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.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Elmer who wrote (32884)	5/23/1998 11:36:00 PM
From: Francis Chow	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1571690

<I wouldn't exactly characterize AMD as fertile landscape. Who else has made the desert bloom?> You know what got me interested in AMD? Last year I upgraded my home machine from a 486 to a K6 and was really really surprised at how good the K6 was, given AMD's stumble on the K5 and Intel's dominant position. I always trusted Intel. Way back in 1990 I started playing around with overclocking CPUs and Math CoProcessors. All Intel's product was safely overclockable by some amount, as opposed to the others (Cyrix etc.) which just could not be pushed. After running my new K6 for a few weeks, I tried overclocking it and pushed it from 166 to around 250. In fact I found I could push it to 208 and at the same time reduce the chip voltage by 0.1 volts. It's a quality piece of engineering. Kudos to AMD, or Vinod Dham or whoever - given Intel's dominance of the industry it was an amazing accomplishment . . . I've taken a interest in, and a liking of, AMD ever since. To all the Intel crowd - "The greatest sin in war is to underestimate the competition, and the second greatest sin is to overestimate the competition." Intel has done both with AMD - why because it does not respect AMD enough to see it as an EQUAL rival.