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 : CYRIX / NSM -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: FJB who wrote (27431)	6/15/1998 10:43:00 AM
From: Pravin Kamdar	Respond to of 33344

Bob, re: My crazy opinion is that Intel could increase profits by conceding the low-end and being the world's high-end MPU supplier. I think the Mendocino, coupled with the i740 3D enhanced Whitney chipset, will be a block buster low end gaming solution. The only thing that will be able to compete is the MXi. But, Cyrix still has to pull that one off. If MXi lives up to performance projections, is manufacturable, and gains broad market acceptance, then Intel might start thinking about giving up that market -- in my opinion. Pravin.

To: FJB who wrote (27431)	6/15/1998 12:53:00 PM
From: Larry Loeb	Respond to of 33344

Bob, I do think there is a strong incentive for them to abandon the low-end of the MPU market similar to their abandoning DRAM in the mid-80's time frame. What probability would you assign to Intel conceding this market? Would publicly conceding this part of the market actually benefit Intel? My crazy opinion is that Intel could increase profits by conceding the low-end and being the world's high-end MPU supplier. They can't abandon the low-end. They need the volume to justify their large investment in fabs. This is also their competitive advantage. Larry Congratulations to the Bulls and their fans. I hope they come back next year (and Patrick and the Knicks can get their act together for one last war).

To: FJB who wrote (27431)	6/15/1998 1:05:00 PM
From: Paul Engel	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 33344

Bob - Re: "What probability would you assign to Intel conceding this market? " ZERO per cent. In 1985, Intel was losing money BIG TIME on DRAM memory. They had been technologically uncompetitive for many years (see note below) and Japan, Inc. was highly focused, highly financed and was eating Intel's - and every American Semi Company's - lunch. Today, things are way different in the "low end" of CPUs: 1. Intel still has the majority of the sub $1000 PC processor business. 2. Fact 1 is ignored by the media and analysts (and many SI posters) but do the math - AMD and NSM/Cyrix are barely selling 2 million CPUs/quarter combined. 3. Intel is the ONLY x86 supplier THAT MAKES A PROFIT IN THE SUB $1000 PC arena. 4. Intel's technology advances will permit future competitiveness in the sub $1000 area - 0.18 micron process development is nearing completion and 0.18 micron Pentium II devices are being designed - CopperMine. So, abandoning a profitable business to allow a competitor to make more money is a dumb business decision. Intel will stay in the market, make money in that market (at lower margins), and insure that NSM/Cyrix and AMD make little or no money - and have difficulty investing in future technology. Note on DRAMS - Intel had achieved the first functional CMOS 1 Meg DRAMs in 1985 - well ahead of the competition. That device could have been the first competitive DRAM Intel had since the 16k DRAM days in the late 1970s. However, Intel abandoned DRAMS and the CMOS DRAM process development team, based in Oregon, became the new CPU process development team, replacing and surpassing another group in Livermore, CA. Paul