Re: Intel did not produce many 90nm CPUs in Q3...
We are talking shipments/sales, not production. Intel certainly shipped a lot of 90-nm CPUs in Q3. Intel announced a 65-nm shipment crossover in Q3, so at some point in Q3 Intel was still shipping more 90-nm CPUs than 65-nm CPUs.
intel.com 
If you look at Intel's Q4 roadmap for desktop shipments you'll see that even in Q4 90-nm Celerons, 90-nm Pentium 5xx, 90-nm Pentium 6x0, and 90-nm Pentium D 8xx still make up almost half of Intel's Q4 shipments. Obviously 90-nm CPUs made up an even higher percentage of desktop shipments in Q3.
hkepc.com
I gave Intel the doubt with 42 million. Run it with 40.5 million and they did higher ASP.
So in other words you are claiming AMD has 28.3% of x86 market share (16/(16+40.5)). Funny how AMD used Mercury's 23.3% in their slides instead.
You show no number references for your units...
-I showed a source for AMD's ASPs, you didn't.
-I showed a source for Intel's ASPs, you didn't.
-I showed a source for AMD's and Intel's market share numbers, you are ignoring them.
-You said Intel claimed to sell over 40 million CPUs last quarter, but that appears to be in reference to cumulative 65-nm production, not Q3 CPUs sold.
-You provided no details on Intel white box volumes or ASPs, yet you are claiming they have a major effect on Intel's reported ASPs while ignoring what affect they would have on AMD's reported ASPs.
Perhaps you are counting the untold millions going into Intel inventory for later writeoff. Make a note. They don't count in sales or ASPs.
Mercury wasn't counting them so neither was I since I was using their numbers.
Perhaps you really believe AMD is DOOMED. After all, if Intel's ASPs are $64/88% higher than AMD's even though a vast majority of Intel's sales were either Netburst, 90-nm, and/or 32-bit then just imagine how much AMD will suffer as Core 2 related shipments climb next year. |
