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: kpf who wrote (219897)	12/10/2006 10:47:23 AM
From: economaniack	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 275872

kpf, if AMD was paying ten digits to develop a process node every two years, I would agree that it was a significant scale economy for Intel to amortize that amount over its larger output. While Intel probably spends that and more on process development in order to sustain their lead, I don't think AMD process development costs are anything like that. Remember, they split process development with IBM and others, and are content to be a trailing adopter behind several other players. Total R+D for AMD is what about $700 million per year? Surely most of that is product specific, which suggests that process development costs are closer to $250-300 million. Since their total costs are nearly $5 billion (for processor related activies) that puts process development on the order of 5% of average unit costs. Since Intel spends at least twice as much on process development, and amortizes it over 2-3 times the output, the difference in per processor average cost resulting from Intel's scale advantage is something less than 1%. That is not what is driving market share in this industry. e ps I studied IO with Panzar, Brautigam, Rogerson, Porter, Williamson, and Bagwell at Northwestern. Its been awhile, but I'm pretty sure I'm not fouling any academic nests here.