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: BUGGI-WO who wrote (195170)	4/26/2006 3:28:34 PM
From: Joe NYC	Respond to of 275872

Buggi, OT / Oblivion I'm quite surprised how well this works at my home desktop unit. Only 3G Opteron (SC) and 1 ATI X800XL. Your PC is better than mine. Why no Q1 contribution? I think it was very small, but they shipped for Rev. at the end of Q1 ... And to F on FAB36 - I haven't very specific facts here, but I'm not assuming this. My thinking is that the Fab 36 masks are Rev F only, that Rev F was scheduled for much earlier (therefore there would have been more significant contribution to Q1) but Rev F is delayed because of re-spins. I think Q1 contribution was only some token rev F notebook chips, nothing material. Joe

To: BUGGI-WO who wrote (195170)	4/26/2006 5:54:21 PM
From: TGPTNDR	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 275872

Buggi, Re: Why no Q1 contribution? I think it was very small, but they shipped for Rev. at the end of Q1 .. You got to read the transcript. In Dresden, our Fab 36 team began first revenue shipments in March. epscontest.com If Fab 36 had begun revenue shipments in Q1 they'd have said so. Revenue shipments started in that last week of March after Q1 ended. Thus no Depreciation on equipment used in those shipments? Question - Adam Parker: Really? Okay. I’m trying to understand the depreciation schedule a little bit. I know somebody asked about it, but a year ago your depreciation was higher in AMD excluding memory than it is now despite the Fab 36 ramp. Maybe I don’t understand what happened a year ago. Was there something different about how you were allocating depreciation to memory versus processors a year ago? Or am I wrong in thinking that the whole new fab should have brought about more depreciation now a year later? Answer - Robert Rivet: You can kind of think of it, you’ve got two lines going in different directions. The Fab 30, which has been our only asset in the microprocessor space, is starting to roll off fairly significantly on the depreciation schedule and Fab 36 is just coming on. And like I said, we put on the first full toolset in the January timeframe. We will continue to add additional tools to expand that capacity every day, week, quarter here on out. You can’t crossover between the two. epscontest.com More there if you RTFCC. Especially WRT we were not capacity constrained I think one should read the words carefully. -tgp