Pravin,
<AMD's segmentation strategy is not working. >
What? How do you figure that?
<Duron is a failure. >
Bit too strong, don't you think.
<AMD has natural segmentation due to the wide product frequency range that it has. >
That was done because there were no Durons. Now Durons have ramped, that should change. Rumors say Athlons below 900MHz will be obsoleted by the end of this month. If true, does 900MHz-1.2G seem like a wide frequency range to you?
<They should drop Duron and sell Athlons across the full current Duron+Athlon frequency range. They would be getting more than $50 for a 650 Mhz Athlon. >
The point of having Duron, I believe, is to compete in $399, $499, $599 kind of data points. Going with higher ASP Athlons limits the penetration into these segments, don't you think?
<Intel needs segmentation because there is not much frequency difference between Celeron and PIII. AMD does not need to play this game. >
Intel and AMD need segmentatiton for the same reasons. To improve ASPs by creating differentiated brands.
<Intel is laughing at AMD for making this mistake. Celeron out competes Duron in the market (and I don't believe the $20-30 motherboard cost difference argument; Duron, on a clock for clock basis, sells for less than this difference and is a much higher performer). If AMD leveraged their Mhz lead to offer Athlon against the Celeron at the same price, they would make more money and take more market share. AMD, are you listening???>
Pravin, that seems to be rather "light" argument. Are you sure it is not the pain of margin that is talking here?
Chuck |
