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 : Intel Corporation (INTC) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: mauser96 who wrote (39280)	11/6/1997 9:51:00 PM
From: Lev Belov	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 186894

>>but AMD can get a 166 version by using a partly defective faster version that doesn't meet full specifications at the higher speed, but works OK at lower speeds. They can also put in a faster chip and call it a 166, if that's what the market wants. << I understand this, I was actually being somewhat ironeous in my question, because I didn't believe that AMD ever _positioned_ the K6 as a 166Mhz processor (that would put them at the low end right away). I personally think that we are seeing a repeat of the 486/Pentium transition. I remember that for the first year there didn't seem to be enough justification for some people to buy an "expensive" Pentium computer, while a 100Mhz 486 could do just fine. Both AMD and Cyrix back then were positioning their 486-type processors as better and cheaper alternatives to Pentiums, without much success. And as far as I remember Intel quickly killed them all with a somewhat slow, but very cost-efficient P75. Am I the only one seeing a parallel to the cacheless PentiumII 266? Anyway, I was just surprised that if it was a K6 in these Aptivas they were not marketing them as 200s.