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: Yousef who wrote (56259)	4/25/1999 1:10:00 AM
From: Scumbria	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1570341

Yousef, Am I imagining things, or are you guys in a panic? Scumbria

To: Yousef who wrote (56259)	4/25/1999 8:17:00 PM
From: Rob Young	Respond to of 1570341

Re: "Hang in their fellas . . . we only have 18 months of Merced hype left." Rob, Have you heard of a chip called "McKinley" ?? ... Don't worry, you will. Sure I have. Have you ever heard of a chip call Arana aka 21464? You are going to have to do better than that. Maybe wave a Madison future at me? You see, Compaq is in a pretty unique postion. As Intel's biggest customer they have non-disclosure on Merced, etc. As the owner and developer of Alpha architecture they know that side too. So when they choose Alpha over Merced for Tandem, (which you don't switch architectures every few years) they chose Alpha. Arana will substantially outperform McKinley, and 21364 should be close... 21364 shipping volume next year, just in time for Merced. Here is some Arana background for you: informationweek.com Compaq says it intends to drive Alpha as a 64-bit industry standard, for example. "At the time Intel has McKinley, we're coming out with EV8 with simultaneous threading," says Jesse Lipcon, Compaq's VP of high-performance servers. "If EV8 beats McKinley by a factor of two on single stream, it will beat it by a factor of four on multistream workloads." > Make It So, I take the time to cite some sources and present a case and you come back with a hand-wave of McKinley. McKinley is second class compared to 21464 and may not even squeek by a process shrink of 21364. Rob