Wednesday, August 15, 2007
Intel: Barcelona "may challenge us on specific server/workstation benchmarks."
Barcelona may challenge Intel on specific server/workstation benchmarks?.
Though, Intel believes that its upcoming 45 nm Core 2 Duo product line will keep a "broad leadership" position in the industry.
I second that. But , until then "poor" 1,9 Ghz Barcelona may challenge Intel on specific server/workstation benchmarks?
So, Intel inevitably needs 45nm to counter attack? One 45nm fab is worth at least $5B. Good God. I found Barcelona new advanced architecture much cheaper way for obtaining top price performance ratio.
Yes, Intel aims to regain "clear performance and energy-efficiency leadership" with Nehalem in 2008.
But, what to do in the meantime? AMD will shrink its genuine 4 core die in 45nm in the second half of 2008.
And its prices. Were are Intel's margins (declining by years) deseprately needed for new expensier and expensier
lower geometries fabs. Seems that something stinks in Intel's economy mathematics. Margins are lower and lower, expenses higher and higher. In one moment investors should ask themself, is Intel a barrel without the bottom?. Where are our returns? How certain are they? And if Intel fail, who will buy so big company?
And what for? Think with your own head, not with someone's foolish ass.
Though, Intel believes that its upcoming 45 nm Core 2 Duo product line will keep a "broad leadership" position in the industry.
I second that. But , until then "poor" 1,9 Ghz Barcelona may challenge Intel on specific server/workstation benchmarks?
So, Intel inevitably needs 45nm to counter attack? One 45nm fab is worth at least $5B. Good God. I found Barcelona new advanced architecture much cheaper way for obtaining top price performance ratio.
Yes, Intel aims to regain "clear performance and energy-efficiency leadership" with Nehalem in 2008.
But, what to do in the meantime? AMD will shrink its genuine 4 core die in 45nm in the second half of 2008.
And its prices. Were are Intel's margins (declining by years) deseprately needed for new expensier and expensier
lower geometries fabs. Seems that something stinks in Intel's economy mathematics. Margins are lower and lower, expenses higher and higher. In one moment investors should ask themself, is Intel a barrel without the bottom?. Where are our returns? How certain are they? And if Intel fail, who will buy so big company?
And what for? Think with your own head, not with someone's foolish ass.
THIS LINK posted by Joseph Bell : 8:28 AM
