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: BUGGI-WO who wrote (235559)	7/3/2007 5:33:54 AM
From: aleph0	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 275872

BUGGI-WO The continuing flow of bad news makes me suspicious .. as to BigMoney's intentions with the stock price ! Normally we should have tanked after Q1 .. didn't happen ! In spite of all this bad news/delays etc., the SP hasn't really budged from the 14$ range. One has to wonder whether the fact that AMD owes BigMoney a lot of cash has something to do with "supporting" the stock price ! .. or are you buying Puts or going short, if I may ask ?

To: BUGGI-WO who wrote (235559)	7/3/2007 6:14:59 AM
From: aleph0	Respond to of 275872

SOITEC : AMD’s volume ramp off the rails Editor's Blog: July 2007 Monday 02 July 2007 fabtech.org May have been posted already ? // ... So, in conclusion, the Barcelona volume ramp is delayed. Of more concern, though, is Soitec's unclear view as to when such a ramp will actually happen. That's the big new problem for both AMD and Soitec. Indeed, for Soitec, the delayed and unspecified timing of the AMD ramp could impact its full-year revenue guidance, and that is not due to happen until 2008, such is the uncertainty! From Soitec's guarded comments, it's clear that even they see the Barcelona ramp is off the rails! ... // PS: Just noticed that the INQwell has picked this one up : Chip hack tells AMD it's failing on SOI sauce Ramp de-railed. Oh, Barcelona By INQUIRER staff: Tuesday 03 July 2007, 10:03 theinquirer.net;

To: BUGGI-WO who wrote (235559)	7/3/2007 6:38:29 AM
From: Dan3	Respond to of 275872

Re: "rate" way overestimates the real benchnumbers for many many apps and 2,6G is nowhere insight, Sorry, but it would be stupid to use a single thread benchmark to compare 4 core chips - or to pay attention to a single threaded benchmark that compares such parts. OTOH, what's the point of benchmarking 2.6ghz parts if you're only shipping 2ghz parts? That's equally pointless. There is some good news here, the glass is about 1/6th full. IPC is significantly improved across the board, with significant improvements to integer, as well as floating point. They "just" need to up the clock by 50%, and they need to do it quickly. If there are a very few speedpath issues that are holding back the chip, maybe they can be fixed quickly.

To: BUGGI-WO who wrote (235559)	7/3/2007 11:11:52 AM
From: dougSF30	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 275872

BUGGI, the real problem is that the claim is now false. And with the Seaburg chipset, due in Q4, Intel 2.66 may lead Barcelona 2.6 in int_rate for 2S systems. Theo, embarrassingly, cannot even read, and thinks this stale claim is for Barcelona 2.3, not Barcelona 2.6, and also does not realize it is now a false claim.: theinquirer.net

To: BUGGI-WO who wrote (235559)	7/3/2007 4:16:12 PM
From: Petz	Respond to of 275872

re: Thats really bad, because "rate" way overestimates the real benchnumbers for many many apps Not when Intel makes compilers that substitute hand-optimized assembly code when it recognizes "SPEC_CPU" source code. Doug's all excited that suddenly Clovertown SPECint2006 scores grew by 10% overnight. Did Clovertown get any faster? No. Don't believe me? Check out SPEC_OMPM_2001 (revised 2006). According to SPEC, it uses "modifications" of SPEC_CPU codes, but weighted to measure HPC computing performance. Apparently, the Intel compilers can't "recognize" the SPEC code, and Clovertown is SLOWER than dual core Opterons on this benchmark. Clovertown's best (2 chips): 11,822 Opteron's best (2 chips): 13,627 DC Xeon's best (2 chips): 10,689 A similar situation with Apple's crappy SPEC_CPU results was also pointed out. Petz