HUGE Power Play Against Intel

[manikyath]

1 minute ago, Admiral Naismith said:

As a avid contributor to r/wallstreetbets, I too recommend selling Intel and invest everything into AMD and Qualcomm based off this information.

 

I can't wait to finally by my own yacht.

i'm not too sure about that one. qualcomm is defenately a solid investment seeing how ARM finds its way into more and more stuff, but AMD will depend hugely on the success of ZEN, and what they can produce afterwards.

 

also, unless you invest a crap ton of money (essentially also risking said money if for example qualcomm has a huge unexpected setback) you arent gonna be buying much of a yacht

[Omnislash89]

3 minutes ago, tlink said:

just banter, i thought fun was allowed? i said /s at the end for a reason.

I take NDAA and threats of blackmail very seriously. I'd use an alt account or TOR if I figured there was something to lose.

[DocSwag]

Huge POWER play? I see what you did there!

[TidaLWaveZ]

20 minutes ago, PigWithAMustache said:

says the x99 user to the am3+ user

That's right, I'm the same guy that still has a top tier performing CPU by modern standards more than 2 years after I bought it.

[Omnislash89]

7 minutes ago, Admiral Naismith said:

As a avid contributor to r/wallstreetbets, I too recommend selling Intel and invest everything into AMD and Qualcomm based off this information.

 

I can't wait to finally by my own yacht.

Be aware that of the stocks you mentioned, only Intel currently pays dividends.

[Omnislash89]

2 minutes ago, TidaLWaveZ said:

That's right, I'm the same guy that still has a top tier performing CPU by modern standards more than 2 years after I bought it.

Idk, my 4930K is whipping my brother's 6900K in the ass... though I'm at 4.5GHz and he only at 4.3....because Broadwell doesn't know how to "vCore" headroom. Also Corsair AIO cooler.

[Guest]

I have a problem with number 2. 

Isn't IBM also blue? 

[imreloadin]

12 minutes ago, Omnislash89 said:

Snip

I wouldn't openly state you're going to break the CoC of this site either

[Omnislash89]

10 minutes ago, fpo said:

I have a problem with number 2. 

Isn't IBM also blue? 

That's what makes this input so juicy to me...it confounds everything we know of chromatic alliances.

[Omnislash89]

5 minutes ago, imreloadin said:

Snip

I see we have a chess player here... That said, if this is all entertainment/speculation in the form of a insider reveal...it renders the entire argument moot. 

[Guest]

2 minutes ago, Omnislash89 said:

That's what makes this input so juicy to me...it confounds everything we know of chromatic alliances.

WHICH BLUE TEAM WERE YOU REFFERIN' TA?!?!?!??!?!!

[TidaLWaveZ]

15 minutes ago, Omnislash89 said:

Idk, my 4930K is whipping my brother's 6900K in the ass... though I'm at 4.5GHz and he only at 4.3....because Broadwell doesn't know how to "vCore" headroom. Also Corsair AIO cooler.

That maybe so but apples to apples the 6900k should bury the 4930k in sheer CPU performance. Furthermore AMDs best offering right now doesn't hold a candle to 2 year old 5820k.

[Omnislash89]

11 minutes ago, fpo said:

WHICH BLUE TEAM WERE YOU REFFERIN' TA?!?!?!??!?!!

IBM making a move against Intel.

[Omnislash89]

7 minutes ago, TidaLWaveZ said:

That maybe so but apples to apples the 6900k should bury the 4930k in sheer CPU performance. Furthermore AMDs best offering right now doesn't hold a candle to 2 year old 5820k.

I've smoked a neighbor's FX 9590 at 5GHz... instructions per clock is THE stat to determine dominance.

[GSTARR]

If nobody is supposed to know yet, don't open your mouth

[Omnislash89]

1 minute ago, GSTARR said:

If nobody is supposed to know yet, don't open your mouth

Y'all are being real bitter. It is secondhand hearsay. It may hold water or not. It is worth conversing about, not slinging threats and such over. C'mon, guys...

[leadeater]

1 hour ago, Omnislash89 said:

Thoughts? Concerns? Invest now...I know I have.

You know that's insider trading right?

 

Quote

Insider Trading:

The illegal practice of trading on the stock exchange to one's own advantage through having access to confidential information.

 

[Omnislash89]

3 minutes ago, leadeater said:

You know that's insider trading right?

 

 

it is not confidential knowledge per my sources, and if it is, I maintain that has not been communicated to me. #BurgenOfProof

 

[leadeater]

10 minutes ago, Omnislash89 said:

it is not confidential knowledge per my sources, and if it is, I maintain that has not been communicated to me. #BurgenOfProof

That's fine but as someone mentioned, specifically saying you have invested on a public forum isn't a smart idea. Not being able to name the source and not being able to supply a source press release or public statement by IBM by it's nature implies that the information is confidential. Companies like IBM treat all information as confidential unless stated otherwise, and that is a very safe assumption to make.

 

If it isn't public knowledge that everyone can know about (at the same time) and you trade on it that is insider trading, stock market is supposed to be a fair playing field (not saying it is as that's the last thing I believe).

[Clanscorpia]

1 hour ago, PigWithAMustache said:

amd will still wreck intel in the desktop market and the gaming hardware market as a whole.

Mmmmmmmmmm boi. Hell na

[Omnislash89]

2 minutes ago, leadeater said:

That's fine but as someone mentioned, specifically saying you have invested on a public forum isn't a smart idea. Not being able to name the source and not being able to supply a source press release or public statement by IBM by it's nature implies that the information is confidential. Companies like IBM treat all information as confidential unless stated otherwise, and that is a very safe assumption to make.

 

If it isn't public knowledge that everyone can know about (at the same time) and you trade on it that is insider trading, stock market is supposed to be a fair playing field (not saying it is as that's the last thing a believe).

Point taken. For the best of my knowledge (novelty of communication and discourse aside), I have no reason to believe it is in-line with any factual or otherwise verifiable resource to be a fact. I have heard mumbling in the ether and those had (at a more present date by recent employees) been corroborated to be something to look at. I took the "something to look at" heading by two of my contacts (personal, non business) to mean there was something at least worthy of conspiracy (akin to Ancient Aliens guy) to look at. 

The post was to be half conspiracy with the illusion of actual groundedness in communication to suffice...but it seems...for several reasons... people believe or have reason to believe this to be much more than face value.

I argue (to a Moderator) that if such a case against my post for violation of any of the aforementioned laws or Terms of Use, the burden of proof would fall on any entity within LTT to themselves discover independently and positively identify themselves a validation (ergo illegal information) of insider information created or disseminated by my post...rendering the evidence illuminating post itself of the same violation. 

It is all hearsay at best... I just wanted to  illuminate the community to a conspiracy with the slightest bit of material significance..not spark a war between myself and those hoping to keep the peace between the forum and the FTC.

 

[Dabombinable]

1 hour ago, TidaLWaveZ said:

That maybe so but apples to apples the 6900k should bury the 4930k in sheer CPU performance. Furthermore AMDs best offering right now doesn't hold a candle to 2 year old 5820k.

It doesn't hold a candle to my stock 4790K.

[leadeater]

12 minutes ago, Omnislash89 said:

Point taken. For the best of my knowledge (novelty of communication and discourse aside), I have no reason to believe it is in-line with any factual or otherwise verifiable resource to be a fact. I have heard mumbling in the ether and those had (at a more present date by recent employees) been corroborated to be something to look at. I took the "something to look at" heading by two of my contacts (personal, non business) to mean there was something at least worthy of conspiracy (akin to Ancient Aliens guy) to look at. 

The post was to be half conspiracy with the illusion of actual groundedness in communication to suffice...but it seems...for several reasons... people believe or have reason to believe this to be much more than face value.

I argue (to a Moderator) that if such a case against my post for violation of any of the aforementioned laws or Terms of Use, the burden of proof would fall on any entity within LTT to themselves discover independently and positively identify themselves a validation (ergo illegal information) of insider information created or disseminated by my post...rendering the evidence illuminating post itself of the same violation. 

It is all hearsay at best... I just wanted to  illuminate the community to a conspiracy with the slightest bit of material significance..not spark a war between myself and those hoping to keep the peace between the forum and the FTC.

 

Don't worry about it too much. I do find the actual information of the topic interesting, just wouldn't have mentioned anything about stock trading is all.

 

I would have to think the SoC chips will have to be specially designed for the task as some storage tasks are very CPU demanding, like serving direct SMB/NFS. There are ways round that of course, use a 1U Intel based gateway to do that task and the Qualcomm chips in the back-end storage controllers.

 

P.S. Moderators commenting on threads are general members unless otherwise stated, just thought I mention it not realizing it had already been said when I first posted.

[imreloadin]

1 hour ago, Omnislash89 said:

Point taken. For the best of my knowledge (novelty of communication and discourse aside), I have no reason to believe it is in-line with any factual or otherwise verifiable resource to be a fact. I have heard mumbling in the ether and those had (at a more present date by recent employees) been corroborated to be something to look at. I took the "something to look at" heading by two of my contacts (personal, non business) to mean there was something at least worthy of conspiracy (akin to Ancient Aliens guy) to look at. 

The post was to be half conspiracy with the illusion of actual groundedness in communication to suffice...but it seems...for several reasons... people believe or have reason to believe this to be much more than face value.

I argue (to a Moderator) that if such a case against my post for violation of any of the aforementioned laws or Terms of Use, the burden of proof would fall on any entity within LTT to themselves discover independently and positively identify themselves a validation (ergo illegal information) of insider information created or disseminated by my post...rendering the evidence illuminating post itself of the same violation. 

It is all hearsay at best... I just wanted to  illuminate the community to a conspiracy with the slightest bit of material significance..not spark a war between myself and those hoping to keep the peace between the forum and the FTC.

 

Way to backpedal/double down at the same time...I like your style sir

[Godlygamer23]

3 hours ago, Omnislash89 said:

I've been a contributing member of the community for some time

You have less than 100 posts. Nothing to get excited about.

 

Unless you have verifiable data, I'm not convinced that it's going to inherently happen.