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: Dan3 who wrote (148657)	11/17/2001 11:20:20 AM
From: Joseph Pareti	Respond to of 186894

some of the "gems" from the AMD exec. webcast: 1) Hector " I will elaborate on the profound and wide role that fab 30 represents to execute the AMD road map... Fab30 will be fully loaded with 5000 wafer/week in 2002 (Paul has already noted that they said 6000 not long ago :-) 2) " ... "Meanwhile it would be foolish not to leverage on the billions of dollars the industry has invested in the foundry" TRANSLATION -- aside from Fab30 (with Fab25 being converted to flash in 2002) AMD will rely on second source (of course "leveraging on the industry" sounds much nicer :-) 3) (Hector again) "we have plans to go in production with 90 nanometer and 300 mm in 2005" --- Now I clearly hear Paul saying that AMD might one day announce that Thoroughbred @ 130 nm delays are part of AMD 's plans to "align " this product line to 90 nm :-) 4) (Jerry) "I won't let Rob (Herb) off the hook for getting to 50% M/S mobile in the US retail channel" (I wonder what he smoked before saying that or whether he never heard of Tualatin)

To: Dan3 who wrote (148657)	11/17/2001 2:26:08 PM
From: Paul Engel	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 186894

Ban Ban The Monica Blow Hard Man - Re: "AMD is selling almost entirely through whitebox makers now, there are definitely fewer machines out there from the big OEMS (at least here in the US) - so why aren't their ASPs falling? They ARE FALLING - just look at TODAY's prices !! $252 Athlon XP 1900 $188 Athlon XP 1800 $141 Athlon XP 1700 $112 Athlon XP 1600 $110 Athlon XP 1500 $111 Athlon 1.4GHz 266 FSB And you are correct - AMD has LOST THE RETAIL sales channel - seems only the garage shops are using the AthWipers.

To: Dan3 who wrote (148657)	11/17/2001 3:25:21 PM
From: wanna_bmw	Respond to of 186894

Dan, Re: "Intel has been able to sell its processors for roughly twice the price AMD was charging for the past few years, with Intel's fastest chip always selling for around $1,000. Pricewatch would seem to indicate that Intel has been flooding the market recently, not that they are in shortage" Two comments: First, AMD has confirmed that they will again post a loss for the fourth quarter. Last quarter, they shipped 7.7 million units, and with an ASP of $60, that gave them $467 million in revenue (actual figure from balance sheet, not result from calc). If you are correct, and ASPs are on the rise, one would think that they can at least get back to the days when they had a $75 ASP. If they sell the same record breaking 7.7 million units at $75 ASP, they would be making $110 million more than they did last quarter, which would result in a non-loss. AMD predicts a loss, which should tell you either that they are selling a very small portion of Athlon XP processors (thus not raising ASPs as much), or they are selling less processors over all (thus not hitting record volumes). Therefore, I think that AMD is desperate for breaking even, or at least losing less, and therefore they are pricing their parts higher, but at the loss of market share. Second, Intel's lower prices are the result of their October price cuts, but in retrospect, it seems they have overshot their intentions. Demand became so large, that they ran into short supplies. After realizing this, they couldn't exactly raise prices, so you see the current price drops in place. However, quoting from the top of the list on Pricewatch, as I've mentioned, is a bad idea, since the first page of vendors are usually participants in the "grey market", which always tends to get CPUs at a discount. If you look at the second page of prices on pricewatch, you get a different story. $424 - Pentium 4 2.0GHz $279 - Pentium 4 1.9GHz $264 - Athlon XP 1900 1.6GHZ $228 - Pentium 4 1.8GHz $202 - Athlon XP 1800 1.53GHZ $186 - Pentium 4 1.7GHz $151 - Athlon XP 1700 1.47GHZ $173 - Pentium 4 1.6GHz $123 - Athlon XP 1600 1.40GHZ $159 - Pentium 4 1.5GHz $122 - Athlon XP 1500 1.33GHZ $118 - Pentium 4 1.4GHz $121 - Athlon 1.4GHz $104 - Athlon 1.33GHz If you compare it to Intel's and AMD's official price lists, you'll see that there is clearly not an oversupply issue (Intel is not flooding the market). AMD processors are selling at a small discount, though, but much less than is usual for them. 2 GHz w/ 256k cache (.18) $401 1.90 GHz w/ 256k cache (.18) $273 1.80 GHz w/ 256k cache (.18) $225 1.70 GHz w/ 256k cache (.18) $193 1.60 GHz w/ 256k cache (.18) $163 1.50 GHz w/ 256k cache (.18) $133 1.40 GHz w/ 256k cache (.18) $133 1900+ $269 1800+ $223 1700+ $190 1600+ $160 1500+ $130 Re: "Has enough of the buying public really figured out that P4 performance is (per MHZ) awful and not to be trusted? " Not at all. Almost every OEM or retail vendor I see has AMD's megahertz listed with the system. This should indicate to you that people are very much interested in the megahertz, and are not willing to just display AMD's model numbers by themselves. wbmw