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 : Intel Corporation (INTC) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Mary Cluney who wrote (123909)	12/31/2000 1:06:44 PM
From: Elmer	Respond to of 186894

Re: "It is amazing that he [Jerry Sanders] can still generate so much support from Dan3, Kap4kan, and a lot of others on this and the AMD threads" I agree. His record of zero increase in shareholder value over all these years has got to be the worst of any sitting CEO in the industry. One has to conclude that those who support him have another agenda. Making money can't be it. EP

To: Mary Cluney who wrote (123909)	12/31/2000 1:09:00 PM
From: Scumbria	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 186894

Mary, AMD has quite a track record when it comes to competing against Intel. Jerry Sanders has a 30 year track record of creating wealth mostly for himself and losing money for shareholders. What was that saying, "you can fool some of the people some of the time, but you can't fool all the people all the time"? I don't understand this kind of remark, though I hear it all the time. AMD has chosen to compete in the PC processor business. This industry is dominated by a huge and often ruthless competitor. AMD has succeeded where many others have failed in the consumer market, and may soon start growing market share into the conservative business segment. Shareholders need to understand the business model and risks associated with their investment. AMD is trading with a P/E of 5.5. If they can get some business wins, the stockholders will be richly rewarded. Look how far AMD has come in the last 24 months in terms of engineering and marketing accomplishments! They now dominate the retail marketplace. Scumbria

To: Mary Cluney who wrote (123909)	12/31/2000 3:02:46 PM
From: Dan3	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 186894

Re: AMD has quite a track record when it comes to competing against Intel. Mary, Intel has (or had) a business where it makes parts for $25 and sells them for $200. A business like that is going to attract new entrants. Intel has fought off several attempts to enter this fabulously lucrative business over the past 20 years. This time, thanks to Intel's concurrent love affairs with Rambus and VLIW, it let its business slide a little too long and it has lost its monopoly. If P4 had been a real home run, Intel might have been able to return to the earlier status quo, but P4 is a mixed bag. P4 has high nominal MHZ - terrific for marketing. But P4 is fast only on synthetic benchmarks and a very, very, limited number of applications. Supposedly the day will come when most software has been rewritten to make P4's performance better, but such a day is many years away. The tools (like compilers) have to written (which is going on now). Then those tools have to become the preferred tools for developers, then applications have to be written (or rewritten) using those tools, then those applications have to enter the marketplace, then those applications have to become most of the application in current use. It's going to take quite a while, and may never happen if other chips are available that run all applications well - both mainstream ones and specially compiled ones. P4 is also much more expensive to manufacture than its competition (both internal and external) and requires expensive infrastructure support as well. Had P4 been able to run current programs twice as fast as existing chips, or been no more expensive to deploy than existing chips, it might have done what Intel needed. But P4's performance is downright sad on almost all software ever written and it is horribly expensive compared to the competition (I don't mean expensive at retail, I mean expensive to build - which will put some very hard limits on its ultimate market). If Intel's shrink to .13 goes quickly and smoothly, and its transition to copper goes quickly and smoothly, and its transition to low-K wafers goes quickly and smoothly, and they are able to fit in the pieces of the P4 they removed to fit it onto .18 die without bringing it back up over 200mm2 on .13, and the design proves to scale well on the 3 ways new process, then and only then does Intel have a chance at regaining its prior status. But for that to happen, it will be necessary for AMD to have problems with its somewhat simpler transition to .13 SOI from a .18 process that already uses copper. AMD will also have to run into problems with its less complex transition to the hammer series of chips. Because even if all goes perfectly for Intel, it probably won't be able to dominate a 64 bit Hammer on SOI that is around 100mm2. Regards, Dan