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: Jim McMannis who wrote (59375)	5/24/1999 1:05:00 AM
From: Saturn V	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1584705

:"I presume that when you said the 'late K-63' you meant the 'deceased K-63' I was obviously pulling your leg, when I said that. Both of us agree that the K6-3 is lost soul at this point in time. It does not offer a significant performance improvement over K6-2.[ It is amazing how efficient the K6 core is ! Despite a lack of Backside bus and on chip L2, it offers performance almost equivalent to the K6-3.] The incremental cost of the K6-3 is too high ! In the consumer market place which is open to AMD, only MHz sells (as noted by you countless times). So the K6-3 looks hopeless now. However the situation could change. As the processor speed increases without a corresponding increase in DRAM memory speed, the impact of the on chip L2 will become greater. A year from now it could have a brighter future, since the incremental cost of K6-3 will also be dropping. However if the "MHz sells" mentality continues to prevail in the market segments which AMD sells to, K6-3 may continue to be moribund, withering in the shadows of K6-2 and the Celeron. History will judge if K6-3 is a case of A. DOA [ Dead on Arrival ] or B. PB [ Premature Birth ] or C. PR [ Premature Release ]. However I must fault AMD's management for this very obvious and preventable error, and the consequent embarassment and waste of resources.