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 (217854)	11/28/2006 11:29:06 PM
From: Sarmad Y. Hermiz	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 275872

>> He obviously is hoping AMD is cost and production constrained so that Intel isn't negatively impacted by AMD's move to 65-nm. Neither hoping, nor not-hoping. Hope has nothing to do with it. How about what is reasonable to expect ? So far, I'm expecting AMD's 65 nm parts to be mid range, and not raise AMD's processor gross margin. Not in Q4 '06, or Q1 '07. The clock speeds that are announced, where do AMD's 65 nm parts compare to Intel's in performance ? Like D9xx ? Or Core2 E6400 ? E6600 ? E6700 ?

To: eracer who wrote (217854)	11/29/2006 12:13:23 AM
From: THE WATSONYOUTH	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 275872

Perhaps the looming question for AMD is "how little is the K8 worth when Conroe and Merom make up 80% of the Intel desktop and notebook processor market. What do you (or anyone) think is the % of CMW sold in the 4th quarter? Also, your guess for Q1 and Q2 07? I'm guessing 27% for Q4 and 42% and perhaps 58% for Q1/Q2 07. Just guesses though and I could be convinced otherwise. What are/were Intel's stated goals? THE WATSONYOUTH

To: eracer who wrote (217854)	11/29/2006 12:57:52 AM
From: combjelly	Respond to of 275872

"I think you could have summed up your first three paragraphs by saying "I agree"" Yes. But for the others on the board I thought it important to detail the reasons why. There is a persistent believe amongst some that a smaller die is a means unto itself. It is only one factor amongst many. "He loves to talk about die sizes, production costs and production capacity." He isn't the only one. On either side of the fence. "If Conroe isn't worth much more than K8 then K8L isn't worth much more than K8 either." It depends on the market. Intel is walking the "one size fits all" path that AMD has been walking due to necessity. But it looks as if AMD is going a different route. In my opinion, notebooks, commercial desktops and consumer desktops versus servers, workstations and gamers is the new division. Intel is betting on the old notebook, desktop, server/workstation division still holds sway. For the latter market, K8L is worth it. For the former, probably not. But AMD is rumored to have a warmed over K8 for at least the notebook market. I think it has wider possibilities. "Do you have a link to the Q3 '06 ASPs for AMD and Intel notebooks?" No I don't. And I wish it were different. But if you go to the HP site and look at the consumer notebooks, you can get an idea. That site allows you to configure equivalent systems with either processor. Now granted, the chipsets differ and you need to study it to get the drives the same, but in general you an get a faster Turion or even a faster Turion X2 at the same price as the Core single core equivalent. Given that the video is likely to be superior, that speaks volumes.