: Joe NYC	Read Replies (4) \| Respond to of 275872

syh, I think AMD's process weakness will get in the way of achieving its design goals... ...Since Q1 results last year, I have posted that I think AMD's fab 36 is not working well. I think you are right about the current 65nm process, which stinks, and one has to wonder if the stink will rub off on Barcelona as well. As far as fab 36, there is no information about the 90nm process run there not being good (or being bad). The only info that is known is that the 65nm process stinks. Well, to the extend of binning. Looking at parameters of the 65nm chips (as far as power consumption), it is better than 90nm process. Joe