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: Logos who wrote (52247)	4/6/1998 10:56:00 PM
From: Elmer	Respond to of 186894

<Is there really such a thing as 100% yields? I thought 90% was considered excellent. So now we're told that AMD, which just a few months ago was having all kinds of yield problems, is now perfect (on the K6-266 anyway)? Can someone please explain this.> I think what he is saying is that of the die that are good (unknown percentage), all run at at least 266mhz, and 75% run at 300mhz. What percentage are good? Who knows, I wouldn't place too much faith in leaked information on a company who is about to do a stock offering to raise money.... EP

To: Logos who wrote (52247)	4/6/1998 11:06:00 PM
From: Time Traveler	Read Replies (4) \| Respond to of 186894

Hazem, "Is there really such a thing as 100% yields?" Not in reality, only in AMD investors' dreams. ".AMD, which just a few months ago was having all kinds of yield problems, is now perfect (on the K6-266 anyway)? Can someone please explain this." All hypes and lies, just like last year and the year before and the year before last. Although Intel is winning the war on technology front, marketing front, and manufacturing front, AMD is kill Intel in propaganda front. I agree with Merced Trader that Intel needs to beef up its propaganda department (investor relations). If Jerry Sanders is out of a job at AMD, Intel should seriously consider hiring this master of hypes. 100% yield's, yeah right, give me a break! Darwin, "this celetron <$1000 computer is found to be slower than AMD's. My question is: with so many scientist phds at Intel, why can't they beat their competition here.?????" Although I am not an engineer at Intel, my answer to your question is as follows. Socket-7 is approaching its serviceable limit. 266MHz CPU speed is somewhat doable, but 300MHz is really pushing it. 66MHz I/O bus speed is achievable, but 100MHz+ is again pushing it. Celetron with Slot-I which does not have the speed constraint like Socket-7 is thus a stepping stone heading towards future chips that are higher speed and aiming for sub $1K computers. Not to mention when L1 cache is beefed up, that would really give a running for systems with L2 cache. It is not Intel's technology that is inferior to AMD's. In my humble assessment, Intel is trying very hard to migrate everything towards Slot-I and beyond. Socket-7 is clearly approaching its useful life. After all, Intel still has these Deschutte's (0.25um Pentium/MMX) running off Socket-7, yet Barrett chooses not to pursue. This technical fact might be Intel's trump card in the days to come. Meanwhile, the weakness of Intel's propaganda department is still causing us long investors quite a few sleepless nights for now. John.