SI
SI
discoversearch

 Technology Stocks | Advanced Micro vs Intel (AMD / INTC)


Previous 10 | Next 10 
To: Elmer Phud who wrote (2529)1/8/2008 9:16:59 PM
From: inex
   of 2581
 
I hope that was speculative money you used.

Thanks, Ephud... It was... One would have to be crazy to invest in AMD with anything BUT speculative money.. :)

Scott

Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read

To: TimF who wrote (2530)1/8/2008 9:42:30 PM
From: inex
   of 2581
 
Tim,

but AMD does have higher costs and debt than in the past.

It would be interesting to do an analysis of AMD's debt/revenue ratio historically to determine if AMD's higher debt is simply more a function of AMD being a bigger company or whether in relative terms, they have high debt... When I get a little time, I'll report back on this...

Also, Tim, its odd that very few factor in the potential distraction that integrating ATI into the company might have been to overall execution... It would be naive to believe that a company the size of AMD could digest a company the size of ATI without some indigestion. I'm not going to claim that this severely effected execution, but, wouldn't it make sense that some AMD engineers got pulled from some projects in order to work on some Fusion and other GPU/CPU projects???

Well, I've got more, but, that's about all the spouting I'm going to do on the subject...

Bottom line is that I see AMD in the short term filling the role that they filled pre Opteron, and, in the long term, having spurts of successes that will cause the stock to shoot up periodically much like it has historically...


Scott

Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read | Read Replies (1)

To: inex who wrote (2532)1/8/2008 10:36:40 PM
From: combjelly
   of 2581
 
"It would be naive to believe that a company the size of AMD could digest a company the size of ATI without some indigestion."

True. But ATI seems to have been at a particularly weak point when AMD got them. Now, if the Inq's stories about R700 are true, then that might be the reason. And, I have to say, the recent stories about the graphics capabilities of Puma seem to bear it out.

Bottom line, if the Puma and R700 work out like The Inq's press is painting it, then AMD could be in a very good position. If not, well, then they will be the new Commodore.

Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read | Read Replies (1)


From: Elmer Phud1/9/2008 12:01:14 PM
   of 2581
 
Is AMD admitting to another slip in their 45nm process?

He also said that AMD is on schedule to come out with its 45-nanometer manufacturing process in 2009 as well.

AMD is on record as claiming they will have 45nm production in Q2'08 and shipping in Q3'08. I can't imagine anyone actually believing them but nevertheless, '09 production is hardly "on schedule".

Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read

From: Elmer Phud1/9/2008 12:06:07 PM
   of 2581
 
Another slip for Barfelona?

Translation:

It was known already that the given rhythm versions with 2.4 and 2.6 GHz of Phenom were pushed back in the second quarter. We could confirm yesterday that the 9650 and 9550, version "débugguées" of first Phenom (see our article) are also pushed back in the second quarter. AMD indeed received its first chips using the stepping B3 (early silicon), the bug is still not corrected. A new "spin" is thus necessary, which can push back Phenom in May.


investorshub.advfn.com

And still the faithful believe...

Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read

To: combjelly who wrote (2533)1/9/2008 4:33:27 PM
From: inex
   of 2581
 
CJ,

It seems as though the same type of irrational selling that occurred in 2002 is also occurring now. Many people following this stock fail to realize that, while it would be nice to have processors that perform on par with Intel's offerings, as the FAB 38 conversion continues and AMD's ability to increase market share grows, AMD has an opportunity to pump out chips and drive incremental revenue by capturing chipset and graphics sales. Prior to this, AMD had to cover all expenses with CPU sales. They were constantly trying to tip the balance between market share and profitability. Now, AMD can use its CPU sales to broaden the market for its chipset and graphics chip sales. In the past, trying to capture market share from Intel with a price war usually hurt AMD's bottom line more than Intel's. Now, with the benefit of chipset and graphics chip revenue virtually tied to each CPU sale, AMD has the ability to soften the effects of a price war. Going from 20% marketshare to 33% marketshare increases AMD's marketshare for chipsets by over 60%. It's a little more difficult to determine how this would effect discrete graphics, but, it certainly would effect sales in a positive way. The nicest part about all of this is that none of this market includes Intel as a competitor. Sure, one can say that NVidia is a worthy competitor, but, NVidia is no Intel.

All of this breaks down to the following... If AMD sells a CPU for $50 to try to capture market share from Intel, then, they sell a chipset for $35 and possibly a descrete graphics card for $100, the net profit from the sale of all three is more than the net profit from only selling a CPU for $100. This is why the ATI investment was a good one. It finally allows AMD to go after marketshare without giving up on the notion of profitability...

Scott

Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read | Read Replies (2)


To: inex who wrote (2536)1/9/2008 6:25:55 PM
From: Elmer Phud
   of 2581
 
Scott - I disagree with your analysis.

AMD only has 65nm capacity. They aren't going to waste that on chipset silicon. The chipsets and graphics come from foundries which have to make their profit too. I don't see much of a market for highend graphics in lowend systems, which is the niche AMD is forcing themselves into. Intel's chipsets and graphics are done in house on older depreciated process technology. Intel brought that inhouse because foundries are problematical, to put it nicely.

As for market share, AMD does not have a compelling product in any market segment with significant profit potential. All they can do at this point is try to under price Intel in the low to midlevel market, a strategy which has had them losing many 100s of millions each quarter and there is no end in sight. Even if AMD could manufacture their quad cores, they underperform even Intel's 65nm products and if the recent rumors of the barcelona B3 step still having the TLB bug are true then no one knows when it may be fixed. Even if fixed it is still a huge very expensive die on a poor yielding process. Speaking of process, 45nm is now apparently slipping to 2009. If that's not enough, without HiK-metal gate they will fall further and further behind on both performance and power consumption. The much heralded "asset lite" strategy fails to mention that AMD is restricted in the x86 volume they can contract out. That means AMD has to maintain their own fabs and develop their own process with help from IBM. Their loan guarantees for the German fabs have full employment clauses as well. That's enormously expensive but no alternative is legally available. Bottom line is that without a compelling product portfolio and a competitive process/manufacturing infrastructure, there is little to support the view that AMD will be gaining market share any time soon and those loan payments have to be made from profits that just aren't there. It would be to your benefit to look at the whole picture.

Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read | Read Replies (1)

To: inex who wrote (2536)1/9/2008 6:31:59 PM
From: Jim McMannis
   of 2581
 
"It seems as though the same type of irrational selling that occurred in 2002"

That's what happens when a stock is heavily owned institutionally.

Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read

To: Elmer Phud who wrote (2537)1/9/2008 8:17:25 PM
From: inex
   of 2581
 
Ephud,

The chipsets and graphics come from foundries which have to make their profit too. I don't see much of a market for highend graphics in lowend systems,

ATI made a profit on chipsets prior to AMD's buyout... Are you insinuating that this is no longer the case?

As for market share, AMD does not have a compelling product in any market segment with significant profit potential.

I'm not sure about this... I think that many would choose an AMD processor coupled with an ATI chipset and integrated graphics over Intel's Core II with Intel's weak integrated graphics...

However, I probably neglected to mention that one of the <reasons that I picked up more stock is that I agree with you that AMD is completely misfiring on multiple fronts which has, IMHO, provided a buying opportunity. I do not expect AMD to become competitive on the high end anytime soon, but, fortunately, the notebook market doesn't require highend processors. I expect that in April/May, AMD WILL have a competitive (or at least sellable) alternative for the notebook market which is becoming increasingly more important, AND, is the one segment in which AMD has a virtual lock on chipsets in any AMD based systems.

All they can do at this point is try to under price Intel in the low to midlevel market,

And I'm under the impression that this segment accounts for the majority of the unit shipments... So, you agree that AMD is in the game in this segment... Good. Me too... :)

there is little to support the view that AMD will be gaining market share any time soon

I believe that AMD will sell whatever they produce and that they will produce whatever they can. I think the only limiting factor on market share is AMD's ability to produce more chips, which, should continue to improve as FAB 38 continues to ramp up 65nm 300mm product. They will sell at whatever price point the market will bear, which, will be lower if AMD continues to stumble, but, IMHO, I anticipate that by April/May, we should have a better idea what will unfold in Q3 and Q4...

With my "speculative money" I have placed a bet that they will correct some of the problems they have been having. If they weren't having problems, then, I would never have been able to pickup stock under $7/share...

Scott

Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read | Read Replies (1)


To: inex who wrote (2539)1/9/2008 9:37:41 PM
From: Elmer Phud
   of 2581
 
And I'm under the impression that this segment accounts for the majority of the unit shipments... So, you agree that AMD is in the game in this segment... Good. Me too... :)

Sure, AMD can continue the price war and they can continue to lose 100s and 100s of millions each quarter. In fact I expect them to. That's the problem. They can't make money with an underperforming higher cost product in the lowend. There's nothing on the horizon to change that.

Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read | Read Replies (1)
Previous 10 | Next 10 

Copyright © 1995-2014 Knight Sac Media. All rights reserved.Stock quotes are delayed at least 15 minutes - See Terms of Use.