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: dougSF30 who wrote (197401)	5/17/2006 9:03:44 PM
From: gzubeck	Respond to of 275872

Doug, every day you sound more and more like an Intel employee...

To: dougSF30 who wrote (197401)	5/17/2006 9:15:18 PM
From: Petz	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 275872

I'll answer the last 2 of your questions now, others later: Then why is AMD not selling at capacity? Why was AMD so cautious with Q2 guidance? AMD was selling at capacity (drop in inventories) for at least two consecutive quarters, if not more. Q2 caution Because Q2 is Q2. Flat to slightly down is OPTIMISTIC for Q2. Petz

To: dougSF30 who wrote (197401)	5/17/2006 9:21:49 PM
From: AK2004	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 275872

re: Why was AMD so cautious with Q2 guidance? if Q2 guidance is your criteria then you should get as far from Intel as possible :-)) -AK

To: dougSF30 who wrote (197401)	5/17/2006 9:31:17 PM
From: firthoffourth	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 275872

Then why is AMD not selling at capacity? Why was AMD so cautious with Q2 guidance? First of all, Q2 is the weakest of the four and AMD is targeting a revenue number in line with their last reported 4th Q, so I'm not sure I consider that to be weak. Another thing to consider is perhaps they are using capacity from fab36 to ramp 65nm parts for a Q4 launch - I wouldn't be so quick to disregard the article Theo Valich wrote about significantly higher clocks in the back half of 2006 - apparently he knows a thing or two. Regarding 65 watt Woodrest, that is certainly going to be a competitive part, keep in mind that the QC K8L will consume the same power as existing DC K8. QC Woodcrest will not; IIRC that part is not a true QC, but 2 DC chips glued together. If AMD can deliver K8L in Q1 the situation at Intel will not be getting better anytime soon. Both companies will have good cores, but AMD will have a vastly superior platform. Intel may enjoy an advantage on the mobile front (though K8L core and 65 nm will likely narrow the lead considerably), but AMD will own the server market. Given the choice, I would rather own the server market. Intel will still be saddled with a very bloated cost structure.