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: Paul Engel who wrote (59555)	5/25/1999 1:53:00 AM
From: Mani1	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1584807

Paul Re <<you are too new>>, Correct, I was not reading the board consistantly in 1997. But the fact of the matter is that the thermal design in the K7 does point to any unstability problem. K7 is not any worse of the chip because it dissipates what it does. If they were making fun of Intel for its "thermal brick", that is equally silly. Intel has very specific plans for a very similar thermal design/package. I am not guessing, I know this for fact. Mani

To: Paul Engel who wrote (59555)	5/25/1999 7:47:00 AM
From: Cirruslvr	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1584807

Paul - RE: "Go back through the AMD archives" Speaking of past posts, It seems like the K7 hype is almost as big as the K6 hype was back then, except this time, it doesn't look like AMD will have analysts pushing it. There was hype the K6 would be the "fastest Windows processor" when it was slightly faster then the PPro and PMMX. Also, when the chip came out, there were NO Tier 1 OEMs onboard officially. You were noticeably absent on the thread during the days leading up to and after the K6's launch. (In the 8000s) The bears telling people to sell were Victoria Gate and Rod MacPherson. Last time, it was Klamath whose benchmarks looked poor, this time it is the K7's. At that time, the AMDites were VERY confident, this time, I believe we are more patient to make conclusions because of ALL of AMD's SNAFUs. Like last time, this time it is all a matter of execution. Piper's Kumar and an other analyst from Prudential have said that K7 yields are better than expected. I don't remember reading anything like that when I read the old posts from around the K6's release. So, unless I have missed something, at this point, the K7's INITIAL yields look all right. This can't be said of the K6, and THAT is why the stock tanked. This time, ASPs could again tank AMD, but Flash is picking up and it may counterbalance the negatives, however we don't know if analysts will even care about Flash when the K7 is obviously more important. ANY sign of K7 production problems is obviously a sell signal. There is another deja-vu factor. Last time, when the K6 came out, AMD released an unexpected profit instead an expected small loss. Now, a medium sized (for AMD ;) ) loss is expected. We all know Sanders would LOVE to wow everyone and attempt to get as close to break-even as possible. I don't know what caused the unexpected profit in '97, but Jerry said they shipped 10K K6s in that Q, as opposed to the 40K K7 expected this Q at a much higher ASP and similar size die. Does anyone have any serious thoughts on the past hype compared to this hype? BTW, one thing I also noticed - last time Vinod Dham (sp?) seemed to be Jerry's right hand man while this time it is Atiq Raza.