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: Paul Engel who wrote (6339)	5/28/1998 7:45:00 AM
From: Francis Chow	Respond to of 6843

IBM's Celeron is more expensive, but slower (only IBM . . .): infoworld.com

To: Paul Engel who wrote (6339)	5/28/1998 7:50:00 AM
From: Francis Chow	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 6843

< ''unlike anything Intel has.''> I agree AMD has to differentiate its chips from Intel's (A. to make better chips and B. to get away from the -25% price hit), but it's a question of balance. To say the chip is "unlike anything Intel has" is unwise. Intel is the industry's gorilla and all products must either be positioned against Intel's products or find a niche. The sub-1000 market is a kind of niche for AMD, but not a very secure one in the long term. For the forseeable future, unless the slotted processor dies off, AMD will have to position its offerings against Intel's offerings - different yes, but still comparable to.

To: Paul Engel who wrote (6339)	5/28/1998 8:09:00 PM
From: Petz	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 6843

RE: San Jose Mercury article. The last four paragraphs of the article ("risk factors") are bogus: Despite the impressive performance of the chips, however, a number of factors could derail AMD's plans. The original K6, or K6 Classic as those chips will now be called, also won critical praise but AMD was unable to produce the chips fast enough to take advantage of its opportunity. ...not likely, the daily production of the K6-2 is huge and I have heard that YIELDS ARE HIGHER THAN THE K6 CLASSIC (0.25æ) And while Microsoft has promised to support 3D-Now in Windows 98 -- with enhancements that are scheduled to ship in July -- the Department of Justice lawsuit against Microsoft could ultimately derail that operating system. ...HUH, DirectX 6.0 beta FOR WINDOWS 95 is available now. It is not at all a Windows'98 only product. Where in the world did San Jose Mercury News get that idea? Although AMD expects that the K6-2 would still offer better performance than the original K6 even without Windows 98, the improvement wouldn't be as noticeable on Windows 95. ...All the benchmark testing released today was on Windows 95 or Windows NT 4.0. It shows the K6-2 equivalent to a Pentium II at the same speed in Winbench '98, the primary benchmark for business- oriented Windows 95 applications.