Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Re: Care to explain how you consider that to be half as long?
It isn't half as long, it's half as wide - 64-bits vs. 32-bits.
Re: I didn't miss anything
LOL !!! Just all the benchmarks that showed that the half wide, quarter register, VERY limited floating point (and floating point is a big powr user) Dothan is crippled relative to its competition.
By the way, you might want to check the latest real world example of why Intel is hemorrhaging server market share.
HP ProLiant BL25p achieves record server blade
performance on the SPECweb99_SSL benchmark:
ftp://ftp.compaq.com/pub/products/servers/benchmarks/bl25p-specweb99_ssl.pdf
BTW, single BL25p with dual core Opteron beats 2 (as in TWO) Dell blades.
Re: Intel was ordered to post it too!
Great, show us a link.
Intel appears to have weasled out of it - unless you can find a link to it somewhere, and so far you haven't been able to.
Re: maybe these charts will help
You want to compare power consumption of a chip with half the pipeline width, 1/4 the register size, (AMD64 has twice number of registers and each is twice the size of Pentium M's)? Running software that (till later this year) for the most part only uses half of the resources it's powering?
And how many of those benchmarks were compiled with Intel's compiler that flags AMD chips as 386's and disables all of the SSE, etc.
Additionally, you missed a couple of benchmarks - let me help you out.
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
Re: The Consent Decree was indeed secret Dan, unless you count the fact that it was published by the FTC.
You should consider reading what you post. You posted something that says Intel has to come up with a report detailing what it is going to do to stop abusing its monopoly. That report continues to be secret (at least, it was reported to the papers that it would be secret and you sure couldn't find it). It was supposed to be posted after acceptance, but apparently Intel managed to weasel out of that requirement.
From your link:
Respondent shall submit, within thirty (30) days of the date this agreement is signed by Respondent, an initial report, pursuant to § 2.33 of the Commission's Rules, signed by the Respondent, setting forth in detail the manner in which the Respondent will comply with the Order when and if entered. Such report will not become part of the public record unless and until the accompanying agreement and order are accepted by the Commission for public comment.
Re: AMD is handicapped for power because of the 64b thing...
Actually it's Intel that's handicapped by their process and so can't produce mobile parts that run the current version of windows.
You're starting to get it, just not quite there yet.
Re: to trim power consumption of desktop CPUs in half by H2 2006
Just like AMD began shipping in H2 2005.
How Quaint.
Re: That makes your statement conjecture, not fact
You are absolutely right.
claiming the performance of 65nm, without using up the 65nm process
Nope. I'm suggesting AMD is already shipping the core of their 65nm process. If you want to argue that the benefits of that move are yet to be seen, feel free. I find that AMD's existing gains to be phenomenal. If you're saying even bigger improvements from AMD are right around the corner, well, I just don't see how it can get much better until multigate comes along at 45nm.
This is a bit weird. Don't we usually argue the other sides....
Re: I have always believed Intel has pretty much played by the rules
I buy systems from a number of sources, and what I've been heard from people who deal directly with Intel is simply nauseating, no other word for it.
I know you can't stand me and think I'm just here to trash Intel for fun, but I'm writing truthfully - Intel's "marketing tactics" have been illegal, to put it mildly, and reprehensible, to put it morally.
Re: a layman
I'll point it out again. I posted about the stunning results of AMD's recent process updates. You can call me names all you want, but it won't make up for the performance chasm that's opened up between AMD's and Intel's processes.
What AMD has done to their transistors to get so far ahead of Intel, I don't know, but part of it is the SOI you kept posting was useless - a great example of your talents for assessing process technologies.
All we do know that they've done it.
Intel's 65nm process was under the gun when Intel was "only" trailing AMD power/performance by 1/3 - now they're trailing by 2/3!
Intel had better be getting at least double their typical improvements when they to 65nm.
Re: A few hundred random failures
Intel has shipped millions of defective parts, both CPUs and chipsets, to its customers.
Historically, it's been Compaq that's found most of the problems with TomsHardware being one of the notable exceptions. Intel has a number of things they should be proud of, but as far as their record of letting defective parts get out the door - let's just say you're not playing to their strengths....
Re: and that fact that AMD now has a 90nm part that is...
It's the power consumption, Al, the power consumption. AMD continues to ship parts with higher performance than anything Intel can ship and their headroom keeps going up, but now they've gone from doing it using 1/3 less power to doing it with 2/3s less power.
It's a big deal.
Re: it sounds like what you're saying, is
Nope.
What I'm saying is that AMD is already shipping parts with the performance gains and power reductions not expected until the 65nm "node".
AMD's process is now delivering 3 to 4 times the performance / watt that Intel's process is. Until the recent process changes introduced this month, it was more like 5/3's (in desktops, workstations, and most significantly, servers).
What I'm saying is that AMD is delivering 65nm parts, in terms of performance (power and speed). If they've done that without "using up" any of the process techniques developed for 65nm, then Intel's problems are larger than even I thought (is that possible?).
Keep in mind that AMD is ramping this amazing process at second FAB (FAB 7) and an even more advanced process at their FAB 36.
Re: So hybrid 65/90 nm SOI process technology is how AMD's Turion
manages to provide twice the processing power (with 64-bit wide ALUs, registers, shadow registers, etc.) while using about the same power.
Note that moving from 2meg to 4meg cache on a Xeon adds about a watt of power consumption - almost all of the power used by modern CPUs is used by the (relatively) small number of very high speed gates in the CPU's core logic - and AMD's Turion has twice the core logic of Intel's Pentium M CPU since it processes 64-bits at a time vs. Pentium M's 32-bits.
Intel flat out stated during their last conference call that even their follow on mobile core (Yonah) would have to remain 32-bit because even Intel's upcoming 65nm process wouldn't get the power requirements down low enough to support a mobile 64-bit part.
Intel can talk about how much it spends on its FABs until the cows come home, but it can't seem to ship a process that results in high performance parts that have reasonable power budgets.
And in this business, you've got to be able to ship the parts.
Re: you have absolutely no understanding whatsoever, of the physics behind
LOL !!
All I posted was AMD has rather clearly started shipping technology that is part of the next node (65nm) and some links to show that AMD is moving away from "jumping" from node to node and instead incrementally improving their process.
That "next node" always encompasses a number of technologies for each company, but the key - the vital factor - is that AMD's shipping production product is already incorporating power reductions and performance gains that AMD wasn't expected to have until the middle of next year.
Intel, meanwhile, is stuck with the old, all or nothing "jump" strategy, which requires them to wait for all of their FABs to have all aspects of the next "node" ready so they can "copy exactly" their production changes.
At some point towards the end of this year or early next year Intel should start shipping some of the 65nm node technology that AMD has in production today.
Re: There is a much more sensible explanation for dual core power consumption levels.
You think so? Why don't you let Intel in on the details, then, so they can stop hemorrhaging server market share.
Intel is rather desperate to reduce the power consumption of their server chips - they can't seem to do what AMD has done. Intel's process technology has been lagging further and further behind AMD's.
Maybe you should let Intel in on your "sensible explanation."
Re: Intel's 'Yonah' to supersede 'Dothan' Q2 06
A "brand new" chip will be introduced that's 32-bit when even Celerons have been 64-bit for almost a year? That time frame is getting into the point where AMD will be ramping production from its second and third CPU FABs (FAB 36 and FAB 7) - the "no volume alternative" argument for sticking with Intel won't be valid any more.
And if Yonah is being first introduced only in Q2 of next year, how far back has Merom, Intel's 64-bit response to AMD's Turion, been pushed?
AMD has cut power use roughly in half with its latest shipping process - buyers of the X2 and Opteron Dual core parts are shocked to see them using less power than the nearly identical single core parts they're replacing. The only way that's possible, IMHO, is that AMD has phased in key parts of its 65nm process, and AMD's 65nm process is looking fantastic.
Re: anyone remember the 430tx or 440bx? same ole, same ole...
Yep, and the 810, the 820, the MTH... the list goes on and on. This time the problem is apparently related to problems with power consumption in the new chipsets - the newer Pentium M based notebooks are showing shorter battery lives than similar notebooks that use AMD's Turion - and the only change is the move to Intel's new chipset.
http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=25208
The capacity argument is prima facia absurd - Intel chipset parts are 16mm2. You can fit 1,750 on even an 8 inch wafer. Two day's production from one FAB should produce the 16 million or so needed for the quarter - if you aren't having terrible power use binsplit problems. Intel may be throwing away 10 chipsets for every one that tests out with power us low enough to be sold.
The "good news" is that even Dell is now dropping Intel for its high end chipsets, something that will free up even more capacity.
http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=25248
Re: Intel to exit entry-level chipset market
Funny timing. They just finished up a massive PIII shipment as a last hurrah for Intel's participation in the gamebox market.
Mercury notes that Microsoft's purchase of a shed-load of Pentium III processors for its Xbox games console shifted the dynamics of the market during the quarter that AMD's gains were effectively nullified
http://www.channelregister.co.uk/2005/08/02/intel_vs_amd_q2_05/
http://www.xbox.com/en-US/xbox360/factsheet.htm
That's the same class of capacity as is used by the chipsets, except that the xbox chips are considerably larger than chipset chips, so that capacity for (2 million?) xbox CPUs should provide something more than 8 million additional chipsets this quarter. Plus they're bringing those new and newly updated FABs on line this quarter, right? What about all the capacity that's going to free up?
Intel just got chased out of the gaming box market (one of the fastest growing markets out there) so now they're going to retreat from the chipset market as well? What about the "platform strategy?" Has Intel given up on the "platform strategy?"
Re: SPECjbb2005 benchmark results
I wonder why they didn't test a 4-way box....
After the SPECWeb 2005 results started showing up, Intel had to get a new benchmark written in a hurry.
http://www.spec.org/web2005/results/web2005.html
There's only one certified roaster, and that'e the 84watt P4 "mobile" chip
Here's a link to study results and a warning about the P4 from the Pennsylvania Department of Public Health:
Laptops May Threaten Male Fertility
THURSDAY, Dec. 9 (HealthDayNews) -- Laptop computers pose a long-term threat to the fertility of young men who use them because they can reduce sperm formation by raising temperatures in the genital area, a small new study says.
Keep the laptop on a desk, not on the lap, is the advice of Dr. Yefim Sheynkin, an associate professor of urology at the State University of New York at Stony Brook and lead author of what is described as the first study of the effect of heat from the computers on the genital region.
But the warning drew a quick rebuttal from another fertility expert, Dr. Steven J. Sondheimer of the University of Pennsylvania, who said "it is not clear that it [the warming effect] is clinically important."
High scrotal temperature is "definitely a well-known risk factor for infertility," Sheynkin said. "We have known for years that it can affect male fertility and sperm production."
Men who are trying to become fathers are routinely advised to avoid saunas and hot baths, he said, and the new warning is "quite important because millions of young men and boys are using laptop computers on a regular basis now."
The study of 29 men in their 20s and 30s by the Stony Brook group found that keeping a laptop on the lap for an hour can raise scrotal temperatures by more than 2.5 degrees Celsius, enough to affect fertility significantly, said a report in the Dec. 9 issue of the European journal Human Reproduction.
But Sondheimer, a professor of obstetrics and gynecology at the University of Pennsylvania Medical Center, said there's little for men to worry about. "We've known for a long time that anything that warms the testicles lowers the sperm count, but whether this translates into infertility is not clear," he said. "Most likely it does not lead to infertility. We don't translate this information into clinical practice."
Previous studies have raised alarms about other factors that could affect male fertility by raising scrotal temperatures. French researchers reported in 2000 that driving a car for two hours raised the temperature by more than 2 degrees Celsius. A report from doctors in Kiel, Germany, that same year warned about the possible danger of plastic-lined disposable diapers, which were found to raise temperatures more than cotton diapers.
A 1999 study in the United States found that even seasonal temperature changes had a major effect on male fertility. Sperm production dropped by 41 percent in the summer as compared to winter, the study found, while sperm speed decreased and the number of defective sperm increased as the weather got hotter.
That effect was noted in the Cole Porter song Too Darn Hot, whose lyrics say in part, "According to the Kinsey Report, the average man you know, must prefer to play his favorite sport when the temperature is low."
The new study was "not designed to look at fertility issues," Sheynkin said, but merely to measure temperature effects. It found that the surface temperature of the Pentium 4 computers used in the study rose from 31 degrees Celsius (87 degrees Fahrenheit) to nearly 40 degrees Celsius (104 degrees Fahrenheit) after an hour of use.
Scrotal temperatures of the men rose by an average of 2.1 degrees Celsius when they sat with their thighs together to keep the computers centered. Temperatures went up more than 2.5 degrees Celsius when the computers sat on one leg or the other.
Many studies have shown that an increase of just 1 degree Celsius can affect sperm formation, Sheynkin said. Just 15 minutes of laptop use produced that temperature rise in the study.
If a user can't put the computer on a desk, laptop use should be limited to just a few minutes at a time, Sheynkin said. But even then, frequent laptop use can be damaging, he said.
"The effect of short-term exposure can be reversible," he said. "But if men don't give themselves time to recover, if they use laptop computers on a daily basis for years, it can take from three months to a year to recover. And the effect can be irreversible, which is very difficult to treat."
Sheynkin said he now plans a study to measure the physical effects of laptop use. "We will identify a group of men who are using laptop computers on a regular basis and see to what extent it affects fertility," he said.
http://www.dsf.health.state.pa.us/health/cwp/view.asp?A=174&Q=240348
An enlightening response on the LiveStrong from SI:
Again, they choose to compare apples and oranges. In reality, the battery test life was 12%-20% less than with the Toshiba notebook to which it was compared. Anyone wanting better battery life would simply buy the "LiveStrong" with the 12-cell battery. Not available on the Toshiba. The Toshiba only has integrated Intel graphics, and it weighs over a pound more, but does the author compare gaming performance or run any media applications? NO.
And, contrary to the article, the Toshiba costs $200 more. I could not get the LiveStrong price above $1,124 with 512M RAM, the CPU he had and the hard drive and DVDRW he had. Yet he states his LiveStrong cost $1,249. Oh, he left some "wiggle room!" He said it "runs about $1,249." A total lie. The only way to get the price that high is to put in 1G of memory or add software. Try it yourself: http://www.shopping.hp.com/webapp/shopping/cto/computer_customize_components.do
If he had ordered the version with a 1.6 GHz Turion, it would have still outperformed the Toshiba notebook, weighted over a pound less, had almost identical battery life, and cost $225 less.
Or he could have ordered the 12 cell battery (a no-brainer $25) and it would have still been lighter than the Toshiba, had better battery life, still been cheaper and outperformed it, especially with graphics. Funny thing, this author picks a version with a processor upgrade which reduces the battery life, but never mentions performance. He could have at least told us how quickly they boot up.
HP, could you please offer a version with an MT chip?
Petz
http://www.siliconinvestor.com/readmsg.aspx?msgid=21533609
Keeping in mind that this is also a 64-bit chip vs. a 32-bit chip, Turion is starting to look less like a Centrino challenger and more like a Centrino Killer.
Re: It's a problem I've never experienced with a Centrino system
This is total crap. A major heat issue in many notebooks is the hard disk, which has nothing to do with the CPU and produces hot spots in all notebooks.
This guy's writing ad copy for Intel, it isn't a review.
Re: If this is the case, Intel will have the capacity to crush AMD in the next few years. AMD is going to have to depend on filling their new fab with capacity, but if Intel can serve the needs of the market, they will do whatever it takes to keep their own factories filled. I see a pricewar brewing, and if Intel ends up with more competitive parts in the next cycle, it could be very damaging to AMD. It's no wonder they filed a lawsuit. It might be their only option at this point
Fair enough. Keep in mind that Intel has had the capacity to "crush" AMD for years, but seems to gotten nowhere (despite using marketing tactics that are, at best, "creative"). Remember that the only area in which Intel has been claiming shortages is in the mobile segment where AMD has single digit share. There is more than enough "crush" capacity in workstations and servers, where AMD has doubled and tripled market share in the past year.
Now try turning it around, noting that power reduction has become such a key factor, Intel still doesn't have an SOI process, and that SOI (in the past) has requried a couple of generations to get the designs tuned to the process. Chips produced on SOI wafers need to be architected differently to take advantage of the process. Intel may be able to copy what the technical innovators like AMD have learned and adapt that to their own process or it may take Intel 2 years of SOI production to show the benefits AMD, IBM, etc, are seeing now.
Also note that AMD will have 3 production FABS for CPUs in the same time frame Intel has 4. Only one will be 300mm 65 to 45nm , but the other two combined (300mm and 200mm 90nm SOI FABS should be about the same as a second FAB 36.
You mention a pricewar. AMD has survived (but not thrived) for decades with ASPs literally one half those of Intel. With AMD no longer squeezed into one or two low margin segments, and AMD tripling it's capability to supply the market, Intel could, in a worst case, see its share cut to 50% at the same time its ASPs drop by 50%. Imagine Intel's revenue being cut by 3/4 while its costs remain the same and then they get hit by a $30 Billion bill from the jury in the lawsuit.
IFs are interesting. They aren't predictions, but it can be fun (or dreadful) to explore the solution space.
The next step is to assign probabilities to the various outcomes.
Re: the locals are rumbling about AMD
If that's the way Austin treats new corporate investment, no wonder why Intel just up and left.
Re: Re: Merom pushed out 1 Month Early
Great news!
I think the last Intel products to be pushed out early were the MTM and 3 slot rambus motherboards....
Just how much V&V did they decide they couldn't wait for?
Re: what else do you think AMD has in its bag of tricks
Fin-Fets and Asymmetric cores.
They're in the rather happy situation where all they really need for the next 18 months is more of the same. By then they should be closing in on 45nm (fin-fet) and 4 or more cores per chip.
Re: Processor engineers already have too much to worry about without having to consider programs that until recently was dismissed as just "poorly coded software."
That's always been the fundamental differenece between Intel and AMD design philosophies - AMD thought it was the chipdesigner's job to make life easier for software writers, while Intel has always felt it was the software writer's job to make life easier for the chip designers.
Re: fake ignorance over this
Over what? Seriously, I don't know what you are referring to.
If it's the damage estimate, note that I made my estimate before any media anything based on a different measure, and one that I belive is a lot more likely to prevail.
The "media estimates" are that "lost sales" will be used as a basis for judgement (e.g. lost incremental sales).
I don't think that is suitable for estimating damages, since it's impossible to estimate how many (if any) additional parts AMD could have produced and sold.
I think the simplest way to estimate damages is to just take the difference in ASP between AMD and Intel parts. The parts were, in general, over the years, functionally equivalent yet Intel's monopoly tactics deprived AMD of about half the revenue it otherwise would have received for what were (very generally speaking) identical parts.
By the way, Intel's lawyers are starting to "get it." Did you see the Best Buy flyer in today's paper? Front cover is an Athlon 64 desktop and back cover is an AMD Turion 64 notebook. Some of the whitebox guys I deal with that were shy about pushing Opteron servers are suddenly almost desperate to show enthusiasm for Opteron server sales. This is from Monday to Friday of last week.
Maybe it's coincidence....
Re: your last estimate was
Nope - you are mistaken.
My estimate has been the same - an initial award of $30 Billion that will be cut by 2/3's on appeal.
You'd better re-read my old messages.
You might also note that a damage award of $3.3 Billion would result in $10 Billion to AMD since damages are tripled, by law, in cases like this.
The Sunday Times - Business
July 17, 2005
AMD case ‘could cost Intel billions’
Paul Durman
INTEL, the computer-chip giant accused of abusing its market power, could face damages of more than $3.2 billion (£1.8 billion), and see its sales drop by $4.4 billion a year, according to a Wall Street analysis.
The rest is at: http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2095-1697039,00.html
Interesting post from Linus
I've seen that first-hand at Transmeta, where the first
design cut (which saw silicon, but was never sold) was
done almost entirely by simulating spec benchmarks, because
they are "real life" benchmarks, not microkernels.
Bzzt. Wrong answer. Spec is a microkernel. And it has
absolutely wonderful cache behaviour, and the
average loop count is in the hundreds of thousands, if I
recall correctly.
Then real life hits you, and the average loop count is
in the low hundreds or a few thousands, and it turns out
that you need to re-do all your simulations because Spec
show hardly any actual behaviour you'll find in more
complex loads.
In Spec, you'll find loops that are a compiler writers
wet dream: they run for lots of iterations, and they don't
have any function calls in them (they've all been inlined,
either because they were simple in the first place, or
because the vendor has long since made sure that they are
nice and fast and tuned both libraries and system header
files for what spec shows).
And branches are extremely predictable, and nothing else
happens on that machine (no million-instruction idle
loop, no context switches every ten thousand instructions,
and hardly any system calls).
Then real life hits, and it turns out that IO is actually
pretty common, system calls are all over the place, some
branches are really not predictable, and the TLB gets
flushed every ten thousand instructions because Windows
just does that.
In short, you really shouldn't use spec to design hardware.
The pitfall, though, is that as a compiler writer (whether
static or JIT) you look at those Spec loops, and you say
"I can generate really wonderful code for this and do it
in 15 cycles, when Xyz does it in 25".
So yes, I'm convinced that compiler writers were intimately
involved in ia64 design, but I'm also convinced that they
looked almost exclusively at all the nice hot-spots that
things like Spec has. Then they wrote papers about how they
could schedule those hot-spots in half the cycles of anybody
else if they just had a six-wide issue CPU that they could
tweak to their hearts content.
All the while missing that those things just aren't what
people run all that much, or care about. But yes, you can
get wonderful spec results.
Linus
http://realworldtech.com/forums/index.cfm?action=detail&PostNum=3510&Thread=100&entryID=...
Re: Joe, you are seeing Intel perform under pressure right now. They quickly transitioned to EM64T in all their major product lines except mobile, added NX bit functionality that they call XD, and added SpeedStep and low power states in desktop and server lines to help with idle power dissipation.
Sorry, but I think you're way off there.
They've been late to copy features that AMD has pioneered, despite having had plenty of time to copy those features. One of Intel's problems is that they've been forced to divert so much effort to designing chips that switch sections on and off, to compensate for Intel's inferior process technology. Particularly in dual core, and especially in dual core servers, where systems can be expected to run higher load profiles, Intel's process problems really stand out in their affect on heat and power.
Intel has the money to buy the latest 300mm tools, but hasn't been able to come up with an efficient process to run on those tools. And it's starting to really hurt them. The shrill desperation shown in their new single socket "dual core server" line announcements where the "servers" are limited to a single socket is pretty stark.
Re: Buy this weekend and saw 5 separate desktop systems with Pentium D in them. Intel must be pushing these pretty hard.
How many unique sku's vs. "open box" returned "values?" A search of their site returns a single Gateway listing, but I'm pretty sure there are Compaq and HP models available in the store.
Dell customers have been complaining that some of the new P4 systems sound like "hair dryers" , so the return rate on these machines may be higher than typical even when nothing is wrong with them.
Maybe we're missing something here. An Intel dual core system, sitting on a bracket on the bathroom wall could be a great dual purpose machine, and the use of long cables would keep its noise out of your work area. The "wind tunnel" design cases required by Intel's new case spec could be used to produce cases with the PS in the "handle" and the CPU in the "tube."
Dual use Dual core - the new PC / Hair Dryer from Intel that looks, works, and sounds just like your hair dryer.
http://forums.us.dell.com/supportforums/board/message?board.id=dim_other&message.id=217863&q.... http://forums.us.dell.com/supportforums/board/message?board.id=oplex_other&message.id=18684&....
Ee: X2 Systems showing up at retail
These guys were featuring one of their X2 systems in a mailer that I received yesterday.
http://www.tigerdirect.com/applications/category/category_slc.asp?CatId=1885&Nav=/c:1868/&So....
Chipguy and Elmer -> The dualie Opteron runs at 40% of its peak FLOP rating while the Montecito prototype runs at 90% of peak.
LOL !!!
FYI, the difference between base and peak in spec has to do with whether or not any compiler flags are set (base sets no flag).
In a real compiler running on a real system, useful for a variety of tasks targeting a variety of real world applications, there is a big difference between base and peak.
If OTOH, a compiler is a "SPEC Special" developed for useful only for producing SPEC scores unrepresentative of real word performance, the base, default setttings will be close to or equal to the peak scores, since generating SPEC scores is the only use of the compiler.
Re: if memory serves
It doesn't.
Why do you just make this stuff up? You look silly.
I'll be surprised if you can post a link showing AMD with 20% of the corporate and retail notebook market (and, so far, you haven't been able to).
Yet you keep posting this nonsense of 50%.
Even sillier was your comment years ago there was no corporate portable market, it was just retail consumer
It was the opposite - notebooks used to be very expensive with the result that the retail market was a much smaller percentage of the overall market than it is, today. 10 years ago it was unusual for a high school kid to have his or her own notebook computer.
Re: Are you suggesting
Nope - if I'd wanted to suggest that, I would have written it.
I'm just asking a question - If AMD had done that and Intel had sued over it, would you think Intel was a bunch of whiners that couldn't compete? We know there are large areas of criminal extortion that you think are wonderful (if committed by Intel, anyway) I'm just curious about how far you take that angle, especially if your company is at the other end.
By the way, the crooks were raided - again:
http://today.reuters.com/business/newsarticle.aspx?type=tnBusinessNews&storyID=nBRU003659&im....
http://biz.yahoo.com/rb/050712/tech_eu_intel_probe.html?.v=2
Re: If a couple more named vendors deny AMD's charges, a judge may throw out the case as frivolous. Anyone see this as a possibility?
What's far, far, more likely is a $30 Billion summary judgment against Intel, but anything is possible.
Re: I have said before that I don't expect much from Turion.
Now there's a shocker.
Why don't you show us where you expected AMD to walk away with nearly 30% of the 4-way and above server market?
Just to give us an idea of how unbiased your "expectations" are when it comes to AMD gaining market share?
Re: Didn't at one time AMD have 50% of the portable market. Now down to 10%
LOL !! Nope, they didn't. Why don't you post a link that shows AMD as ever having even 20% of the corporate and retail mobile market.
But 2 years ago Intel had 100% of the 4-way and above X86 server market - now they're down to around 70%.
That's real - as opposed to your fantasy.