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: wanna_bmw who wrote (162872)	3/25/2002 3:23:28 AM
From: Dan3	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 186894

Re: the company to ship about 4 million additional units in the fourth quarter than it did in the third quarter, or approximately 34 million units overall, Intel said." Whether those unit shipment figures turn out to be accurate probably won't be verifiable until a few more quarters have passed, McCarron added. That's from an interview with Dean McCarron of Mercury Research, among others. If the shipment figure was from "an [un-named] Intel spokesment", why will it be several quarters before the numbers are verifiable? It's an interesting article, and those numbers add up if AMD dropped below 20% in Q4. But some of the wording is pretty strange.

To: wanna_bmw who wrote (162872)	3/25/2002 3:42:39 AM
From: AK2004	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 186894

bmw I wonder how is that dataquest went from 22% to less than 20% hmmmm....... of course, amd quoted the dataquest for windows based systems, not exactly the same numbers........

To: wanna_bmw who wrote (162872)	3/25/2002 11:13:19 AM
From: dale_laroy	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 186894

>"Intel Corp.'s aggressive ramp of its P4 processor and some cut-rate prices on its low-end Celeron processor actually allowed the company to ship about 4 million additional units in the fourth quarter than it did in the third quarter, or approximately 34 million units overall, Intel said."< To a certain extent, Jerry may have been unfair implying that Intel was selling Celeron processors a fire sale prices to gain market share overseas. The new 130nm Celeron is smaller than the 180nm Duron, and potentially lower cost to produce. However, the Celeron's that Intel was selling overseas at cut-rate prices were probably the older 180nm Celerons, which are probably more expensive to produce than the newer 130nm Celerons. By the end of this year, it could be that it will be less expensive for AMD to produce Thoroughbred than for Intel to produce the 130nm P-III Celeron. If AMD adopts Intel's tactics for the fourth quarter of this year, they may be the ones having a fire sale on older, more expensive to produce Duron processors out of Fab25. One aspect of this will be that AMD will have a harder time renaming their Thoroughbred processor a Duron, than Intel had renaming their 130nm P-III a Celeron. I would look for the shift in naming to occur with ThoroughbredS being called a Duron, as Clawhammer (Athlon 64?) takes over the Athlon name in the manner that P4 took over the Pentium name for Intel. With the P4 Celeron being a 180nm processor, if AMD can maintain the pressure on Intel to keep the P-III Celeron alive at the low end through undercutting P4 Celeron with Durons out of Fab25, they could be in an excellent position to grab this market that accounts for all of Intel's H2 growth, with the introduction of a ThoroughbredS Duron.