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.
"Remember, almost all AMD Fans believe it. Even in the absence of any evidence."
Just like Intel flash "profitability". We all know how that one played out...
Hector promised us several new accounts in 2007. Apple, Sony, Panasonic, and Toshiba are the only ones I can think of that aren't already on board.
That's three times you have referred to ".65", and, for that matter, ".45". Come again?
Cray Signs $250 Million Agreement With DARPA to Develop Breakthrough Adaptive Supercomputer
How shortsighted of them not to select the awe inspiring Clovertown or Montecito processors for their revolutionary new supercomputer... What was DARPA thinking when they selected CRAY and Opteron?
Cray Signs $250 Million Agreement With DARPA to Develop Breakthrough Adaptive Supercomputer
How shortsighted of them not to select the awe inspiring Clovertown or Montecito processors for their revolutionary new supercomputer... What was DARPA thinking when they selected CRAY and Opteron?
Uhh, I think he knows that. EOM
"while IPF sales grew tremendously."
From what to what, not in percentages, not in big box or infrastructure dollars, but in the only thing that has anything to do with Intel's bottom line, CPU REVENUE??
Yeah, the Power 6 breakthrough is GREAT news for IPF.
Excellent, very detailed article on the lawsuit!
"Intel's Worst Nightmare"
http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/fortune_archive/2006/08/21/8383598/index.htm?source=yahoo_quo....
I'll say. Looks like buying ATI was one smart move. Intel continues to screw up graphics - From L'INQ's write-up on Intel's Vista- compatible "Broadwater" chipset:
"Intel G965 is pretty awful"
"the speed problem seems pretty well fatal"
"the chipset is actually slower than its predecessor, Lakeport/i945G. Much slower"
"if you go above 800*600, well, things approximate a slideshow"
"The chipset's performance was described to me quite succinctly by one major OEM as 'it sucks'"
" From what we understand, nothing short of a miracle will fix this chipset"
"This is kind of problematic for OEMs who want Centrino kickback money but also that Vista sticker"
Still no 2U models.
Not according to Nathan Brookwood of Insight 64. He says that the X3655 is 2U.
Dell to launch AMD-based notebooks in 4Q
Celia Lin, Taipei; Rodney Chan, DigiTimes.com [Monday 31 July 2006]
Dell will launch a wide-range of AMD notebooks in the fourth quarter, targeting all market segments from low end to high end and offering models that use AMD Sempron and Athlon 64 processors, as well as Turion 64 x2 CPUs, according to sources at Taiwan-based notebook makers.
The first AMD-based models, which will likely be launched in late October or early November, will be 15.4-inch notebooks manufactured by Quanta Computer for the consumer notebook market, the sources said. Then, Dell will introduce 17-inch AMD-based models at the end of the year, the sources added.
The anticipated launch of AMD-based notebooks means that the cooperation between Dell and AMD will cover all the segments in the PC market. In May, Dell already introduced its AMD-based servers, and the company is expected to launch AMD-based desktop PCs in September, the sources indicated.
The sources also remarked that competition between Dell and Hewlett-Packard, which is the biggest client for AMD notebook CPUs, in the US market is expected to be fiercer ever after Dell's launch of AMD-based notebooks. However, Dell will remain Intel's biggest client despite its adoption of AMD notebook CPUs, the sources added.
We all waited long enough for this. I was once worried that any embrace, if and when it occurred, would be tepid, a la IBM and Opteron (until today, anyhow). The INQ "it will be a shocker" article indicated just the opposite, and this article appears to prove them right. It's feeling like a duopoly, folks! Albeit a duopoly with lower margins for both players as Intel tries desperately to staunch the bleeding. I didn't see any mention of business notebooks, as HP has done.
Touche! EOM
"the end of a proprietary era"
Perfectly stated.
"ONE OF THE main reasons that the Itanic is the running joke of the IT industry is not anything silicon related, it is simply an accounting issue. The problem is that Intel simply won't come clean on the numbers, and worse yet, they toss out weasel-words when asked...
As the Olympic class footgun skeet championship that is Itanic continues with startling speed, Intel has been retreating from markets faster than you can say 'circle the wagons sheriff', but luckily, they are retreating upmarket instead of down...
I say luckily not because it is good for the chip, far from it, but it is good for PR. When you sell a server with 64 CPUs for $2500 each in a system, Intel gets $160,000 out of the deal. If that server costs a hair under $6 million, well, there is a lot of 'other', and Intel's share of that 'other' is zero.
What can Intel do to fix this? Euthanasia would stop the bleeding, but there is not much else you can do. The competition can sum up the parts of the system and service, and as long as them make an average profit, they are in the right business. Intel has a chain where each step has to make money or they all fail. IBM is laughing all the way to the bank.
That brings us back to weasels, and the numbers they fling. You can see that when Intel quotes the triumphant number for system revenue, they are hiding a hollow core, pun intended. They will never give you CPU sales numbers, or even CPU shipment numbers, they are quite different in this case, you only get system revenue.
This game is getting tiring, and what is worse, some analysts keep falling for it. When are they going to ask the real questions about the Itanic line and stop playing kissy-face? Nothing will fix the broken model, but the sooner we can get the real numbers, the sooner we can figure out what is really going on. Oh wait, that is exactly what they don't want."
http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=33115
Wow. So WAVX is among your investments? Says a lot. What, for goodness sakes, did you buy it at? Their slide from $50 to 66 cents and imminent delisting must have been rewarding. And we should trust your pronouncements about AMD? Right.
Intel's fab effort in China is doomed. Started in 2004, it's about to close its doors.
"Nanotech Corp., the Chinese silicon foundry hopeful that was started with help from Intel Corp, is in limbo and close to going under."
"[Nanotech] is still there, but there are no people at the company."
"Nanotech's "technology has no backing.""
On par with most of their investments over the last decade.
http://www.eetimes.com/news/semi/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=190301899
Buggi: The overall report seemed good (thanks). Your last line: " I'm very afraid whats going on here.". Could you elaborate?
CJ: Aren't the currently available and reviewed AM2 CPU's all Rev F already, such that any power savings would already be known, or are the first AM2 Rev E, with F to follow shortly?
From Digitimes:
"In the high-end server space, Intel is increasingly at a loss as to what to do with its Itanium processor. Despite the company fanfare for the upcoming Montecito or Itanium 2, the only future for this hugely expensive experiment in non-x86 computing appears to be another round of R&D investment, probably on the order of US$10 billion and probably the work of a consortium rather than simply Intel."
Hey, at least they have a 1.6 GHz Montecito to fall back on. Will it ship before they finish their "90 day top to bottom" review?
Speaking of which, SGI just filed for bankruptcy. This generally includes some disadvantaging of the shareholders.
DRC floating point coprocessors just showed up. Providing an order of magnitude speed-up in FP intensive tasks, they drop into Opteron sockets. Cray is on board. Hmm... Wasn't FP prowess one of the few remaining justifications for Itanium? Can SGI afford to ignore this?
http://www.drccomputer.com/
http://www.theinquirer.org/?article=31398
"Well it should survive the cut."
That's apparently not what Bob Colwell thinks...
http://groups.google.co.uk/group/comp.arch/browse_frm/thread/bec92d6c3da4843f/ea39c08fdf6f574c?hl=en....
http://www.aceshardware.com/forums/read_post.jsp?id=115163144&forumid=1
"It's dead, Jim".
Thanks to Joe on SI.
""I just sold my last Itaniums," Bretzmann said, breathing a sigh of relief."
What a hoot! I'm sure though, that it will be spun as IBM reacting to the competitive pressure that "rapidly growing" Itanium is inflicting on Power.
No, the main one.
"Montecito based systems will outperform contemporary Opteron systems 2x socket for socket."
And dollar for dollar...? And in total CPU revenues...?
You use the phrase "contemporary Opteron systems". Last time I checked, Montecito was still nowhere to be found, and it's architect has defected to AMD. The team is scattering, the C0 steppings sucked, and who knows where D.x is. And K8L is looming. But go on, enjoy your still-nonexistent, niche processor's elite status, while it lasts. You sure need something when CPU revenue or a future won't suffice.
Lower clocked Itaniums eliminated due to "too much high-end demand". What a hoot!
"Intel is to discontinue the production of eight Itanium 2 processors, as the company believes there is too much demand for higher performance products.
Chips up for extermination include the 1GHz and 1.4GHz dual-processor models, both with 1.5MB of L3 cache, 1.4GHz/3MB DP-oriented Itanic 2, the 1.1GHz/4MB, 1.3GHz/3MB, 1.4GHz/4MB, 1.5GHz/6M and 1.6GHz/3MB models, and three Xeon MP processors are getting the chop too (the 2.2GHz/2MB, 2.7GHz/2MB and 3GHz/4MB models.)"
http://www.techspot.com/news/20320-intel-to-cut-itanium-2-range.html
Lower clocked Itaniums eliminated due to "too much high-end demand". What a hoot!
"Intel is to discontinue the production of eight Itanium 2 processors, as the company believes there is too much demand for higher performance products.
Chips up for extermination include the 1GHz and 1.4GHz dual-processor models, both with 1.5MB of L3 cache, 1.4GHz/3MB DP-oriented Itanic 2, the 1.1GHz/4MB, 1.3GHz/3MB, 1.4GHz/4MB, 1.5GHz/6M and 1.6GHz/3MB models, and three Xeon MP processors are getting the chop too (the 2.2GHz/2MB, 2.7GHz/2MB and 3GHz/4MB models.)"
http://www.techspot.com/news/20320-intel-to-cut-itanium-2-range.html
Wow... if wbmw's stridency and posting volume is the forward indicator I think it is, AMD's in for a very nice CC.
Love that out-take:
"This is not the result of us choosing processors to bias the test. The Intel 630, just about the slowest desktop P4 Intel offers at this time, draws more power than the AMD A64 X2 4800+, the second most powerful desktop processor AMD offers currently. To top it off, the 630 is a single core processor while the X2 4800+ is a dual core."
Lame. Kinda like Intel stock.
Rich and getting richer.
Spansion will hold their conference call 1 hour before AMD's. EOM
Spansion will hold their conference call 1 hour before AMD's. EOM
Intel getting the "cheap-tech" label - I love it!
I HAD read the description. I assumed that readers of my post were not so dense so as to have to have it all spelled out explicitly, but since you seem to need some assistance here, I'll rephrase things:
Very cool! Ranked by PTRANS, Supercomputers based on Opteron take the top five spots, and eight out of the top twelve.
(The supercomputer based on) Itanium II from SGI turns in a pretty lame performance.
Very cool! Ranked by PTRANS, Opteron takes the top five spots, and eight out of the top twelve. The systems using Opteron even trump Power 5 systems. The only Itanium system in the top 30 limped in at #14. And this is one of the few markets it has left.
The Linpack founders, recognizing the limitations of their benchmark, have developed a more meaningful test suite: HPCC - the High Performance Computing Challenge. Guess who wins by a landslide? Cray's Opteron based Red Storm. It posted a parallel matrix transposition score 40X that of IBM's Blue Gene. Shhh... don't upset Chipguy!
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2006/03/060331152034.htm
The Linpack founders, recognizing the limitations of their benchmark, have developed a more meaningful test suite: HPCC - the High Performance Computing Challenge. Guess who wins by a landslide? Cray's Opteron based Red Storm. It posted a parallel matrix transposition score 40X that of IBM's Blue Gene. Shhh... don't upset Chipguy!
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2006/03/060331152034.htm
"AMD is all talk, no action".
3+% QoQ share gains
Perhaps you can "talk" that one away.
""Yes. It is simple math. Intel had its own IPF team, took
on most of the Alpha EV7 and EV8 design teams, and
last year took on the HP MPU design team. Each of
these teams have experienced and skilled architects
and lead designers. It is quite obvious that Intel will
not fund development of 3, 4 or 5 different competing
IPF microarchitectures at once. If there are only 1 or 2
ships to command and a bunch of senior guys that feel
that they should get a turn at being captain then obviously
most of them will be disappointed. Some will stay and be
team players and some will leave Intel to try being a big
fish in someone else's small pond. Life goes on.
"
Well there, now. Really a very minor issue, glad to hear it's been settled, and this hemorrhage of key personnel won't interfere with the ascendent revenue rocket that is Itanium.
Uh-huh.
This isn't they way it works. In any company, a relatively small number of extremely talented and very self-driven people are the main engine for innovation. That's the key reason that little AMD can out-innovate the 100K+ megalopolis of Intel. You were flat out wrong with your "only one" assertion, and to have eight people walk out at the same time with the lead architect is actually pretty remarkable. Unless, of course, you can't see the writing on the wall...