Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : Advanced Micro Devices - Moderated (AMD) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: AK2004 who wrote (6316)	8/23/2000 4:41:06 PM
From: chic_hearne	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 275872

Re: SSB report, Jonathon Joseph Albert, What a crock this Joseph guy is. Take a look at his estimates for Intel: 12/00E Current $0.36A $0.50A $0.43E $0.44E $1.72E Previous $0.36A $0.50A $0.43E $0.44E $1.72E 12/01E Current $0.44E $0.48E $0.51E $0.52E $1.95E Previous $0.44E $0.48E $0.51E $0.52E $1.95E In other words, Intel will earn $.23 per share more next year, or about $1.5 billion. They have already taken over $3 billion in one time gains this year, so that means Intel has to earn more than $4.5 billion next year than they are earning this year. How can these ANALysts keep a straight face when making predictions like this and at the same time suggesting AMD will earn less next year? If this is any indication, there is HUGE potential for AMD stock as reality sets in. chic

To: AK2004 who wrote (6316)	8/23/2000 4:51:54 PM
From: andreas_wonisch	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 275872

Albert, thanks for the report. Looks like the usual analyst crap about Intel but still interesting (especially since it's coming from SSB). BTW, I heard on German television today that Goldman Sachs was visiting AMD yesterday and wasn't impressed (they maintained their "market outperform" rating). Apparently today they are/were visiting Intel. Do you have any information or reports on that? Andreas

To: AK2004 who wrote (6316)	8/23/2000 4:52:09 PM
From: dougSF30	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 275872

Does Jonathan Joseph actually understand these terms? Or his he regurgitating what Intel tells him? And what is he basing his conclusion 'P-IV is a screamer' on? Has he seen benchmarks? It seems as though he is concluding this merely from the pipeline length, cache changes, ALU speed, etc., which is kind of shaky ground from which to be drawing overall impressions from. Standard benchmarks would be much more informative. Doug --snip-- Whatever. The important point is the P-IV is a screamer---it easily has bandwidth to 2GHz. Compared to the P- III, the 20-stage pipeline that is 2x longer, the ALU (arithmetic logic unit) executes integer instructions 2x faster, the 400MHz system bus is 3x faster, and the decode cache system is more efficient. Unfortunately, SDRAM chipsets will not likely be available until Q1/Q2 of 2001. --unsnip--

To: AK2004 who wrote (6316)	8/23/2000 5:16:08 PM
From: Eric K.	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 275872

That's a nasty report, Albert. I can't believe AMD is managing to lose market share in this environment. If Joseph's projection of 36.4M Intel cpus is accurate and AMD ships 7M, AMD's unit market share data for the last three quarters will be 17.0%, 16.6%, 16.1%. I suppose revenue market share is significantly increasing, but I am not pleased with the unit shipment results. Blame Via for preferring to skank to Intel even though the number of Athlon chipsets required are much less than for Apollo chipsets? Blame AMD for not creating enough demand? Edit: I suppose based on his predictions for a flat unit shipment rise for Intel in q4, AMD should rise to 19.8% in q4. However, there appears to have been a significant opportunity loss in the mean time. -Eric