To: Profits who wrote (39228 ) 10/13/1998 6:19:00 PM From: Tenchusatsu Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 1573691
Profits, re: <The point of my earlier post is that Intel is not overwhelming anyone with their roadmap. I apologize for being mistaken about Willamette/Katmai core, however, you missed my point.> Oh, I got your point, all right. I just don't agree with your opinions, that's all. For example: <The K6-2 and K6-3 compete nicely against the P6 and Katmai, whereas the K7 competes directly against the Willamette/Foster.> K6-2 still hasn't broken out of the Celeron segment, but that can change in Q1 once K6-2 400 and 450 MHz reach larger volumes. The K6-3 is perhaps the first real threat to Intel's bread-n-butter Pentium II line. <whereas the K7 competes directly against the Willamette/Foster.> We have different definitions of generations. Just because AMD calls the K7 a seventh-generation processor doesn't mean that it's going to be positioned against Intel's seventh generation Willamette/Foster. My feelings (and I'm going to be flamed for this, I'm sure) is that AMD's K6 is more like a P5.7 and the K7 will be more like a P6.3. But even achieving P6.3 status is pretty good for K7 considering its higher clock speeds over K6. As for AMD's response to Willamette/Foster, you can bet that AMD is already going to position a future K8 against Intel's P7. <And Merced/McKinley are so far out that AMD will have plenty of time to respond.> Slight correction here: Merced is going to be released before Willamette/Foster. But Merced isn't even going to be in the same league as AMD, and likewise I don't think AMD needs (or wants) to respond to Merced in the near future. Tenchusatsu