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.
SemiconEng, BTX case - Intel defined this standard last year. It is an aggressive cooling solution, moving the processor near the air intake and providing a cooling hood (thermal module). Here is a description:
http://www.anandtech.com/printarticle.html?i=1876
Ahhhh, Sorta looks similar to the cooling duct on a Dell, except for a cleaner implementation. Thanks.
Semi
No, but -- You might want to consider that its been announced that ATX cases can't handle the heat, so BTX cases have been invented to fill the breach.
I didn't know about BTX cases. So you're saying that there's a solution? Great. Thanks.
Semi
Semi - Not exactly. I think it could very well have an impact, but more likely in the realm of blades and other high density situations.
Paul
I guess we'll just have to wait and see how many "Blade and other high density situations" that the initial version of Prescott gets incorporated into, before intel dumps the current socket, for the later socket switch. I would think that the Pentium M, or the Northwood 2.4C would be a better choice in those situations, but that's just me. How many OEM's do you think that there will be, that are planning on putting 478 socket Prescotts into Blades initially??
Semi
That's really an irrelevant question.......
.......... but they'd likely just change their case/cooling situation and charge a little more.
Paul
So, it sounds like your saying, in your opinion, that the fact that some people are saying, that currently, "AMD has something that intel does not", will most likely have very little, or no impact at all to intel financially in the near future. It's "irrelevant". That's what I thought too, Thanks.
Semi
Semi.........
Can you please attempt to answer my 2 questions, instead of trying to change the subject? To remind you, I was trying to ascertain the Corporate financial impact to intel, of your statement that "AMD has something that intel does not" To remind you of the questions.....
How many ads have you seen in newspapers and magazines that feature the processor temperatures as a selling point?
Have you seen any Prescott box builders announce they won't be putting out Prescott boxes due to heat issues?
Thanks
Semi
Did I tell you my Athlon64 runs cool even without Cool and Quiet enabled? Intel has a problem. AMD has something Intel doesn't.
Mysef
You've said it Plenty of times..... at least. Don't worry, I'm sure most around here don't have a problem with You repeating yourself indefinitely, as long as you're bashing intel. A couple of questions come to mind though, that I'm sure you can answer, to help me understand the significance of your constant repeating of it..........
How many ads have you seen in newspapers and magazines that feature the processor temperatures as a selling point?
Have you seen any Prescott box builders announce they won't be putting out Prescott boxes due to heat issues?
Semi
Top Ten picks for Wireless Hardware
Intel products are in 2 of first 5.....
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/nf/20040127/bs_nf/23059
Not All Talk
As for wireless handheld devices that do not incorporate voice communication, HP's (NYSE: HPQ - news) new iPaq 4350 offers integrated wireless local area network (802.11b) and Bluetooth technology and runs Microsoft's (Nasdaq: MSFT - news) Pocket PC operating system. Other features include a color screen, full keyboard and a 400 MHz Intel (Nasdaq: INTC - news) XScale processor.
intel Banks on Centrino
Intel has invested heavily in its Centrino wireless chipset, and that money appears to be well spent. Centrino includes the chip giant's new Pentium M mobile processor and wireless local area networking technology (802.11b) for broadband Internet access. Centrino also offers up to five hours of battery power for laptops and the promise of slimmer and lighter notebook designs.
Intel recently announced an upgrade: an 802.11b/g radio chip based on the Centrino platform that promises connections at three times the speed of 802.11b.
Semi
Intel Honors 40 of America's Future Scientists
http://biz.yahoo.com/bw/040128/285258_1.html
Wednesday January 28, 1:00 pm ET
Intel Science Talent Search Names Teen Finalists
SANTA CLARA, Calif.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Jan. 28, 2004--Intel Corporation today announced the 40 finalists in the Intel Science Talent Search (Intel STS), America's oldest and most prestigious high school science competition. The finalists will be in Washington, D.C. from March 11 to 16 to compete for $530,000 in scholarships.
So, that's what intel is doing with the companies "future investment" dollars eh? Well, i'm sure that sponsoring, and awarding a "Junior Nobel" every year, CERTAINLY doesn't compare with buying a "Chair" for yourself at a University, like ole Jerry decided to do, but I guess intel's ego will just have to be satisfied with helping the future of science instead.
Semi
BTW, I'd like to thank you and SemiconEng for several very insightful posts the last few weeks. It really is a lot nicer than the bickering that had been going on. Of course, it would help if some of the AMD supporters would also tone down the static.
I agree, the ignore list has been working wonderfully for me the last few weeks. I'm much happier now. Thanks for the feedback.
Semi
I hate to be critical about an otherwise informative article but it makes it sound as though Intel's purpose is to destroy AMD. The tone is AMD centric as though Intel management stays up at night plotting against AMD.
I agree, intel's goal should not be to destroy AMD. Competition is good. Besides, I don't want the Government breathing down their neck. Making money is the main goal to keep their eye on. On the other hand, if AMD gets it's butt kicked a few times in the process, I won't be crying over that at all.
Semi
Semi, that clinches it.
Don't worry, I'm sure that as soon as Dan realizes he was talking about an AMD Thread Moderator, not an intel one, his opinion will no doubt be different, or claimed to be misquoted.
Semi
Sony Not 90nm Capable?
http://www.reed-electronics.com/semiconductor/article/CA378149?spacedesc=news
Indeed, Sony has made several 90nm announcements in the last 12 months and had planned for PSX to exemplify its strategy to combine the company's game and electronic technologies. PSX had been -- and still is, according to SI -- promoted as the first Sony system based on the EE+GS@90nm processor, which combines the PlayStation 2's Emotion Engine and Graphics Synthesizer chips onto a single die.
SI's claims are based on it removing the EE+GS@90nm chip from the PSX, model DESR-5000, and determining it to be 130nm technology with a die size of 90mm². This is in contrast to Sony's claims of 90nm technology and an associated die size of 86mm² for the PSX, the firm said.
Semi
Never Thought I'd Say This.....
But for once, I almost agree with Dan3. He got the type of site wrong, but I agree with that his point is valid nevertheless IMO.
http://www.siliconinvestor.com/stocktalk/msg.gsp?msgid=19750484
Semi
No kidding. I'd rather deal with 10 rude people than
one hypocritical person any day of the week.
Fortunately I have now delt with both issues. I'm much happier now, with 2 people on ignore.
Semi
a surefire sign that you´re going to eat your words pretty soon.
Well thanks for your "curteous" response. I see Doug has taught you well. I was simply asking a question, remind me not to ask you any questions ever again.
Keith On Ignore.
Semi
What Did Otellini Say?
So, I know that the Inquirere characterized what Paul Otellini said as meaning that there would be x86-64 Pentiums.......
http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=13871
THE PRESIDENT of Intel gave his clearest ever statement saying that his chip firm would adopt 32-bit chips with 64-bit extensions during a conference call last night.
Actually, while that's the Inquirer's interpretation of it, that's not what he said. What he said was.......
http://biz.yahoo.com/rc/040128/tech_intel_64bit_1.html
"You can be fairly confident that when there is software from an application and operating system standpoint that we'll be there," Otellini said, responding to a question about 64-bit technology, in an interview with a Wall Street analyst that was broadcast over the Web.
He said "we'll be there", he never said "we'll be there with extended 32 bit Pentiums". Suppose what he meant, was, that by then Itanium will be cheap enough to manufacture for the Desktop Market. That would also make his statement true, wouldn't it?
Semi
well, I found your answer slightly humourous. Please forgive me for laughing as I'm not sure if I'm laughing with you or at you.
Well, I'm pleased, if you're pleased.
Semi
semi, did you take him literally or was that wry humor?
I answered a posted question, nothing more, nothing less. I have no comment on the rest.
Semi
How long exactly is a nanosecond?
A nanosecond is 10 to the minus nine power, second.
milli (m) = 10 to the minus 3
micro (u) = 10 to the minus 6
nano (n) = 10 to the minus 9
pico (p) = 10 to the minus 12
Semi
Semi insists that the Northwood EE pricing is set to drive buyers away from 130nm product and towards 90nm product.
Keith shows that Intel intends to have an EE-branded 90nm product.
The two assertions are not in conflict.
By context, I understood Semi's comments to refer to the current Xeon rebranded EE product, not any future LGA775 product (presumably not a rebranded Xeon).
I didn't respond to Kieth, because wasn't interested in arguing the point anymore. I though I specifically noted the 0.13u P4EE, vs. the 0.09u P4E Prescott reference in my post, but I guess I didn't make it clear enough. Oh well, I'm glad that somebody noticed. Thanks.
Semi
You are free to believe what you want, but whatever that is, it won´t change these facts.
Thank you for agreeing that I am free to believe what I want. I appreciate it.
Semi
Semi, More likely, as soon as 3.4 Prescott ships, P4EE will be shut off,
Repeating the same wrong assertion a second time doesn´t make it right.
Keith
You'll note that I said "More Likely". That means it's an opinion. Opinions are allowed here, even if they're not popular, right? If you have some data to refute my opinion, I'm sure that we'd all be happy to see it. Otherwise, I have a question: You know that my opinion is a wrong assertion..... How?
Saying someone is wrong, doesn't make that assertion right..... either.
Semi
sgolds,
At least we now know how much Intel thinks Prescotts are worth compared to P4EE. It does not indicate that Intel is very confident with Prescott performance.
Joe
Sure, if you've already made up your mind, and you're only looking at the data in a way that supports that preconception. On the other hand, if you look at how intel has introduced new process technologies in the past, when trying to drive the market from the old to the new, and apply some logical thinking, there's quite another more likely explanation.....
http://www.investorshub.com/boards/read_msg.asp?message_id=2160931
More likely, as soon as 3.4 Prescott ships, P4EE will be shut off, and in a few months, after Prescott is established, and the line is purged, nobody is going to care anymore about P4EE, if they ever did to begin with.
Looks to me, like intel is once again using the same method to drive the market away from the previous technology to the newer one that it's used before. Price pointing the newer chip below the top of the line previous chip has been done by intel a few times now, as I recall.
My guess is, that most P4 Northwood production, will all be a memory by the end of summer 2004.
Semi
SemiconEng, seems expensive for that EE -
Of course it is, it's supposed to be. Intel won't want or need anyone to buy 0.13u P4EE, once 0.09u P4E Prescott is released. I gave an explanation here. In about a week or so, Nobody is going to want 0.13u P4EE anymore, if they ever did.
http://www.investorshub.com/boards/read_msg.asp?message_id=2160931
More likely, as soon as 3.4 Prescott ships, P4EE will be shut off, and in a few months, after Prescott is established, and the line is purged, nobody is going to care anymore about P4EE, if they ever did to begin with.
Looks to me, like intel is once again using the same method to drive the market away from the previous technology to the newer one that it's used before. Price pointing the newer chip below the top of the line previous chip has been done by intel a few times now, as I recall.
My guess is, that most P4 Northwood production, will all be a memory by the end of summer 2004.
Semi
Distributor Prices Up For Prescott
http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=13832
Looks like a 3.4GHz Prescott is there. Not that I believe things like distributor listings, as indicitive of availability, but I just mention it, because some people might believe those things. Those distributors were probably bought off by intel to make that listing anyway.
http://www.investorshub.com/boards/read_msg.asp?message_id=2179479
http://www.investorshub.com/boards/read_msg.asp?message_id=2165836
http://www.investorshub.com/boards/read_msg.asp?message_id=2165948
Semi
I've made this point before. AMD is getting absolutely ZERO premium for thier "64" bit feature. nada. nothing. AMD is trying to change their business model to get premium prices for 64 bits on both AMD64 and Opteron and its not working.
I think that AMD marketed A64 wrong. I seem to recall that intel did something different, when the went with extended 16-32 bit. I may be wrong, but I seem to recall that intel marketed it as "A 16 bit processor..... that will be 32 bit ready down the road, when you're ready", sort of de-emphisizing the 32 bitness, and concentrating on the 16 bit performance, until there was sufficient 32 bit software available. Then, they come out with a heavy next generation 32 bit marketing program. You still get all the next generation server wins that you would have gotten anyway, and you schmooze the path for the eventual desktop users.
It appears to me that AMD went with just the opposite. They're marketing strikes me as....... "Here's 64 bit that runs your 32 bit super duper, so pay us more for the chip, even though there's not much software for Win 64 bit right now". I don't think most desktop users are ready to pay that high a price for 64 bit. AMD should have introduced Desktop Opteron at a much lower pricepoint, Of course, that would have meant that AMD would have had to sell Opteron cheaper..... which means they might have sold more A64 chips in the second half of 03, which could have meant more H2/03 revenue and or market share. Which wouldn't have been to good for my intel investment. Soooooooo, JMO, but I LOVE the current AMD Marketing Machine.
Semi
Stay by all means, just try to remember to occasionally post on topic ... for intimate details of your love affair with Intel are not that interesting and quite frankly embarrassing for those of us who are here seeking news on AMD under the maybe
naive mistaken belief this was an AMD thread .
WoW, that was almost a compliment........... Almost.
Tom
Competition definitely liftet the entry barrier. Now Intel+AMD are monopoly, and there is no competitive #3 in the horizon.
That actually brings to mind a question. I'm not that familiar with Anti-Trust Law in the US, do you know if it is possible for 2 companies to be classified as a monopoly? I would guess a 2 company monopoly would be an oxymoron, no?
Semi
Interesting perspective. I still think Intel was a better company operationally under Andy Grove. There seems to have been a lot of mishaps lately. I just don't see the well oiled machine they need to be. I guess this is a work in progress. They ought to be careful as AMD is looking stronger than at any time in the past.
HailMary
No doubt..... mishaps is an understatement. Hard to live up to the AG Legend, but it doesn't seem to me, like the captain was listening to the navigator. Good thing the engine room is insulated from all that. Just between you and me, IMO, the sooner Otellini is escorting Barrett out the door, the better. What was up with that negative talk at the CC? Intel just had the best quarter in 3 years, and all the PR Machine can come up with is "Seasonally Lower Q1"? Couldn't even try to sound positive? People make fun of Otellini, but IMO he's a PR powerhouse. I don't believe he would have delivered it like that.
Semi
Semi and other long time Intel investors-
If I were in your position, I would probably despise AMD (I'm not saying you all do - I just think I would personally). After all AMD forced Intel to lower ASPs, has caused them to rush products out the door, and countless other things that have affected Intel's stock price for the worse. Intel probably would have been another 5 or 6 banger over the last 5 years if it wasn't for AMD. AMD just won't lay down and die.
See, I look at it differently....... I don't want AMD to lay down and die. Not at all. Prior to the period you describe, intel was fat, lazy, and arrogant. Even after AMD wasn't able to make clones after 286, there was a fat/lazy attitude I detected during the K* days, due to well known manufacturing issues with those products, during that time. Intel didn't wake up and smell the coffee until Athlon, and today, intel is neither Fat, nor Lazy. Forget about eliminating arrogant for now, we both know that's not going to happen.
IMO, intel would not have survived at all in today's market being the fat slob it once was, and they have AMD to thank for that, and I think the transformation in the company was nothing short of remarkable. Practically turned an aircraft carrier on a dime. I think, despite the reduced value of my holdings, that the competion from AMD really has been good for intel, despite the stumbles. You learn allot from stumbling.
See how 2 people can look at the same data and see different things?
Semi
I don't want to be critical, because you have obviously done very well with this investment, but wouldn't it be wise to move a good portion of your Intel investment into better growth prospects or even a stable value fund?
Thanks for the feedback. I didn't exactly say that it was my only investment. At this point, it's really a bigger chunk than I would like. Who the heck expected it to split so many times since I bought it.
But since it is such a chunk, I've one thing is, I've been able to make other investments off of the ummmmmmm dividends. (Biotechnology, Nanotechnology, Health Care/Pharmacuticles, or Agriculture, anybody?). Ironic eh, based on the recent fun being made of dividends. There are also countless other ways to make money off of stock, Oh, and let's not forget the huge 401K that was amassed pre-intel enlightenment, since diversified into 5 funds. And just where did I put those US Savings Bonds that I bought religiously when I was in the military............ Oh yeah, the banks vault. Been planning this for a loooooooong time. Intel was unplanned, not the root of the plan. Plenty of eggs in plenty of baskets, no need to worry. Thanks for the concern though
Semi
You know, Semi...
After a response like that, I would think that you would be more sympathetic to the investors around here. Like you, they see a company that they think will be BIG... REAL BIG. And like you, they seem to be betting the farm, and the dirt under it. Sound familiar?
wbmw
Now that is a well thought out response, thank you. Sure, I don't have a problem with your advice. I understand perfectly. When they get to 2 decades, let me know. Tell you what, I won't crap on AMD, they don't crap on intel. Fine with me. Wait, scratch that, even better, I know how to fix things right now.....
Doug back on ignore. There, I feel better already. I'm sure he will too. Be even better for the board, if he did the same to me, since apparently, nothing I say meets with his approval. I took the bait.......... again. Don't worry, that won't happen anymore.
Semi
Thanks. I'm certain you'll be able to do as much for the Intel board as you've done for this one.
Doug
No need to thank me, I am always happy to help those that need it.
Semi
BTW, after a picosecond consideration of your advice, I've decided to stay. I wanted you to be the first to know.
Perhaps the Intel iHub board would be a better spot? Intel is relevant to AMD as a competitor, but personal testimonials of faith and loyalty to Intel forevermore, and articles of general praise for Intel are surely more at home over there.
Doug
Thank you so much for your suggestion. I am always pleased to receive nonvenomous, unhateful, even-tempered, and........ unemotional advice, from the members on this board, even if, I wasn't talking to them in the first place. And you can rest assured, that I shall certainly give your advice all the consideration that I feel it is due.
Semi
It also weakens arguments that either Intel or Microsoft
wield monopolistic power.
WoW..... Now that's an angle I hadn't considered. Gee, what do you think the Europen Union body investigating intel based on "Unnamed Companies" Complaints of monopolistic practices, will think of all of this........?
What's up with that anyway? Did those guys fall asleep from bordom, or what?
Semi
Intel, Microsoft Maintain Good Ties Despite Linux Strain, Exec Says
Intel said its relationship with Microsoft remains strong in spite of its support for Linux and Microsoft's backing of AMD.
Tit for Tat. A Draw IMO. It's in both companies best interest to diversify, business is business. What I think both smart CEO's learned from this though, is that if you rock the boat, the boat may rock back, and it's a good idea to have another boat just in case the current one starts leaking. Otherwise if you're not real real careful, you just might end up drowning........ yourself.
Leaks patched..... Aye Aye Sir
Semi
Sorry about the metaphors, I'm watching a swashbuckler movie.
Semi.
Glad you did well, I mean it.
I did very well with EMC, Prime, DEC, and AMD on occasion. Well enough to put 4 kids and two grandkids thru colledge and never have to work again and live well.
I wish everyone who posts on this board the very best in there investments. I never wish anyone bad luck...what goes around comes around.
I still like AMD, had the BEST of luck with AMD's products. More bang for the buck!
Best
Jules
Cordial response..... Thank You, I appreciate it. Maybe now, some of the AMD fans have a little better understanding of my "Bee-ness". Have you ever had a feeling that something you were going to be involved in was going to be big? Well...... Let's just say that back in the early 80's, I did have some "involvement" with intel. And during that time, the one thought that was dominating my mind was..... "This Chip stuff...... and this company someday......someday is gonna be BIG..... REAL BIG". And there I was...... seeing it in time...... Man..... I sunk practically EVERYTHING I could get my hands on into it, and some of it that I couldn't afford to spare. Bet the farm, and the dirt under it too. That's how strongly I believed it.
Now........ 2 decades later, that investment has gone from effective 20 cents per share to this. Was it better at $70? sure, am I crying in my beer? No. To me, it's NOT just an investment. That investment has turned out to be a MAJOR....MAJOR turning point in my life, so, while I will TRY...... to temper my Bee-ness, if anybody around here (not directed at anyone), is expecting me to crap on intel, and toss away 20 years of loyalty to one of the things that got me where I am today..........
Forget It.
Semi
Yes, there is :-
http://www.investorshub.com/boards/read_msg.asp?message_id=2104425
I feel rather peeved that on an AMD specific board I have to wade through loads of Intel fuddery as supplied by subzero et al. When these guests, who have absolutely no interest in AMD or its products/shares except perhaps its demise, start posting intelligently and sensibly you may find more of the style you have become accustomed from me.
So, I'm curious, since apparently you have identified the posters that you consider to post "intel fuddery", why is it that you don't just put those people on ignore? Wouldn't that solve the "peeved" issue for you, as well as result in modifying your "style"?
Sounds to me, like it would be a win all around. Right?
Semi
What a classy post. (eom)
Thank You.
I agree with you, good for mas!
By the way, I more than trippled my money over the course of a few monthes. How about yourself?
Jules
Well, I bought most of my intel stock in 1983, at around $20.00 per share, and with all the stock splits since then, by my calculations, I now have tons of additional shares, for which I have effectively paid ~ 20 cents per share for, at this point. It closed today at 31.71, so let's see..... that would be.......... $31.71 - 0.20 = $31.51 increase per share, so that's....... ummmmmm....... probably a heck of allot more than the puny "trippled" you've made "in the last few months". Thanks for asking.
Semi
BTW, remind me, how much I would have now if I'd done the same thing with AMD? Never mind, I found it, ~ $6.00 per share.