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 : ATI Technologies in 1997 (T.ATY) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Sleeperz who wrote (2673)	2/4/1999 9:32:00 PM
From: Marc	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 5927

Well maybe if you would stop looking for the end of the world every time a company is releasing a new chip, maybe you could have make some money, but you don't seam to get it. What can i tell you that i haven't already told you.. remember the old Wall Street saying: "Don't fall in love with a stock" there is also the other site to this, not sure how to put it in word but let's try: Don't detest a stock just because other kind of like it. Marc. PS-> NTT, welcome to the tread, you comments are really appreciate.

To: Sleeperz who wrote (2673)	2/4/1999 11:14:00 PM
From: NTT	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 5927

Not to belabor the point, but I still don't see how the Savage4 fits into any of those categories. 1) It doesn't fit into the high performance category because it is going to offer similar features to the Rage128, but 6 months from now. Even then, it still won't have all of the frills like an IDCT engine or a HDTV capable overlay. I also didn't see mention of full stencil buffer or 32bit Z, but I could be mistaken. The Rage128 already has proven superb 32bit rendering abilities. Theirs is still vaporware. Since nobody but ATI has been able to pull off this miracle of engineering, I'll believe it when I see it. 2) It certainly doesn't fit in the low cost category simply because it costs about 4 times as much as ATI's low end AGP part. Its price is actually in the same category as its competitors motherboard implementations of their high performance parts. 3) And it doesn't fit in the mid performance, mid cost category simply because the competition will be offering parts with potentially double the performance for the same price point. Mind you, I haven't seen any actual fill rate quotations on this part, but my guess is that it's low otherwise they would have mentioned it. It needs to be in the 400-500Mp range in order to be competitive at that time frame. Even then, it will be just one of the crowd -- nothing revolutionary.