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: Windsock who wrote (145821)	10/21/2001 8:57:38 PM
From: Dan3	Respond to of 186894

Re: When is a P III not a P III? If Intel CPUs are relegated to consoles, but they still sell quite a few of them, does it matter? PC Market share is very important because it brings along with it support infrastructure. To take it to its extreme, if AMD were to chases Intel out of the PC market, relegating Intel to the game console and handheld markets, it would be a big deal, n'est pas? Not likely? Of course not. But the fact that AMD's flat unit sales into a declining market in Q3 indicate further market share gains is important. Intel is afraid to reveal unit sales or even to define its markets. If Intel did indeed lose a little more PC market share last quarter, but increased total X86 units shipped due to the initial pipeline fill of PIIIs for Xbox, it's very much worth noting. Microsoft could have wanted a good sized initial supply of CPUs to ensure availability during the Xmas season. Consider the the parts have to be shipped to the far east, assembled, tested, packaged, shipped back, and available for sale starting next month. Remember also that since 9/11 the possibility of longer lead times exists for any shipment, especially shipments that must make multiple international trips. So, it's quite reasonable to expect Microsoft to have wanted its first few million PIIIs to be in hand by the end of September. And since they weren't broken out separately, it seems quite reasonable to think that those couple of million sales were included with the other PIII sales. So, it looks like Intel shipped more CPUs last quarter, while AMD CPU shipments were flat. But, at the same time, it also looks like AMD gained another point or two of PC market share - and some of us think that's very important, even if you think it's irrelevant.

To: Windsock who wrote (145821)	10/21/2001 9:51:27 PM
From: Elmer	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 186894

But now a P III is not a processor because that would decrease AMD's market share. Pretty soon McMoron will tell us that an Intel processor in a Dell PC is not a processor because AMD does not have any Dell designs... and no IBM designs, and no Gateway designs. When I first read Jimbo's post I thought perhaps he had a point but you've changed my mind. There really is no difference between a Dell box and a Xbox in this sense, they have an x86 socket and Intel fills it. EP

To: Windsock who wrote (145821)	10/22/2001 9:47:20 PM
From: Jim McMannis	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 186894

RE:"But according to McMoron the P III is not a processor if it will end up in an xbox. So a P III is not a P III when McMoron says its not. Of course when it looked like the Athlon would get the xbox design win then this was the greatest news for AMD's superior processor according to McMoron. But now a P III is not a processor because that would decrease AMD's market share. Pretty soon McMoron will tell us that an Intel processor in a Dell PC is not a processor because AMD does not have any Dell designs... and no IBM designs, and no Gateway designs." You don't use your real name when you post, I do. I'm afraid you have me at a disadvantage. OTOH, that doesn't excuse rude behavior on your part. Show a little class... I would have been more than happy to share my opinion on the X-box chips being or not being included in in Intel PC market share tally but it seems you are happier to just be a wise guy. Jim