Replies to post #8580 on Advanced Micro Devices Inc (AMD)

[Elmer Phud]

Blauboad - A couple things suggest good Barton yields/splits.

Management has said as much in the conference calls.

Oh please!


The chips are extremely overclockable to the extent that all grades below 3000+ appeared to have been downbinned for demand reasons. The fastest chips are also good overclockers, which suggests that there is alot of headroom in the process.

This is not something that can be measured. There is no data to back up this claim. It would seem that if there was so much headroom AMD would release a higher bin unless they don't want to make A64 look bad as you suggest here:

AMD is about to release the AMD64, and I expect that they will want it to have a clear performance advantage over the fastest Bartons. That gives them a reason not to push Barton as far as it will go, since in September it will become a budget chip and its premiums evaporate. It would be a difficult marketing position to have your A64 3600+ priced several times higher from a concurrently selling Barton 3600+ that, based on the QS rating, should perform identically well. So, they may lose a few high-end Barton sales in the meantime, but AMD is betting the company on Hammer already anyway. What's a few more chips in the pot? Like I've said, if Barton does get released in a higher grade/s, that indicates very good things for A64.

Again this makes sense if the premise is correct but where is the independent data to show that Barton is highly overclockable?

No reported shortages or acquisition difficulties for Barton.

Depressed demand for AMD products?

[me] I have more confidence in my bias than yours: [you] I couldn't agree more :)

As it should be :)

[Haddock]

AMD is about to release the AMD64, and I expect that they will want it to have a clear performance advantage over the fastest Bartons

I really doubt that AMD would hold back faster Bartons for this reason. Consider that Barton is cheaper to build than A64, why would AMD want to force the market to move to a more expensive chip if the performance were the same? I could understand it if Opteron wasn't out and AMD wanted to get x86-64 machines into the hands of developers, but with Opteron and nForce3 out there and moderately priced (for a developer) there's no reason to rush A64 unless the performance warrants it.

In general I am sceptical about all theories that AMD or Intel are holding back much better technology for tactical reasons. Of course there may be situations where they prioritise yield over bin splits or vice versa, but they don't sit on higher speed grades for any length of time. That would be economic lunacy!