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: Kevin K. Spurway who wrote (41771)	11/18/1998 11:25:00 AM
From: Scumbria	Respond to of 1572531

Kevin, If anyone at AMD is paying attention, you should take a cue from Intel and design a socket-based infrastructure for K7 now, so you don't get locked into slot A like Intel was locked into slot 1. Excellent suggestion. AMD has always sold parts by providing a low-cost solution. It doesn't make sense to change their strategy now. Scumbria

To: Kevin K. Spurway who wrote (41771)	11/18/1998 11:36:00 AM
From: Maxwell	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1572531

Kevin: <<If anyone at AMD is paying attention, you should take a cue from Intel and design a socket-based infrastructure for K7 now, so you don't get locked into slot A like Intel was locked into slot 1.>> Unlike Intel, AMD K7 architecture is open to anyone free of royalty. AMD welcomes chipset makers to design chipsets for K7. This is a good technique to get the whole industry adopting K7. Thus I don't think AMD is in trouble here. There is no need for socket for K7 in the low end. K6-2 and subsequently K6-3 are more than sufficient to keep supersocket K7 well into 1999. Supersocket 7 is superior to socket 370 because of its 100MHz bus. K7 is in a different market than K6-2/K6-3. Maxwell