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 : AMD:News, Press Releases and Information Only! -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Joey Smith who wrote (2642)	12/3/1997 1:00:00 AM
From: greg nus	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 6843

Joey Smith, gee you sound pissed like you lost money latly. Has Intel dissapointed you again. Were having fun with AMD. Arn't you having fun with Intel?

To: Joey Smith who wrote (2642)	12/3/1997 10:19:00 AM
From: DRBES	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 6843

re: "K6 will always be 1-2 speeds behind " Always is a VERY long time. STAY TUNED!!!!! DARBES

To: Joey Smith who wrote (2642)	12/3/1997 3:51:00 PM
From: Petz	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 6843

Joey, RE: <K6 will always be 1-2 speeds behind> Where do you get this nonsense? Even Byte magazine reported that the K6-3D will be out Q1 '97 in both 266 MHz and 300 MHz. Furthermore, several independent tests of of working silicon have shown the 300MHz K6-3D to be 25-30% faster than a P2-300. Intel's only response to this is a 333MHz Pentium II in February which is an extremely marginal improvement over the 300. so they will never get to the sweet spot for profits. Also, Intel's fastest notebook chip is a 233 MHz non-Pentium II Tillamook. The roadmap for Intel published in yesterday's Infoworld shows only a 266 MHz mobile chip in April or May. AMD will have this within a month, so Intel is at least 3 months behind. BTW, the 233 MHz mobile chips now sell for $423 (I think), quite a sweet spot for AMD, which had an ASP of $150 last quarter. AMD's strategy of gaining market share against Intel is a bad strategy, period. What would your strategy be, to lose market share? In the 486 era, AMD achieved 25% market share with a relatively inferior product. Look at the NY Times review of the three major sub-$1000 computers by IBM, Compaq and HP, excerpted in Message 2859546 There's absolutely no question which is the superior machine. K6 machines will be in demand, no question. Superior products will eventually win out. Losses of cents per share are easy to take compared to the profits that are ahead. Petz