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: eracer who wrote (195088)	4/25/2006 9:17:55 PM
From: combjelly	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 275872

"Why does a 2GHz Athlon 64 X2 3800+ cost double that of its 2GHz Athlon 64 3200+ single core counterpart?" Because it is almost twice the size?

To: eracer who wrote (195088)	4/25/2006 9:29:37 PM
From: Joe NYC	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 275872

eracer, If anything you are "proving" is AMD having the yield problems. Why does a 2GHz Athlon 64 X2 3800+ cost double that of its 2GHz Athlon 64 3200+ single core counterpart? Is it horrible yields for Athlon 64 X2, or is it just priced to market conditions? IMO, in this instance, it is the price where supply can meet the demand. At lower price, AMD may not have been able to meet the demand. Joe

To: eracer who wrote (195088)	4/26/2006 12:33:32 AM
From: Petz	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 275872

re: Perhaps the price is so high because there is zero competition from AMD in dual core notebook processors? The market for dual core notebook processors is the same as the market for single core notebook processors. No one buys a notebook saying, "I need a dual-core CPU" or "I don't want a dual-core CPU." No, there is the under $800 market, the under $1200 market and the expensive market. So the facts are these -- AMD took market share away from Intel in a quarter where Intel had the superior product, the dual-core Yonah. And the reason is that Intel sold them at too high a price. Either Otellini is incredibly stupid, or they could sell all they could make at the prices they charged. I believe the second is the most likely. My point is that Intel had the superior product for 5 months from their theoretical launch date and suffered from declining market share and lower ASP's anyway. (I am assuming that the trend will continue until the DC Turion is launched.) If they could have made enough Core Duo's, it would have rescued their notebook chip ASPs and their market share, but they couldn't. Now it is likely that Intel will have a somewhat superior desktop part for, I would guess, five months again. If they haven't solved their production problems, the result will be the same as January to May for notebook parts. Meanwhile, AMD will have the superior notebook part for five months starting in June. Can you think of one reason a 32-bit Yonah would be preferred over a 64-bit DC Turion? Petz