We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Technology Stocks : Advanced Micro Devices - Moderated (AMD)
AMD 159.32-0.6%3:10 PM EDT

 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: mas_ who wrote (218546)12/2/2006 7:46:46 AM
From: RinkRead Replies (1) of 275869
Mas, re: What a complete load of imaginary twaddle you just made up there, all of it, do please keep taking the happy blue pills because the end results are highly amusing.

Please talk arguments instead of emotion. Let's go over DougSF's post and see if your above reply was a normal one.

1. Early next year? Nothing more at A-day? I guess they want another spin first?
I too think AMD needs another spin e.g. to get the frequency up to launch speeds in order to provide real benchmarks applicable to the top launch speed. Is this thought from Doug (and me too) really so weird that you need to insult him?

2. This makes the launch sound like a "trickle launch".
Well I think it's more of a full launch as I think all products from the 8000 series down to QC FX will be launched within the timeframe of some 4 months (8000 first, then 2000, then 1000 which presumably coincides with QC FX which according to a previous article is due Q3/07). Still they start with the lowest volume product which is at least a reason to call this a trickle launch. I would not call it like that personally, but I'm an AMD investor, so I understand that my point of view differs from Doug's. Again: I know there's a multitude of reasons (real reasons and wrong reasons incl $$) why I am looking at the raw diamond called the truth from a different angle.

3. I guess it makes sense, given the cost involved with producing functional 300mm^2 dies
When ramping any new die it makes sense to start with the lowest volume high value products, especially so when the die is large to begin with. A later post of you mentions that Barcelona is 286mm2 (that's the figure I was just looking for btw, tx). It's only a 5% difference with the 300mm2 that Doug mentioned. The 300mm2 was only a slightly roughish estimate that Doug and Paul talked about yesterday and fafaik it was found reasonable then. So where in this do you find a need to create another insult?

4. "We really think that the sweet spot for Barcelona is four-socket machines, since these boxes have the kinds of workloads that can take the best advantage of threads and cores" ...
That last quote is funny. A bunch of baloney, instead of the real reason.

AMD is right to say Barcelona will see most advantage in 4S because that's where HTT3 improves bandwidth and latency the most. Still I for one agree with Doug it has a lot to do with ramping a low volume high value product, especially when it's large. I think there are many more here that see both arguments (AMD's and Doug's).

DougSF has left out the insults in his posts to you. I've requested you to do the same yesterday (no posts insulting each other without hard data; the volume of those is way too high). I'm asking you kindly one last time. I'd for instance appreciate it if you would reply to this post without insulting Doug without prove.


Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext