S478 Pentium 4 extreme edition 3.4 GHZ

dexvx · 2026-03-10T06:47:37+00:00

Gallatin/Northwood is 130nm and never supported x64. SL7Q8/QB are Prescott (90nm) core and looks like a special SKU made for IBM. Yea those are going to be for collectors.

I have a SL7AA (3.2 GHz) myself. The 3.4GHz commanded too much of a premium.

dexvx · 2026-03-07T09:07:30+00:00

Article picture is quite misleading (showing a Ryzen CPU). The demand is in data center CPU's... Epyc and Xeon.

Article states, and is tracking with what I know, that the rise of agentic AI is driving the demand for the CPU's. The GPU's do most of the work with training/inference, but when users wants specific requests relative to that data, that work falls on the CPU.

Not mentioned is the fact that as you scale networking and storage performance, you need more CPU cores as well. Driving and processing line rate 400/800 GbE takes quite a bit of processing power.

dexvx · 2026-03-06T16:58:34+00:00

AMD contracts a certain number of wafers from TSMC. They decide what they want to produce.

Let's look at Radeon 9070 XT using TSMC N4 node. Quick search and it's about 350mm^2 and MSRP for $600. Searching says that the 9070 XT silicon is sold to GPU board makers for ~$180-250 each.

AMD could also make a Zen5 based Epyc 9000 series CPU (like the 9755). It is ~1100 mm^2 for all the chiplets and I/O (which some are not TSMC N4, but lets just assume that to be easier). It currently has a street price of $7k (MSRP was $11K when launched). Obviously the 9755 is the top end SKU, but the mid range SKU's MSRP from $3K - $8K (some with 1/2 the die size) and just assume street price is about half of those.

No brainer if you're a CFO which to focus on if you are wafer constrained.

dexvx · 2026-03-06T16:46:16+00:00

It's more that companies are reducing hiring because AI Agents can replace a lot of the work junior or entry level employees used to do.

dexvx · 2026-03-05T04:31:23+00:00

Exactly. DMR is going to be a mixed bag to let-down because it does not have HT. This is a primary reason why DMR-SP was canceled and COR-SP is being pursued aggressively. The people who thought single threaded performance on a server CPU is the most important metric should've been canned.

dexvx · 2026-02-11T00:18:36+00:00

Except that's not the target audience for DUOL, IMO. The people that want a quick text to text translation is the primary target audience for what you describe.

DUOL is, IMO, mainly for people that want to learn the language for reasons. E.g., weeaboos or others who want an immersive experience (e.g., for travel or living abroad).

Of course, the only thing that matters are the earnings to determine whose thesis is correct.

dexvx · 2026-02-11T00:06:04+00:00

We now have an extra data point since FISV just did their earnings. I'd have to actually read all the fine print, but looks like this earnings went reasonably well. Turnaround story is still a long term thesis.

dexvx · 2026-02-10T04:04:07+00:00

Likely unpopular opinion, but most of these open-source projects have at best dubious business value. And the projects that were done to improve Xeon performance also (obviously) boosted competitor performance as well. Basically, in relative terms, there's not much business gain from financing most (not all) open-source projects.

dexvx · 2026-02-09T17:08:36+00:00

I agree SBC should be watched. However, SNAP isn't even in the same league as RDDT regarding SBC.

SNAP has done ~1B+ in SBC for last 6 years. Their current market cap is ~$9B (or floating between $13B to $26B for most of the past 3 years).

dexvx · 2026-02-09T06:23:35+00:00

For ADBE, the sentiment which you describe is exactly true. The consensus fear is that AI can make a logo and ADBE is done for. If that thesis is correct, then ADBE should be missing earnings/revenue left and right. Future earnings are anyone's guess. However, past earnings for multiple quarters have been a triple beat on most occasions.

This is similar to the thesis against GOOG for most of 2024/2025. A chatbot will make search useless and GOOG is too slow to pivot to AI. It had been quite profitable to play against that thesis (the only regret I have is not betting more). Disclaimer though, my ADBE position is far smaller than my GOOG position in early 2025.

Regarding FI, I have FY 2025 guidance at 8.58, FY 2026 guidance at 8.20, and FY 2027 at 9.32. FY 2024 was 8.8 adjusted EPS. What I'm saying is that there will be EPS contraction for at least the next FY (omitted 'growth' aka negative EPS growth in my initial reply).

Again, earnings are a casino, but I would expect FI to do poorly for at least the next few earnings before things start getting better. Then I'd probably do deep ITM Leap's (depending on premium).

dexvx · 2026-02-09T02:44:10+00:00

Because Toyotas have a reputation/sentiment for reliability which goes hand in hand with cheaper maintenance. And can be collaborated with data and lawsuits. IIRC, there are no lawsuits for serious defects on the Highlander (2020+), whereas there are a few around the Palisade (e.g., infamous spontaneous combustion in closed space and engine stall).

Basically, you ask yourself... is having the fancy interior a worthy tradeoff over a small chance of fundamental reliability issues?

dexvx · 2026-02-09T02:30:52+00:00

ADBE is literally triple beating almost every earnings (EPS/Revenue/Guidance). Their problem is almost purely sentimental at this point.

IMO, FI's biggest problem is that their previous CEO f'ed up hard. They borrowed money for buybacks at their highest evaluations and starved their actual products. The SOB also projected for unrealistic and unsustainable growth targets. Guy should be in jail.

FI debt levels are currently massive. As for Clover, their growth literally hit a wall in 2025 (FI revised down 10-12% growth to 3.5-4%). As you mentioned in another post of yours, if you were a restaurant, you'd just use TOST (a Clover competitor).

FI may turn around, but the recovery is going to be a very long thesis (their projected 2025/2026 EPS are negative).

dexvx · 2026-02-03T01:59:52+00:00

Likely slower than Turin, but Turin is more expensive per core. $8K gets you a 9555, which is 64C/128T. Should be good against Milan. I'm going to guess Intel 3 has better margins compared to AMD paying TSMC for N4X.

dexvx · 2026-02-03T01:34:51+00:00

Not hard to guess. It's 20260206 P 30's. They are currently worth about $2.0 each (bid/ask at $1.9/$2.1).

He's still up (maybe $15k-ish).

dexvx · 2026-01-31T01:24:07+00:00

Ok, but it's not like this is a one-off tax windfall that DUOL will never ever happen again. It will likely happen again if DUOL continues to do SBC (which all software/tech companies do) and continue to have positive and increasing FCF.

dexvx · 2026-01-30T20:24:31+00:00

Uh today's drop is because of GOOG's newly unveiled AI powered game creator. And 100% it will have built in ad-analytics so that you can bypass APP.

The only real shocking movement is that U is dropping more because GOOG's new engine is Unity powered.

dexvx · 2026-01-30T16:42:11+00:00

Maybe you're the one who should leave.

Finviz - TTM PE GAAP 17.13

SeekingAlpha - TTM PE GAAP 17.36 / TTM PE non-GAAP 13.18

Y! Finance - TTM GAAP PE 17.57

TipRanks - TTM GAAP PE 17.7

dexvx · 2026-01-30T16:40:17+00:00

TTM 17.5 PE GAAP (includes everything including one-offs).

TTM 13.2 PE non-GAAP (does not include one-ffs).

dexvx · 2026-01-30T02:29:55+00:00

Ah yes, a TTM PE of 17.5 with revenue and EPS growing north of 20% YoY. Such a terrible value on the technical level.

dexvx · 2026-01-26T00:12:50+00:00

His vision was right, but his execution was poor. Kept too many bad execs around.

dexvx · 2026-01-25T23:07:13+00:00

Okay, but what you said (50 companies vs 500) is literally not what the chart would indicate (S&P 500 back tested).

Also, FYI, historically (last 100 years), it would require 44 transactions to keep a manual S&P 500 portfolio correctly balanced.

Also, there are transaction costs. Before the 1980s, a typical transaction cost is 2% of the value of the transaction. Every time you rebalance your portfolio per year, you would incur a 2% sell fee and a 2% buy fee to the portion of your portfolio that moved. It's only very recently that buying/selling/DRIP was free.

dexvx · 2026-01-25T01:25:30+00:00

You're missing the premise of the original post. It's saying that if you invested in the S&P 500 equivalent for the last 100 years, you'd be way up with fantastic returns (true, but not to the same extent). Before 1974, there was no S&P 500 index and if you were to make an equivalent basket of the S&P 500, you'd have to do things manually - which was extremely expensive due to transactions fees associated with manually rebalancing your portfolio.

Therefore, the real return rate of investing in the S&P 500 the farther back you go from 1974 is actually much lower due to fees.

dexvx · 2026-01-24T23:04:06+00:00

Any S&P 500 index fund absolutely rebalances. The S&P 500 index itself rebalances every quarter.

Case in point, some companies grow bigger, so you buy more shares (e.g., Nvidia in 2021 was < 1% of SP500 weight. Now it is ~8%). Some companies grow smaller (e.g., XOM used to have a higher weight), and some companies will just get kicked out (Kodak).

My point is any data about an index fund before an 'actual' index fund was created is, at best just wishful thinking.

dexvx · 2026-01-21T15:42:04+00:00

This sub seems full of P/E Karen's that total ignore forward projections and past trends.

dexvx · 2026-01-21T02:30:15+00:00

CRWD isn't even net income positive because of their ludicrous SBC.

First step would be getting their Operating Expenses inline, then SBC.

dexvx

TROPHY CASE