SI
SI
discoversearch

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: Sarmad Y. Hermiz who wrote (183663)3/5/2006 1:53:38 PM
From: smooth2o  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 186894
 
Is that too optimistic ?

Obstensibly, AMD has a better part and is winning MS in all segments. Mostly, AMD wins on price b/c they don't spend the monies in the areas in which Intel does (and AMD benefits with those efforts). Since manufacturing is similar between the two, there not that much advantage in costs except for generations of nm which is now only 1 year apart.

You can't keep spending a lot of money on advertising, non-processor R&D and other programs (VIIV, Pro) without being able to charge more. Some kind of equalization needs to happen if AMD keeps to the low cost plan, esp when fab 36 comes on line.

Intel understands this, they won't give up MS. Any change in Intel has to take a few years to happen and the changes needed depends on how AMD plays the game and how well these marketing programs (VIIV, Pro, etc) pan out. If they result in appreciable differentiation such that higher prices are justified, then the plan continues as before. If the game is on price alone and AMD gains share into the 20's and 30's or higher (as per Ruiz's statements), the game has to change.

I don't see AMD gaining more than about 25% through 2006. That alone would say that Intel will have good revenues and profit with a growing market. The problem is that Intel has HAD good revenues and profits and the share price has fallen dramatically for the last few years.

Smooth