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 : Intel Corporation (INTC) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: kapkan4u who wrote (80660)	5/10/1999 1:00:00 AM
From: Process Boy	Respond to of 186894

kapkan4u - I am looking forward to Ten's response to this. As I said on the AMD thread, we disagree on some things and agree on others. Ostensibly, AMD does have a window of opportunity. But I believe Intel's response will not be static. PB <I have just joined SI to pass along this important information. My sources tell me that the AMD K8 design team has taped out a month ago and is already working on the next generation processor K9 (code name DOG). On a more serious note, I am long on both AMD and INTC. Here is my take on how the two investments play together. I bought AMD as an insurance to protect my substantial INTC position. I am nervous about INTC's aging p6 core. The WMT core is a year away which creates a window of opportunity for K7. When WMT goes into volume production, K7 will be on 0.18cu running at 1.4G at half the WMT's die size. Many AMD's manufacturing failures are probably due to pushing the 5 stage k6 to over 400 mz. I suspect that Intel could have had similar problems had they tried to push the p5 core to over 400 mz. Having said that, I am long on INTC because I think the Internet is creating an explosion in demand for servers for the next 2-4 years. They have the capacity to satisfy that demand. The SMP Xeon platform will probably see little or no competition from K7 for about a year. Windows 2000 and post-Y2k corporate buying will propel INTC's earnings into the 3.20-3.80 range for the next year.>

To: kapkan4u who wrote (80660)	5/10/1999 3:45:00 AM
From: Tenchusatsu	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 186894

<I am nervous about INTC's aging p6 core.> I wouldn't necessarily call the P6 core "aging," because if you really take a good look at the K7 design, it's not much more than a "P6-plus." Now before I get flamed by AMD advocates, let me say that this isn't necessarily a bad thing. The K7 features more of what makes the P6 so great, i.e. more execution units, more L1 cache, more buffers, more pipeline stages. However, there isn't anything in the K7 that's radically different from the P6. (In comparison, the leap from Pentium to P6 saw completely new features like out-of-order execution, back-side L2 cache, deep superpipelined architecture, etc.) <When WMT goes into volume production, K7 will be on 0.18cu running at 1.4G at half the WMT's die size.> AMD's stated goal was 1 GHz by the end of 2000. AMD is not known for sandbagging, so it's very unlikely that they'll be able to hit their target any earlier. As for Willamette, well, we'll just have to wait and see. <Having said that, I am long on INTC because I think the Internet is creating an explosion in demand for servers for the next 2-4 years. They have the capacity to satisfy that demand. The SMP Xeon platform will probably see little or no competition from K7 for about a year.> Don't forget about IA-64 in the long term. Intel has big plans for IA-64 to take over the high-end market and dwarf the RISC competition for good. This effort will start with Merced, get a big boost from McKinley, then continue with Madison and Deerfield. Not only that, but starting with Deerfield, Intel also plans to push IA-64 down to the desktop level. By the way, it's interesting that you mention the Internet as the main driving force behind increased server sales. Keep in mind that there are many, many different types of servers out there. Some only need to host a privately-owned web site which receives only a moderate amount of hits. Some have to handle millions of transactions a day. Some are even powerful enough to become replacements for corporate mainframes. In any case, I don't know any other company that has the volume and the leverage to cover the entire spectrum of servers than Intel. Tenchusatsu