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: Paul Engel who wrote (47821)	2/14/1998 1:53:00 AM
From: Thomas M.	Read Replies (4) \| Respond to of 186894

Bob Gabele of CDA/Investnet mentioned on CNBC today that he did not like the insider selling profile at INTC. He said the selling was light in the summer, heavier in the fall, and even heavier now. He said the fact that the selling increased as the price declined is a bad sign. He noted that it could very well not be company-specific, but rather macro-oriented. Tom

To: Paul Engel who wrote (47821)	2/14/1998 2:15:00 AM
From: Jeff Fox	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 186894

Paul: re: the real news - Intel has working Rambus-D! At the International Solid-State Circuits Conference, Intel and Rambus engineers showed a test board with a 2.6-Gbyte/second chip-to-chip interface, using Rambus interface logic. In addition to its prolific product introductions, Intel apparently finds room for chips dedicated to perfecting the advanced circuits required for Katmai, Merced, and Willamette. This is the first demonstration of gigabit per second memory access in silicon by any PC company. Looks like the heat is on the DRAM manufacturers to meet the schedules. The SDRAM stuff is there to fix very near term transition problems. I don't think the DRAM people are use to such rapid and dramatic change. Jeff

To: Paul Engel who wrote (47821)	2/14/1998 2:47:00 AM
From: Sonny McWilliams	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 186894

Paul, re: Us being more confused. Maybe Intel insiders are confused also. Could be the reason for some of their selling. gg. This article almost needs an interpreter. Is Intel hedging as far as Rambus is concerned and is Rambus saying they are still on target no matter what? Sonny

To: Paul Engel who wrote (47821)	2/14/1998 8:06:00 AM
From: Kealoha	Read Replies (4) \| Respond to of 186894

Paul and all: I just got back from Indonesia, rural Central Java, and the scene is bad and getting worse. The economic situation is melting down. The Currency Board is a joke. When this place blows the "Asian Problem" will be all the news and a major correction will happen. Many many people will die in the future riots. The poor folks are taking it out on the Chinese but Suharto and his buddies are the real rip off artists. Thank god INTC has its fab in Malaysia. But CNN's future coverage will really fan the bear market flames. Merchants don't have much on the shelves, including PCs in bigger cities, due to the riots and risk of more riots. Need to hide the inventory.

To: Paul Engel who wrote (47821)	2/14/1998 11:13:00 AM
From: Barry A. Watzman	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 186894

Paul: Thanks for the memory article. I have some questions that you may have the answer to: 1. What are the clock multipliers supported in current PII's ? 2. What clock multipliers will be supported in the 350 MHz PII ? 3. Will the BX chipset support only a 100 MHz clock, or both a 66 MHz and a 100 MHz clock ? 4. What do you think the chances are of successfully using a 300 or 333 MHz current PII at 350 MHz with a BX MB and a 100 MHz bus ? Barry (Uberclockmeister-in-training - :-) ) Watzman ==> Amazing facts, SI did not flag "Uberclockmesiter" as a misspelled word ! "Chipset", on the other hand, is unknown ! )

To: Paul Engel who wrote (47821)	2/14/1998 1:11:00 PM
From: Starowl	Respond to of 186894

Paul: Can you provide any insights into an Intel chip codenamed "Tanner"? According to article excerpted below, it is an interim/transitional chip toward Merced. I had not seen references to it previously. Comments would be appreciated. techweb.cmp.com "A new Intel microprocessor, code-named Tanner, could offer OEMs a smooth transition to Intel Corp.'s 64-bit microprocessor, Merced. Intel has begun informing OEMs that the 32-bit Tanner microprocessor will also function in the same "Slot M" connector that will eventually house Merced. "Intel declined to comment this week on its Merced plans. However, in confidential road maps, the company has anticipated a variety of typical workstations, which range in cost from about $6,000 to more than $100,000, in the second half of 1999, about the time Merced is scheduled to be launched. "A separate Intel road map associates the Tanner chip with a Slot 2 module, leading industry sources and analysts to believe that the Tanner chip would be designed to function in 32-bit and 64-bit computers. Based on documents for a patent for which Intel has applied, analysts believe that Merced will also include some capability for executing older 32-bit instructions, as well as its 64-bit code. "However, industry sources also think that Merced will represent simply too great a leap in cost to lure some OEMs into purchasing the new part, even in servers where performance, rather than price, is a more significant factor. "It's not unlikely to have some sort of a transitional step in place," said Dean McCarron, a principal at Mercury Research Corp., Scottsdale, Ariz. "For example, the Pentium is a 16-bit microprocessor that connects to a 32-bit interface." "The Slot M connector will be incorporated into a 460GX chip set, among others. The 460GX's features include the capability to run four processors in parallel, address 16 Gbytes of memory, and interface to an AGP 4X high-power connector, industry sources said." Thanks, Starowl

To: Paul Engel who wrote (47821)	2/14/1998 1:12:00 PM
From: Ibexx	Respond to of 186894

Paul, Many thanks for the article. In fact, I thought it was quite lucid - not at all confusing. :-) Have a nice weekend, Ibexx

To: Paul Engel who wrote (47821)	2/16/1998 1:05:00 PM
From: Tony Viola	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 186894

Paul, from the article you posted re SDRAM getting support because of it's falling prices, while Rambus gets it's RDRAM out: The result, according to the ISSCC paper, "is a transmission system with controlled impedance and propagation (attenuation and phase) required to transport signals at 800 Mbits/s." To Intel and Rambus, welcome to the world that used to be the domain of ECL systems (transmission lines, controlled and characteristic impedance, etc. The fact that these guys realize that you have to look at "digital" design in a whole new light at these speeds, tells me they know what they are doing. Of course, why would I expect anything different? Tony