SI
SI
discoversearch

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: Tim Higginbotham who wrote (40407)10/30/1998 11:12:00 AM
From: Jim McMannis  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 1573695
 
Higgie,
RE:"I hope you're right, but we've been waiting for NEXT year
for several years. AMD has a problem with executing! The NEED
to upgrade is diminishing rapidly, can you really see any
difference
in speed between a 200 mhz cpu and a 400 mhz cpu in running
any apps other then games, without benchmarking. ASP's will
remain low, until
some killer App requires upgrading. Bandwidth is where speed
is the issue currently, not Cpu's."
----
I'm more inclined to focus on the present and near future than NEXT year so your points are very well taken. The truth is that right NOW AMD is doing rather well. Has another speed grade (400) and core (Warpcore) that will be introduced in the next week or so. They have a K6-3 that is essentially ready for introduction. These will raise ASPs...but I don't know how much they will raise profits at this time.
I don't really the saying, "wait 'till next year" applies at this time. Besides, AMd has been very careful of late not to hype future products, allowing them to speak for themselves when they are introed.
So they are executing, even beyond the wildest nightmares of the Yousefs, Elmers and Engels. Whether they can execute on the K7 remains to be seen of course. After all, they flubbed the K5 and the K6 technology came from NextGen and Vinod Dham and he's gone. So AMD will have to get it right this time on their own...except they have brought in Motorola and IBM. This time they seem to realize their deficiencies
and have taken steps to bolster them.
As far as the need for bandwith vs speed. I know that, you know that...but due to the perceived need for speed, "Megahertz sells" (TM-McMannis). It's good that it does because if the general public figured out that they don't need all those megahertz, ASPs would drop and the progression of faster and faster chips might slow down.
Which companies do ou see as cashing in on bandwith?

Regards, Jim



To: Tim Higginbotham who wrote (40407)10/30/1998 1:42:00 PM
From: kash johal  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 1573695
 
Tim,

Re ! The NEED to upgrade is dimminishing rapidly, can you really see >any difference
>in speed between a 200 mhz cpu and a 400 mhz cpu in running any apps >other then games, without benchmarking. ASP's will remain low, until
>some killer App requires upgrading. Bandwidth is where speed is the >issue currently, not Cpu's.

Tim, based on your BRILLIANT ANALYSIS you should buy AMD and SHORT Intel. AMD has the capacity to ship 30-40M of these low end CPU's and has a much lower cost than Intel due to die size etc.

Intel's whole game plan is based on shipping expensive CPU's.
If nobody wants them the stock will clearly plummet.

Regards,

Kash



To: Tim Higginbotham who wrote (40407)10/31/1998 11:32:00 AM
From: RDM  Respond to of 1573695
 
I owned my first Personal computer in 1976. Things were a little
different then when you only had 1K of RAM.

I have upgraded to through several generations. Perhaps eight. Each
time I thought they would last while. However, they did not. Applications, always have appeared. Applications are difficult to
develop that use the more powerful resources since the more powerful resources are not available to do the development until they are available to the consumer as well.

I believe that when 1 GHZ CPUS are available, most users will feel that they don't need more than 900 Mhz. So it has been and so it will be.