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.
Same procedure as last year, Paul?
Same procedure as every year, Andy.
http://www.computerworld.com/action/article.do?command=viewArticleBasic&articleId=9038359
K.
Nice one. K.
the layoffs in Ireland?
Not really. 10% headcount-reduction overall next year again, they said.
K.
p.s: Glad to learn you are not worried about your husband. Much more important than any Intel-thing.
The layoffs were announced months ago and have been carried out slowly over the last year
I think dvdk was referring to the next round of layoffs leaked only couple days ago planned for next year (which Intel confirmed)
K.
p.s: Fingers crossed nothing changes for you family.
Glad to hear, i am doing what i can to keep me young, honey.
It's really amazing how little it takes to educate an Intel board on "Intel’s path to 45nm: why the big lead, and how?"
I got a healthy laugh from reading an article starting with "a few things are known" portraying the state of Intels 45nm litho-plans from 2005.
K.
You should know better. It was you posting Mercury-data on ASP recently.
K.
Ok i understand you can't change. You are not to blame for this.
Now i owe you an apology. I did not realize it before, but i do now and won't disturb you any further. Good luck.
K.
The project is late, undisputedly.
No silicon is issue-free - errata list is published, so there is also no dispute.
Wrt launch, it's AMDs baby, so it is up to AMD to decide when it is baptized. Even it is still in an incubator.
K.
you put a question-mark and i said you raised a question. Nothing wrong as far as i see. I did not call anyone a fool, as i never do when someone just errs (let alone when he explicitely notes it needs further investigating). I did, do and will continue to consider everyone insisting he cannot err a fool - and if i find it appropriate call on it.
Now, how about this american spirit thing of getting over all this blunder with a joke and try something else? I'd be willing to do so.
K.
Perhaps in the same sense as the Tri-Cores are a "design feature".
If you want so, yes. Both is integral part of its DFM.
It will create a great deal of SKU complexity.
Absolutely. There is a lot more to this, btw, e.g. frequency of HTT-links. This is what slowed the project down and made it necessary to postpone features for later as well.
K.
Different frequencies of cores and NB are a design-feature of K10. It's very beneficial if you know how to change parameters. Just changing something to draw a conclusion from whatever comes out is less helpful. Raising the question of a scaling-problem out of this is beneficial though - for a good laugh.
K.
Getting over blunder with a joke and move on is an aspect of american spirit i like.
K.
Yes, the lines you refer to can be understood as you say. My bad. All i can say a generalization was not intended. I have no reservations whatsoever wrt the U.S. or its people in general - in facts there are many aspects of american spirit and culture i admire. Besides, the attitude i was getting at can be found everywhere, so i guess i agree in your take what i said was rather silly. Thanks for pointing it out.
K.
Ouch. You might have missed the outcome of the tricycle (aka tri-core) discussion.
K.
Now we are talking. No parroting gazettes. No imitating engineers. No silly discussions about benchmarks. Attack and destroy seems still to be the american spirit in the streets.
I always looked at this as a concept pretty similar to Jihad - because the results are very similar. But well - so be it - and probably for good, on either side. The best way i can think of it is as nature's way of keeping hygiene.
K.
Yeah, well, i sure wouldn't if i were in your shoes after clicking it up. ) K.
Your sure wouldn't realize anyone decompensating. But anyone aware of the concept could see you decompensating recently.
Wrt language - i am not particularly good at english street language, so i can't pick you up there. It would be silly to point to books, but maybe googling for "decompensation" might help to learn what i am talking about.
K.
elmer
There is a very easy way to demask the more humble con men: They decompensate as soon as ask them about a book in an interview. Common knowledge in HR.
K.
Well. Actually i see 30. Maybe 40. Just for different reasons.
K.
Anecdotically, there is a guy in a client's IT-department who is really a living specbook. He knows every single detail of any server installed there - so everybody aks him instead of looking it úp or opening a box. He also knows everything about the aircon, power-circuits, e.g. how and where which power-outlet ist fused, etc. etc. - because he is the janitor of the building. I frequently listened to him unintendedly in the cafeteria when he was educating colleagues. One of his talents is imitating the way engineers talk - so combined with his impressive memory i mentioned above he not only is able to recite what one of them said word by word but also in the style he said it. But then - as soon as he does not recite, he falls back to behavioral patterns of name-calling of scientists, engineers, management and consultants. As he has an organ like Steve Ballmer, most of the ones being name-called might have heard it as well on occasion - and let him go away with it. So do i.
K.
Many thanks for your advise. Frankly, when it comes to a nice treat a stock-board does not satisfy my needs.
K.
there are folks in here that do tech for a living
I'm sure you do - I'd never blame you for this, so i don't mind your behaviour - it seems to be pretty common among janitors.
K.
These reports don't tend to differentiate 90nm from 65nm.
Thanks for pointing to a very weak link of the chain. All i have to support the notion the volume seen are 65nm SKUs is indeed coincidence and showroom-links. Neither is stringent. AMD has a revision of 90nm targeted at mobile (F3 iirc), so it could be from this as well.
K.
I am well aware it cannot be in your interest anybody posting reads such books, elmer.
K.
Mike,
State of the art of 04 approximately, but absolutely worthwhile for education purposes imo.
K.
And it's absolutely disgusting that one of them are charging $939 for the 1.9GHz parts:
Lol. That's for now. I'd suggest to prepare youself for vomitives to come.
K.
how and where your precious ITRS data applies.
Where is very easy, it's in the fabs of ITRS members, i.e about everybody in this industry. How is not as easy, however there are boatloads of publications which cover the mechanisms you could refer to - if you could, that is.
Doesn't mean they know the slightest about their nature or operation.
Well, this is something you might quarrel about with ITRS. But then, you just won't find anybody with data different in dimensions. There are always some a tad better and most a tad worse - but basically the physics is the same for everybody.
On a sidenote, i realized you managed a variation of the attack at least. Good.
K.
So if you think AMD targeted 65nm to be much lower power, what makes you think they can keep it low power and still increase performance to competitive levels? AMDMagic(tm)?
It's an agenda, not magic: Work power down first on the learning curve to the sweetspot you want. Then keep power-level and work on performance.
K.
I haven't seen any evidence of a "significant increase" in 65nm mobile volumes,
Well Gartner, Mercury, iSupply have seen those and their numbers were publicly reported.
that would be a rather poor tradeoff for losing 600MHz worth of performance in the high end of the market, along with zero improvements in performance at equal power envelopes
They had Server and Performance from 90nm - but very little low-power-envelope-products, so there is a good reason for targeting 65nm to there. Besides, they needed the low-power-targeted process for Barcelona as well to fit twice as much cores into the same envelopes.
K.
I pointed you to ITRS-data on variability already, which you chose to ignore and continue with ad personam comments instead. That's perfectly fine with me in general - variation is admittedly not a concept everybody might be able to understand - however you might consider some variation in your attacks to keep the boards entertained.
K.
You can buy a 90nm 5000+ part that runs at 65W as well.
We realize we have very different understandings of mobile-segment. The one i am talking about is 25W and 35W envelopes primarily, 65W-SKUs can only be utilized for the "desknote" subsegment of this market.
Power is no better than 90nm
The envelopes do not change from a performance-targeted to a power-targeted process - but the sweetspot of power-envelopes - corresponding with the volumes they have for these envelopes. Significant increase of mobile-volumes are visible for a while already and can be tracked back to process.
Having said this, it is pretty ambitious to go into a new node with a power-targeted design and process. So it is neither surprizing they launched desktop first, nor that mobile-volumes have only been seen half a year later. Beyond, i don't think they are already below a sweet-spot of 45W which is still too high for mobile - i.e. the best of this is still to come.
K.
Volume necessary for AMDs massive mobile- mss gains can only come from a 65nm-node targeted rather at power than performance. Half the cache in 65 is what design contributes to the primary target of this product.
In short: AMD has a mobile-process. As simple as that.
All it needs is looking at what happens out there to grasp it. After a quick surprize (in particular about the fact they are not crowing like mad about it) everything falls into place.
K.
Either Asus is stupid, or Charlie is. Hmm... that's a toughy.
An easy one: Chacun à son goût. It remains that simple if you consider the other possibilities, as well.
K.
AMD had a potential contender with FASN8, but since it foolishly killed it
http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/mainboards/display/20070914232827.html
K.
What I am wondering is if Samsung buys partial ownership of AMD does this mean they get access to make X86 processors.
Don't worry - this is not so.
K.
Not sure what you are getting at - are you suggesting an In-Circuit-emulator with ICE, i.e. an approach a la Transmeta?
K.
Duh - i find one identity is challenge enough for one life
K.
Then again you apparently were once invested in Transmeta
Never been.
so your error in judgement is hardly unprecedented.
I am aware of a a ton of errors preceding a possible misjudgement. Beyond i am afraid there is even more i am not (yet) aware of.
K.
DooDoo, what is your point in reference to Intel???
Rolling thunder - a thought of Intels stockprice without protection for X86 must have struck you by lightning.
K.