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: kash johal who wrote (51086)	2/26/1999 4:38:00 PM
From: Jim McMannis	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1574905

Kash, "I don't see anybody buying 300/333/366 Mhz parts in Q2 for desktops with the latest salvo from AMD." E-Machines will be selling the heck out of $500 machines whith those chips in them. AMDs sweet spot will move from the K6-2-350 to 400. Intel won't have a bit of trouble selling 333 and 366 Celerons. For about $50 a pop which won't help the bottom line, that is... Unless Cyrix gets to PR350 and beyond in Q2 they will lose what market share they have gained. Jim

To: kash johal who wrote (51086)	2/26/1999 4:46:00 PM
From: Tenchusatsu	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1574905

<This is VERY smart of AMD as Mhz sells> Well, hopefully the K6-2 and K6-3 have some sort of built-in mechanism which reduces the clock speed should the temperature of the processor gets too hot. If not, AMD is putting a lot of reliability hopes onto a $6.99 heat sink and fan. At least the fans that appear on Intel processors are generally regarded as high quality. (Heh, when the CPU sells for approx. $500, the cooling better be high quality.) <I am sure that they ran plenty of life test runs to prove reliabilty for excess of 30 years as is standard in the industry. And the OEMS I am sure are privy to that QUAL data).> I really doubt that. I think AMD is sacrificing a few years of reliability in order to get to high speeds. No big deal when you look at the whole picture, but this jacked-up voltage for a 0.25 micron process isn't inspiring confidence. Tenchusatsu

To: kash johal who wrote (51086)	2/26/1999 5:20:00 PM
From: Elmer	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1574905

Re: "I agree with you that at 2.2V their yields at 400Mhz and greater may have been sub 50% even with the revised mask fix. Changing the spec to 2.4V will almost certainly increase that dramatically to as much as 80% depending upon the bell curve. This is VERY smart of AMD as Mhz sells (tm Jim mcminnis). I am sure that they ran plenty of life test runs to prove reliabilty for excess of 30 years as is standard in the industry. And the OEMS I am sure are privy to that QUAL data)." I smell a rat. If there is no reliability issue with elevated Vcc, then why did AMD wait until now to jack it up? The could have done this before if there is no reliability problem. Don't you find it rather coincidential that just when AMD goes back into red ink, just when their competition comes out with a newer faster product, just when AMD finds themselves once again a couple of speed bins behind, they suddenly discover they can jack up the Vcc and suddenly all their yield problems are solved!!! Why now when this process has been running for months? Answer... desperation. Pure and simply. EP