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 : Advanced Micro Devices - Moderated (AMD) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Elmer who wrote (80922)	5/29/2002 3:53:36 AM
From: Jim McMannis	Respond to of 275872

RE:"AMD always comes back to ~$10. Book value is ~$10 AMD trades around $10-$20 Buy low and sell high OR buy low and sell calls. AMD is low now Jimbo..." I remember that chart you put up...what was it? buy at 10 and sell at 20? That's it? Sounds like Wade Cook warming up in the bull pen. RE:"Ask some of the investing geniuses here what you should do"... Why?all I need to know is buy at 10 and sell at 20... So when AMD goes below 10 I'm gonna buy. Why is this happening? siliconinvestor.com siliconinvestor.com

To: Elmer who wrote (80922)	5/29/2002 4:01:15 AM
From: Petz	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 275872

Elmer, AMD said they made 4.5-4.7M Athlons in Dresden using 3800 wafers per week. But undoubtedly some of those 3800 wafers were dedicated to producing a version of TBred on the 0.13u process that will never see the light of day. Whether the problem was getting 512K cache to work or some botched "enhancements" to the Palomino core, we may never know, but there were earlier leaks that TBred had two or three improvements over the Palomino, but now that scuttlebutt has disappeared. So, assuming 800 wafers/week were wasted on nonfunctional TBreds, that leaves 4.5-4.7M Palominos / 3000*13=39K wafers = 115 to 121 good die/wafer. That is 57% to 61% yield based on 200 potential die/wafer. (I used 16% for edge losses.) Intel's yields are certainly less than 70%. Anyone can see that their fab square footage, number of fabs, capital spending per year and depreciation per year are ALL more than 5X as large as AMD. Don't blame the discrepancy on "other" products. CPU revenues at AMD are actually a smaller percentage of it's total revenues than they are at Intel. Austin is going to near zero in the current quarter, yet AMD still expects to ship no less than 7.2M CPU's. AMD will essentially have only one CPU fab for Q2, but will be supplying 25% of Intel's market share using that one fab. Pretty impressive. Petz