Last message on previous page:

And this is relevent to a suit filed on 05?
Just the same, true, they did ramp fab 36 slowly. At the same time, they were reducing output from fab 30. Aside from having Chartered as an alternate, they could have ramped faster, and kept fab 30 operating above capacity for a little longer.
Since part of the point of having fab 30 overproduce in march and april, they had a small buffer, and no need to produce more chips.

It would restart ATi with massive debt... great plan

Intel is raising prices because it can... Not to let AMD survive. AMD did the same thing when they had the better chips, the high end stuff cost a kidney.

Hmm, that makes absolutely no sense... AMD is far from copying Intel on what Intel is doing. They are going two seperate, yet equally interesting directions. AMD is looking at CPUs 'fused' with the GPU, allowing massive parralelism at the core of the CPU, great for graphics, physics etc. Intel is looking at 160 core processors, each core being absolute crap on its own, but together allowing parrellelism at the core, allowing graphics and physics processing. Each company went down a different path to ultimately developing something for the same purpose.

Which we all know wasnt the case as later that year they had to "steal from peter to pay paul", when they shorted the channel to supply Dell...which they themselves admited to.

So basically your just being a lazy bum and not making money?

IIFC, they shorted the channel on dual cores only. It was because they had not expected that large an adoption at that point.
If anything, the Dell contracts proved that they were not constrained. Dell's first delivery was more chips than they had sold in the entire first quarter. Yes, there were some logistical problems. The fact that there was no ramp time included, was problematic. On the other hand, the 4th quarter 07 saw the same level of demand, without a hitch. (production quantity wise at any rate).
I just showed you that thier crappy little 200mm wafer plant was able to handle almost 1/4 of the processor market, and you think Dell is going to constrain them after they have added an aditional 300mm wafer plant?

AMD is going down hill fast hey need to pull finger and get moving fast if they want to survive. They are currently putting all of their money into research lets hope this pays off for their sake aswell as ares. They have the market down for the budget end of the spectrum they just need more to engineer allot powerfuller cpus. If AMD go bust Intel will not have any competition and will raise there prices dramaticly forcing us to comply Lets just hope it never comes to that.

What????. Cmon now buddy...I have a lot of respect for you and enjoy our debates (mostly ) but what are you talking about, "...they shorted the channel on dual cores only...." Mid 05 was the release of the last "new" 939 singlecore, and by mid 06 AMD was already into the fire sale of the AM2 single cores because they couldnt give them away. Shorting the channel of what it wants is still shorting the channel. And if you recall (and Im sure you do) the channel was right well POed, from one end to the other, from the distributers all the way down to the consumers.

AMD was incapable of supplying the market what it wanted, and it showed, and you know that. They were at capacity, had only enough to supply either the channel or Dell, not both and they had to choose: Channel or Dell. Only they didnt really have a choice; they were contractually obligated to supply Dell. You know that too. And by the way, you know full well they were still shorting the channel in Q4 as well. It wasnt until december 06, after the channel distributers had started publically vocalizing their dismay with the situation that AMD fessed up to what they had done, and it wasnt until Q1 07 that they started to catch up with demand, and then, only because demand had dropped courtesy of C2D AND AMDs 65nm yields simultaniously were slowly increasing.

I think Intel paid Dell (and others) to take all of the AMD chips and not sell them ...

So the small customers couldn't get any either.

Hows that for business logic ... just don't think about it too hard as the theory behind it is smoke and mirrors ...

Even Microsoft are getting in on the act ... perhaps Intel is paying them to make SP3 crash on AMD based machines?

Big t ... It could be a conspiracy ??

Could Skynet have already taken over Intel ??

Where the hell is Sarah !!!

No, skynet is busy taking over the Marine Corps and the Navy. It doesnt have time for M$. Been wandering into the basement have you? Dangerous territory

I read Hector's apology. He said that they had misread dual core demand. As you are well aware, it takes 3 months from wafer start to final packaging. What I read that to mean was they figured everyone would be buying core chips, so they throttled back dual core production. It's what's called a logistics problem, not a capacity problem.
No matter how you look at it, a short term shortage of chips, due to ramping is what they encountered. That just aint capacity constraint.
If it were, that would mean that they would still be constrained today.
That is far from reality. If demand were there, they could ramp to the point where they were producing almost double the number of chips they will today. That with the same fabs you say they were constrained with in 07.
Did I mention Chartered?
For my part, I'm amazed that they were able to adapt to the increase in chip realestate that they saw between Q1/06 and Q1/07.