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 (48823)	2/25/1998 5:24:00 PM
From: Jim Patterson	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 186894

There was also mention of a P III in the article. This is the first time I have heard a hint on a P III. Here is a question, Could a Socket 7 motherboard run @ 100 MHz? Intc Sandbagging trick is PC100 and Slot 2 IMO. This should make the P II 400's and 450's 1.5-1.75 times faster than the 1.25 times clock increase over PII 300's. That should make the Chip able to perform 88% faster Plus add in the extra clock cycles normally lost to latency, now estimated at 30-50%, last, add RDRAM. This should make the P II 400's 2-2.5 times faster than a P II 300. IMO, If you think I am way off here, please explain why. Now What If we or rather INTC were to take a good old P II 233 and put it in this slot 2 / PC100 configuration. The PC would be 75-100% faster. The Buss and the RDRAM are the only real difference here. Now why is INTC not going to do this? IOM Probably because they would suffer a major revenue decline as folks bought outdated chips (Read low ASP) on new tech PC 100. Here is the Rub/ big picture risk. Can AMD get the K6 and or the K7 onto PC 100? If they can, In a time where a $1200 PC can run the most demanding desktop software including games, I see the potential for trouble. Key word Potential. I know computing demands increase going forward, but maybe we should start a new Law, Call it the Gates law, OS and Software increases in computing demand every 3 years. The problem is that in 1990 software needed 2 x the current CPU. CPU doubles every 18 months. Here is what I mean. 1990 CPU=1 BG=2 1993 cpu=3 BG=6 1996 CPU=12 BG=12 1998 CPU=24 BG=18 We are here. 1999 CPU=48 BG=24 200c CPU=192 BG=48 Maybe 72 with Voice recognition I can't wait to see how much y'all disagree with this. As you can see, This is why I see trouble on INTC's horizon. Every one of you on this thread know that for a basic office PC a P-166 or P-200 is plenty. For the home with out a gamer it is plenty for now. This is the bottom of INTC's production line. What will make this change? Voice? The Internet? Bandwidth? BTW, my PC and my TV are not going to merge. I may watch TV on my PC, but I am not going to WATCH TV on my PC I hope y'all understand what I mean here. I look forward to responses Jim PS I am neither Long nor short the stock.

To: Paul Engel who wrote (48823)	2/25/1998 5:52:00 PM
From: Tony Viola	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 186894

Paul, Re: "Intel (or leaks from Intel) has given "guidance" that Merced samples should be shipped to key accounts by the end of this year - or early next year at the latest." Time coming soon to order some, then! Re: " I'm sure the testing, verification, debug, retesting... scenario is familiar to you. Intel is trying to allow for that in their "confusing" schedules." Amen. Also, now, all new software! In comparison, bringing up systems based on legacy software should be a piece of cake. Not really, because of the complexity of each new box and all the new microcode and macrocode that have to be debugged. Exciting times coming with Merced. What's AMD got? Tony