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: Scumbria who wrote (57147)	5/4/1999 9:44:00 AM
From: Process Boy	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1572547

Scumbria - <K7 will get at least 1 process jump during it's first 8 months.> So if you're answering my question directly, you are expecting the K7's first speed upgrade to go from 600 to 1000. OHHHH-k. <Try putting this in your pipe and smoking it.> For me to believe 600 to 1000, I'd need to smoke something. PB

To: Scumbria who wrote (57147)	5/4/1999 10:30:00 AM
From: Jim McMannis	Respond to of 1572547

Scumbria, RE:"K6-2 increased in the last 8 months from 300 MHz to 475 MHz, a 60% improvement without a process jump." Yes, I remember that. The ramp that Yousef completely missed. The K7 is even more scalable than the K6 you say? Plus a process jump... Hummmm Jim

To: Scumbria who wrote (57147)	5/4/1999 12:05:00 PM
From: Paul Engel	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1572547

SCUMbria - Re: "K6-2 increased in the last 8 months from 300 MHz to 475 MHz, a 60% improvement without a process jump. " You neglected to REPORT that the jump from 400 to 475 MHz required a 10% JACK UP VOLTAGE BOOST to 2.4 volts - from 2.2 volts. Paul

To: Scumbria who wrote (57147)	5/4/1999 12:09:00 PM
From: Tony Viola	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1572547

Scumbria, Try putting this in your pipe and smoking it. K6-2 increased in the last 8 months from 300 MHz to 475 MHz, a 60% improvement without a process jump. K7 will get at least 1 process jump during it's first 8 months. Should we expect any of the attendant problems on K7, that Sanders mentioned in the recent article on what went wrong with K6-2 when AMD tried to keep up with Intel: Because AMD decided to play the raw MHz game, Sanders admitted that yields were affected. "To support our customers, we pushed both our process technology and our AMD-K6-2 processor design to achieve maximum clock speed...Tuning the process and the design to achieve maximum clock speed while maintaining acceptable yields is an ongoing challenge that ideally involves a series of engineering iterations to achieve optimum results. "Pushed by Intel to match an ever-faster pace of new product introductions, and pulled by the demands of our largest customers for competitive higher-clock-speed devices, we encountered yield problems last December that carried over into the first eight weeks of 1999 with a devastating impact on our aggregate production in the first quarter," he said. I personally would not bet against Murphy's law getting enforced again as applied to AMD's processing prowess: whatever can go wrong, will go wrong. Who in their right mind could expect anything else? Tony