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 (199121)	5/28/2006 1:34:40 PM
From: Jim McMannis	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 275872

RE:"Well, it is clearly not a dud, unless a dud thrashes AMD's entire desktop lineup, with a 2.13GHz Conroe being the equal of the new X2 5000+ across a wide variety of benchmarks" This is with Intel selected benchmarks (you wanna sample you use our benchmarks) and using special Intel made compilers again?

To: dougSF30 who wrote (199121)	5/28/2006 1:37:00 PM
From: Jim McMannis	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 275872

So, when did you sell all your AMD and load up on Intel? Why isn't Intel responding? Surely Intel has provided Analysts with these new Benchmarks?

To: dougSF30 who wrote (199121)	5/28/2006 1:51:36 PM
From: gzubeck	Respond to of 275872

Doug, this is enough of this garbage...Intel is making the conroe probably at significant losses only to drag AMD into the mudpit along with itself...I'm thinking the large computer manufacturers can see where this is going with Intel and don't want to be dragged down into the muck with them...This whole affair is nothing more than smear campaign which inevitably will smear Intel in the end but they can't see it...

To: dougSF30 who wrote (199121)	5/28/2006 2:09:59 PM
From: TechieGuy-alt	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 275872

The thinking that Intel has better performing chips (even 3 speed grades) means that AMD is toast as was in traditional times is thinking of traditional times. There are the following issues with this line of reason: 1. The Mhz wars are dead- no more pushing the clock frequency (at least by the leader) due to Watt/Performance metrics that everyone is pushing. This means that any waterfall of speed grades cannot be rapidly pushed down towards the low end by introing higher and higher clocks at the high end- witness Core stuck at 1 speed grade above intro 5 months into launch! 2. 80+% of the market is at "main stream" performance products. Which means that Intel's ASP's are dictated by what the market will support. Just having higher performing products will not mean that the market will suddenly start paying (say) > $1K for Intel computers whereas currently (say) the ASP for same desktops are ~$850. 3. AMD now has the capacity to supply in quantity in all 3 segmens of the market. The back of the monopoly is broken. It's just going to be a matter of time before it's gone completely. There is no way the OEM's are going to allow Intel to dominate once again- especially with a techanically capably AMD. Remember the "AMD does not have a hope and a prayer" to establish their own socket standard? (along with "Roadkill" etc.) When was the last time you heard that? AMD has arrived and the market share #'s will continue to adjust to reflect that reality. If you think that Intel's temporary 8-12 month (purpoted) lead justifies a 80/20 reveune split in this market as an equilibrium- you really need to re-examine the basis of your hypothesis again. Sometimes one needs to step back from the trees (the current leaked benchmarks) and look at the forest (this market is headed towards a more even revenue split- and there is nothing that Intel can do to stop it over the next 3-5 years). TG