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: Sarmad Y. Hermiz who wrote (217413)	11/22/2006 9:39:45 AM
From: smooth2o	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 275872

re: So now AMD is losing share in server, game, retail, and possibly desk-top in general. They have some notebook share to gain, mainly because computer maker want them to be viable competition to Intel. But will that keep going, or plateau at subsistence level ? One thing that bothers me about notebooks is that almost every AMD-based Dell notebook (and the others, too) that you see have 15.4" or 17" screens with (only) XGA. I saw an article that mentioned Japan's love for larger screens and in particular SXGA, SXGA+ and on up to UXGA resolutions. As I said before, these low powered notebooks with XGA screens are OK for displaying the kitchen recipe for the turkey, but not much else. It will be interesting to see just how many of these are in demand... I think performance still works... Smooth

To: Sarmad Y. Hermiz who wrote (217413)	11/22/2006 11:42:26 AM
From: Plissken	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 275872

AMD actually increased server share, as did Intel, both at the expense of non-x86 architectures. Claiming that Intel took share from AMD would thus be a misrepresentation, especially since AMD massively increased revenue. That share is now mostly eaten up, which means there's no easy pickings left.

To: Sarmad Y. Hermiz who wrote (217413)	11/22/2006 12:44:11 PM
From: pgerassi	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 275872

Dear Sarmad: In that news article, AMD gained 80% in x86 server revenue in a x86 server market that grew 4.8%. Intel maintained share at 80.2%. Evidently they had two different bases. I have a feeling that they incorrectly included Itanium in the Intel x86 revenue share as the basis for that statement was Intel's CC and not the IDC report. Taking that Itanium server revenue out, Intel lost x86 server share sequentially. It is a problem that happens a lot with IPF. With two separate portions of Intel based server revenue, it is easy to see that while Intel maintained overall server share, it could still be losing x86 server share, but have Itanium based server gains offset them. Analysts seem to forget to take Itanium based server revenue out from total Intel based server revenue when talking about x86 server revenue share. I hope its just inadvertent and not deliberate. Pete