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.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Estephen who wrote (128390)	11/13/2000 1:02:17 PM
From: combjelly	Respond to of 1583503

"AMD has no new core for their next gen. processor till winter 2001" Assuming that the Palomino and Morgan are not new cores, which in some sense they are just optimized with just a few enhancements, you haven't provided a reason why they should replace a design that has been on the market for just a year. Considering that Intel admits that the the P4 will be at least 10-20% slower than the PIII in IPC, the Palomino, which can reach at least 1.7GHz in 0.18 micron should be more than competitive. For what it is worth, you still haven't come up with a good reason why AMD should have a P/E of 1. A P/E of 10 maybe, but 1?

To: Estephen who wrote (128390)	11/13/2000 1:06:51 PM
From: jcholewa	Respond to of 1583503

> 1.) AMD has invested heavily on an unstable technology for their next generation platform (DDR). > 2.) AMD has no new core for their next gen. processor till winter 2001. P4 will dominate the market. Hmmm. I haven't tested DDR SDRAM platforms, but from existent data the emerging chipsets for it seem to be at least as stable as the initial chipset for DRDRAM (I speak of the oft-maligned i820). Still ... regarding your two points, if DDR SDRAM proves to be unmarketable and unmanageable, AMD can still use the PC133 platforms already in place. According to preliminary benchmark tests, the 1.20GHz Athlon with PC133 SDRAM holds up pretty well against the 1.50GHz Pentium 4. Now, if the P4 from that point ramps faster than the Athlon, percentage-wise in frequency, then that's another story. But from this vantage point, I do not see 2001 becoming an utter disaster for AMD from a perspective of moneymaking.. Still, that doesn't really address combjelly's question. He didn't ask why AMD's essentials will go down. He asked why its P/E will go down. He is basically asking "Why will AMD's valuation go down more than its execution goes down when the valuation is already a fraction of companies that are currently doing much worse than AMD?". -JC