backtop

Print E-mail del.icio.us 47 comment(s) - last by Samus.. on Mar 7 at 12:07 PM

AMD CEO Hector Ruiz
AMD will not meet it previous revenue guidance of $1.6 to $1.7 billion USD

AMD's shares were down today on news that it would miss its previous revenue guidance of $1.6 to $1.7 billion USD for Q1 2007. Despite admitting the shortfall, AMD did not disclose exactly how much it expects to come up short for the quarter.

“If things are not going as planned, companies are obligated to adjust their guidance as they see fit. This way, investors are not blindsided after the fact,” said Nicholas Aberle, Senior Vice President of Equity Research, Caris Company.

AMD CEO Hector Ruiz tried explaining today at the Morgan Stanley Technology Conference why things went sour for AMD in Q1.  "In a very short period of time, we went from being four years ago a significant player whose vast majority of products went to the channel distribution and not the OEM channel. In a very short period of time that has flipped to the point now where a vast majority of our products go to OEMs and less to distribution," said Ruiz. "That sort of transition frankly occurred in our view probably faster than we had planned."

Ruiz went on to explain that AMD expected for manufacturers to use a larger share of processors than the channel towards the end of 2006/beginning of 2007 and was prepared to serve them. In reality, that didn't happen and OEM were sitting on unused processors while the channel was asking for more.

"We made a strategic risk on how we shifted our capacity to serve our customers and unfortunately some of our customers were not able to meet those very aggressive growth areas that they had so when we shifted that, we were not able to recover as fast this quarter as we would have liked," Ruiz continued. “That issue should be quite alleviated this year because we have a lot more capability this year delivering products and should be able to serve both the fast-growing OEM portion of our business and also continue to serve the channel as we always have before.”

AMD has seen an increase in processor marketshare over the past few years at the expense of "significant lower" average selling prices (ASPs) – especially in Q4 2006. “ASP erosion is very intense right now, and number two, AMD is losing share.  Add that up and you have a pretty bleak market outlook,” said Aberle. The company did, however, see its marketshare rise from roughly 15% in 2004 to 25% by the end of 2006.

Despite the road bump that that the company has experienced in Q1, AMD is confident that the rest of the year will go more smoothly. The company just recently released its 690G and 690V integrated motherboard chipset and is set to launch its native quad-core Barcelona processors in the second half of this year.

Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled
One big mistake.....
By kilkennycat on 3/5/2007 9:50:07 PM , Rating: 1
...the marriage made in hell... the ATi "merge".

Hector should have concentrated on his CPU knitting. Any such acquisition adventures should have been postponed until AMD had a complete refresh of their CPU design-base, with the production technology and the capacity to give Intel Core2 family (and the upcoming Penryn) serious competition. Borrowing an extra $2billion to pay an inflated price ($20 per share, as opposed to the $16 market value) for a company that already had chronic product-execution problems was not a wise move. The complete R600-family of graphics cards will now be at least 4 months late (from the projections before AMD acquired ATi). And the new ATi motherboard chipset is limping into production. These delays and the extra development expenditures in fixing whatever problems are causing the delays must certainly be putting a significant dent in the joint bottom-line.

The fallout from the ATi acquisition is continuing, with the AMD stock-price continuing to tumble at a rate faster than the current market-slide. I would not be the slighest bit surprised if a take-over bid is made for AMD and the "ATi-division" is put up for sale by the new owners...




RE: One big mistake.....
By Viditor on 3/5/2007 10:04:47 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Any such acquisition adventures should have been postponed until AMD had a complete refresh of their CPU design-base, with the production technology and the capacity to give Intel Core2 family (and the upcoming Penryn) serious competition


Sigh...I can see that you just don't get the industry here.
Think of ATI as AMD's largest R&D expenditure and that might help.
It takes ~5 years to bring a CPU to market, and ATI is a core element of AMD's next CPU architecture change (Fusion).

Nor is ATI the problem with AMD at the moment either...the price war is the problem. AMD is issuing a bond to raise a Billion or so soon, so the cash shouldn't be any problem.


RE: One big mistake.....
By kilkennycat on 3/6/2007 1:05:19 AM , Rating: 1
... and you are electing to be one of the bond-holders ?

I think that I understand both the industry and finance very well indeed. It was very obvious that the AMD bid for ATi was a huge strategic mistake.. especially with regard to its timing. BTW, I made a large chunk of loose change on the overbid by AMD for ATi and made another chunk of loose change on selling AMD stock short after the merge ... :-)


RE: One big mistake.....
By Viditor on 3/6/2007 2:25:12 AM , Rating: 3
quote:
BTW, I made a large chunk of loose change on the overbid by AMD for ATi and made another chunk of loose change on selling AMD stock short after the merge


Congratulations...and I have made a solid 7 figures on knowing when to buy and sell AMD and Intel. BTW, this will probably be the best year ever to buy AMD...but I'd wait for another few months (just prior to Barcelona's reviews) if you want rock-bottom...

quote:
It was very obvious that the AMD bid for ATi was a huge strategic mistake.. especially with regard to its timing

Sorry, but I know of noone in investing or in the semiconductor industry who would agree with you there.


RE: One big mistake.....
By Lakku on 3/6/2007 3:54:25 AM , Rating: 2
We don't know if it's a huge mistake or not, and if noone, and I mean noone, is agreeing with that, then perhaps that explains the recent slide in the overall stock market. You may be a good investor, and it would seem so by what you say.

However, I think you can see the dilemna here. AMD paid a sizable chunk for ATi, most of the funds borrowed. They have a HUGE disadvantage when it comes to manufacturing, both in die process and in total output capacity. Intel is building four to five fabs that I know of. If not building, then upgrading them to smaller die processes and 300mm wafers. Intel is set to increase output by a sizable chunk soon. AMD is not building as many fabs and they don't have as good of fabs (in terms of output capability) to begin with. This means they will lose ground to Intel in output capacity, not gain. This is important because AMD may not be able to meet demand even if it arises.

With that said, AMD has been put to a neutral position by some invesors instead of a buy, so I would think SOME people disagree with you. AMD seems to need cash flow, something that a 1 billion plus buyout does not bring to you. Therefore, I believe AMD made a mistake in buying ATi right now, unless of course they planned on being in a position to be bought out and wanted to be more attractive to perspective investor firms for such a buyout. AMD stock is low and a hostile takeover is more then possible, making them a risky prospect at best and at worst, thus a neutral position on it. Don't sell, don't buy.


RE: One big mistake.....
By Viditor on 3/6/2007 8:42:52 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
AMD paid a sizable chunk for ATi, most of the funds borrowed.

True, but you will have to trust me when I say that this really doesn't weaken their position. If you look at the history of all the companies where this has happened, you will see that more often than not it actually strengthens the purchasing company (though in the short term there is ALWAYS a cash squeeze).
quote:
They have a HUGE disadvantage when it comes to manufacturing, both in die process and in total output capacity

Not as much as you think...
1. AMD's 45nm process is 6 months behind Intel's.
2. AMD has 3 Fabs now (36, 30 which is becoming 38, and Chartered), with another (New York) on the way.
3. Intel will be starting with 2 Fabs on 45nm and 2 more coming on-line soon after. But the majority of Intel's Fabs are not capable of manufacturing CPUs at all...

quote:
AMD is not building as many fabs and they don't have as good of fabs (in terms of output capability) to begin with

Only one of Intel's 45nm Fabs has equal output capacity to AMD's Fabs (D1D)...AMD's Fabs are second to none (though Intel does have more of them).
quote:
AMD seems to need cash flow, something that a 1 billion plus buyout does not bring to you

I think you misunderstood...it's not a buyout at all, it's a second float of some of their shares.


RE: One big mistake.....
By vignyan on 3/6/07, Rating: -1
RE: One big mistake.....
By Viditor on 3/6/2007 8:36:36 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Well dude.. you seem to be an AMD fanboy

Disclosure: I own shares in both Intel and AMD, but I have significantly more shares in AMD. That said, I wouldn't own the shares if I didn't believe in the company...

quote:
Intel is by far almost 15x greater production capacity than AMD

Please list for me the Fabs that Intel have that you think are capable of even 3x greater production in CPUs than AMD (let alone 15x).

quote:
And AMD is not just 6 months behind intel in 45nm... Intel has demoed a working next gen processor with over 4 operating systems working perfectly fine... and AMD released a SRAM test vehicle that too in words

1. Intel 45nm is scheduled for Dec/Jan, and AMD is scheduled for June/July...though it's quite possible for changes to occur, that is true for both companies.
2. Intel's 45nm SRAM test vehicle was shown in Jan 06, and AMD's SRAM test vehicle was shown in April 06.

quote:
If i remember correctly... the Barcelona core was due release in 2006

Nope...Barcelona was never scheduled for 2006, it has been scheduled for mid 07 since it's inception. I think you are thinking of the HKEPC rumours that Brisbane was to be a K10 processer (which it never was).
quote:
and Fusion due in 2007

Again, no. That was also a misreporting and rumour mistake.


RE: One big mistake.....
By Calin on 3/7/2007 2:28:11 AM , Rating: 2
Intel having 15x production capabilities (even putting into account chipset production at 1:1 rate with processors) mean AMD having an eigth of the market - which is false. I am sure Intel and AMD are selling all the processors they can make, so the production rate would be 4:1 to 5:1 in Intel's favor.


RE: One big mistake.....
By defter on 3/6/2007 5:44:32 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
Sorry, but I know of noone in investing or in the semiconductor industry who would agree with you there.


You don't seem to know many investors then...

They are several very clear reasons why AMD ATI deal was a big, big mistake. For example:

- ATI had trouble competing with NVidia in the GPU market. ATI lost a lot of discrete notebook market share in Q3 and Q4 (notebook market was their stronghold in the past). Numerous R600 delays have also shown that ATI is also slipping in the high end desktop market.

- Just 1.5 months after AMD and ATI announced the deal (and AMD promised to pay >$20/share), ATI posted a HUGE revenue warning: http://ir.ati.com/phoenix.zhtml?c=105421&p=irol-ne... , they were expecting $520M of revenues for fiscal Q4 instead of $620-$660M promised before. All this means that ATI stock was hugely overvalued at the time of deal, and had AMD waited a few months, they would have gotten ATI at $10/share.

- AMD will be in very difficult situation in the next few years, because of very competitive Intel's roadmap. Thus, AMD really needs all extra money they can get for building new FABs and investing in the process equipment. Spending $5B for ATI was a HUGE expense for AMD.


RE: One big mistake.....
By Viditor on 3/6/2007 9:01:35 AM , Rating: 3
quote:
You don't seem to know many investors then...

LOL...
quote:
ATI had trouble competing with NVidia in the GPU market. ATI lost a lot of discrete notebook market share in Q3 and Q4 (notebook market was their stronghold in the past). Numerous R600 delays have also shown that ATI is also slipping in the high end desktop market


And this makes absolutely no difference to AMD's acquisition. If they were just investing in the company, I would agree...but that's not why they bought them.

quote:
AMD will be in very difficult situation in the next few years, because of very competitive Intel's roadmap. Thus, AMD really needs all extra money they can get for building new FABs and investing in the process equipment. Spending $5B for ATI was a HUGE expense for AMD


They bought ATI because it ALLOWS them to compete, not because they suddenly wanted to start selling video cards.
1. Fusion (Intel has nothing like it)
2. Chipsets (Intel had them, now AMD has their own division)
3. Co-processers (Torrenza)...something else Intel doesn't have. AMD's new bare metal GPUs are expected to tie directly into the cHT links and will allow them to cheaply and easily take computing up several orders of magnitude in a single leap.

For the long run, $5 Billion was a dirt cheap bargain!


RE: One big mistake.....
By Calin on 3/7/2007 2:36:29 AM , Rating: 2
AMD built chipsets at the launch of the Athlon family - and the AMD750 (Irongate) and AMD760 (and biprocessor 760MPX) were working chipsets, even if lacking in high-end selling points.
The reason AMD left other companies develop the chipsets for AMD processors was to save its production capacity for microprocessors, and slash the R&D costs. Barring that, AMD would have been able to keep up with developing working chipsets, but that would have eat from its microprocessor development funds and from microprocessor production capacity (both being in short supply at AMD)


RE: One big mistake.....
By Viditor on 3/7/2007 2:55:17 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
The reason AMD left other companies develop the chipsets for AMD processors was to save its production capacity for microprocessors, and slash the R&D costs

More of the later than the former...
You might try to find the interview on the net, but J Sanders has said on a few occasions that development of the Irongate chipset cost AMD more than the development of the CPU itself.
This was because they had nobody in-house to do the development...


RE: One big mistake.....
By crystal clear on 3/6/2007 1:25:38 AM , Rating: 1
"so the cash shouldn't be any problem"

NO-Its not so simple as you make it appear-

Read my comment-"MAY 3rd 2007"

"AMD asks to double common stock to 1.5 billion shares "

DONT PLAY AROUND WITH SHAREHOLDERS-HEADS WILL ROLL


RE: One big mistake.....
By Viditor on 3/6/2007 2:35:47 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
"AMD asks to double common stock to 1.5 billion shares "

Yup...I read it when it was filed on 3/2/07.
For those who haven't seen the 14a document,
http://www.hoovers.com/free/co/secdoc.xhtml?ID=100...
that's it...

Of course doubling the common stock doesn't mean it all gets diluted...usually most of the stock gets passed back to shareholders (as it does in a stock split), while a small portion is sold to raise extra cash.
In the CC, Hector stated that their goal is to get the cash up to ~$1 Billion. As of Dec 31 06, they were at $1.38 Billion, so I imagine that this will be to oversee any future debt payments.


RE: One big mistake.....
By crystal clear on 3/6/2007 7:01:16 AM , Rating: 1
"Of course doubling the common stock doesn't mean it all gets diluted...usually most of the stock gets passed back to shareholders (as it does in a stock split), while a small portion is sold to raise extra cash."

Sorry I refuse to TRUST this-

It will result in "decrease shareholders' percentage equity and dilute voting rights, earnings, and book value."

Dont be too sure - I would prepare myself for a dirty surprise.


RE: One big mistake.....
By Viditor on 3/6/2007 8:50:43 AM , Rating: 4
quote:
Sorry I refuse to TRUST this

Suit yourself...
But remember that well over half of the shares are owned by institutions who are represented on the Board, and they unanamously approved the motion.
Do you really believe they would cut their own throats?


RE: One big mistake.....
By Samus on 3/7/2007 12:07:13 PM , Rating: 2
AMD wants their name on their chipset. Can't blame'm.


May 3rd 2007 ?????
By crystal clear on 3/6/2007 12:32:30 AM , Rating: 2
Read this-

Quote-

"AMD asks to double common stock to 1.5 billion shares "

" it said in an SEC filing it made yesterday, that the board of directors approved an amendment to double the shares from 750 million to 1.5 billion. That needs shareholder consent."

But, to the extent that the additional shares are issued they might decrease shareholders' percentage equity and dilute voting rights, earnings, and book value. The board recommends that shareholders vote "for" this proposal.

The shareholders' meeting is on May 3rd. If shareholders don't vote, a "for" will be presumed.

http://www.theinq.com/default.aspx?article=37982

Unquote-

The share holders are not satisfied with Hector Ruiz.

AMD is certainly not in a good position.

I will not be surprised if Hector Ruiz is asked to GO AWAY.

You play around with the shareholders OUT YOU GO.




RE: May 3rd 2007 ?????
By drebo on 3/6/2007 1:37:25 AM , Rating: 1
Yes, because we all know that the inquirer is the most reputable source of information and never, ever spins its stories.


RE: May 3rd 2007 ?????
By crystal clear on 3/6/2007 4:37:50 AM , Rating: 1
Never accuse anybody/site of spinning stories if you do not have any firm evidence.Read viditor comment below-

quote:
"AMD asks to double common stock to 1.5 billion shares "

Yup...I read it when it was filed on 3/2/07.
For those who haven't seen the 14a document,
http://www.hoovers.com/free/co/secdoc.xhtml?ID=100

By Viditor on 3/6/2007 2:35:47 AM , Rating: 2

Unquote-

Always check/verify before you respond-maybe you have something against the site(inq).Not my problem anyway.


RE: May 3rd 2007 ?????
By Viditor on 3/6/2007 2:40:33 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
The share holders are not satisfied with Hector Ruiz

Speak for yourself...I now own more than most shareholders, and I love the guy! :)


RE: May 3rd 2007 ?????
By kilkennycat on 3/6/2007 4:03:24 AM , Rating: 2
You must have been buying AMD stock like mad the last couple of days ??


RE: May 3rd 2007 ?????
By Viditor on 3/6/2007 4:29:05 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
You must have been buying AMD stock like mad the last couple of days ??


I'm buying, but only lightly right now...I think AMD still has a little bit more pain to go through before they hit rock bottom. That said, I AM buying lightly...I'm doing so in order to hedge the lowest level purchase.

I do think AMD will be in the low 30's at least by this time next year.


RE: May 3rd 2007 ?????
By crystal clear on 3/6/2007 4:45:00 AM , Rating: 1
SINGAPORE (Reuters) - Former Federal Reserve chairman Alan Greenspan was quoted as seeing a "one-third probability" of recession in the United States this year, according to an interview with Bloomberg.

"We are in the sixth year of a recovery; imbalances can emerge as a result," Bloomberg quoted Greenspan as saying.

"Ten-year recoveries have been part of a much broader global phenomenon," Greenspan said in the interview

http://www.reuters.com/article/ousiv/idUSSP2203342...


RE: May 3rd 2007 ?????
By crystal clear on 3/6/2007 4:47:23 AM , Rating: 1
"good luck" Hopefully "No heartbreaks"


RE: May 3rd 2007 ?????
By clnee55 on 3/6/2007 11:44:13 AM , Rating: 2
You must have enjoyed watching your portfolio since Jan06 when AMD was $45.
You own more shares than most shareholders?? Are you Hector in disguise? You seem to be a very smart investor, putting everything in one basket.

"Speak for yourself...I now own more than most shareholders, and I love the guy! :)"


RE: May 3rd 2007 ?????
By Viditor on 3/6/2007 8:51:05 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
You must have enjoyed watching your portfolio since Jan06 when AMD was $45

Well, let's use some facts here...AMD didn't hit $45, the highest intraday price was $42.70 on March 3 06...
I did sell the majority of my shares (~45k) in Jan at ~$40, for which I made a enough to buy a nice dinner...:)
If you recall, I bought a lot of those shares at $11, a fact which I posted on AT (I remember you specifically telling me that I was a fanbois idiot for doing so...).

quote:
You seem to be a very smart investor, putting everything in one basket

What makes you think that I do that?


RE: May 3rd 2007 ?????
By clnee55 on 3/7/2007 1:23:18 AM , Rating: 1
THat's nothing, my son bought AMD shares at $3 in 1990 and sold of them at $48 in 2000. He bought again at $5 in 2003 and sold the exact day that AMD hit $42.7. He made 8 figures (one more than you). That's very easy to say after the fact. You might not know the definition of the financial anylist, "the guy who can explain everything happening in the stock market the day after it happens. You did say that you bought at $15, but you never said you sold AMD at $40 until now. Don't lie, you can lose or you can win when you gamble with stock. I still think that you are a fanboy idiot.


RE: May 3rd 2007 ?????
By Viditor on 3/7/2007 2:18:47 AM , Rating: 2
What part of "I bought a lot of those shares at $11, a fact which I posted on AT" don't you understand? As to selling at $40, while I didn't think to keep you up to date on my portfolio, common sense should tell you that selling immediately after a mojor rise and on good news isn't a very surprising thing.

quote:
You might not know the definition of the financial anylist

No, but I know how to spell "analyst"...
quote:
You did say that you bought at $15

Your facility for getting the numbers wrong never ceases to amaze me...$11. As to selling at $40, while I didn't think to keep you up to date on my portfolio, common sense should tell you that selling immediately after a mojor rise and on good news isn't a very surprising thing.
quote:
Don't lie, you can lose or you can win when you gamble with stock

Investing in stocks isn't really a gamble (unless you're buying options) because there is no set expiration period...
So you can be up or down on paper, but the Fat Lady doesn't sing until you tell her to (unless the company goes bankrupt).
At the moment, my current (rather large) position in AMD is at an ASP of near $16, but I'm cost averaging down over the next few months...


RE: May 3rd 2007 ?????
By clnee55 on 3/7/2007 1:33:48 AM , Rating: 1
Viditor,

Fact 1: You sold majority of your shares at $40 for ~45K, which means you have about 1125 shares, I give you 2000 shares total. And now you claim you own more shares of AMD than most investors. Lie #1

Fact 2: Assume you bought at $11. Yoy made $30 a share, or 33K. That's not 7 figures, boy. Lie#2.

Fact 3: If you sold majority of your shares (1125 shares)in 2006. You can't have a lot of shares left. And all of those shares have going down the drain since then. WHere the 7 figures come from??

Keep you mouth shut on investment, people might think you smart. I think still you are a fanboy idiot.


RE: May 3rd 2007 ?????
By Viditor on 3/7/2007 2:22:44 AM , Rating: 3
Heavy sigh...
quote:
You sold majority of your shares at $40 for ~45K

No, I sold 45,000 shares at $40 for an approximate pre-tax profit of $1.3 Million...

quote:
You can't have a lot of shares left

You see, there's this really cool thing called buying back shares after the price has dropped...guess you haven't heard of it.


Clueless
By TomZ on 3/5/07, Rating: 0
RE: Clueless
By Goty on 3/5/2007 9:08:44 PM , Rating: 4
I'm sorry, but I don't think the man who kept AMD so far in the black for as long as it was is "clueless".


RE: Clueless
By defter on 3/6/07, Rating: -1
RE: Clueless
By James Holden on 3/5/2007 9:10:53 PM , Rating: 4
Knowing and admitting are two separate things.


RE: Clueless
By matthewpapa on 3/5/2007 9:31:36 PM , Rating: 2
no surprises here

c2d is killing AMD right now


RE: Clueless
By mendocinosummit on 3/5/2007 11:39:31 PM , Rating: 3
They have the best dual core for the price right now. I have built five systems with the 3600+ at $105 for people who don't need a $185 C2D system that usually has more expensive mobos. I like to put in dual cores since they are a little more future proof. My point is that $80 to $100 makes a big difference when selling a comp to some people


RE: Clueless
By drebo on 3/6/2007 1:42:49 AM , Rating: 3
quote:
c2d is killing AMD right now


On the contrary, as someone pointed out below, the price war is killing AMD. Core 2 Duo has little, if any, effect on it. AMD is still dollar-for-dollar competetive with Core 2 Duo, but completely owns the lower end, which is where the majority of computer sales are made.

Intel's aggressive pricing on their overstock of Pentium D processors is what is driving AMD revenues down, not the fact that in the over-800 dollar CPU range they perform better. I can get Pentium D 915 processors for under one hundred dollars. That's a damn good price, and because most corporations prefer to keep their systems on the same platform and most of my corporations nearing the end of their 4th year of PC life are now starting to replace, they again choose Intel because that's what they've had before.

That, and most software vendors specifically list Intel on their system requirements.


In a nutshell...
By JackPack on 3/5/2007 9:31:25 PM , Rating: 2
It's a long winded way of saying AMD made the wrong bet. They focused on Dell and the other OEMs. Channel partners, whitebox builders were left in the cold. But Dell customers simply did not bite on AMD products. Get ready for lots of inventory in Q2 because things simply did not go as planned.

At least Ruiz confirmed Barcelona shipments will happen by the end of summer.




RE: In a nutshell...
By Viditor on 3/5/2007 9:49:36 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
They focused on Dell and the other OEMs. Channel partners, whitebox builders were left in the cold


Essentially correct...but remember that AMD has to pay huge penalties if Dell demands parts and AMD can't supply them.

quote:
At least Ruiz confirmed Barcelona shipments will happen by the end of summer


No he didn't...he said that Barcelona REVENUE will happen by the end of summer. In order for that to happen, the shipments must start in Q2.


RE: In a nutshell...
By nerdye on 3/5/2007 9:50:08 PM , Rating: 2
I too don't believe AMD was wrong in focusing on delivering large shipments of processors to the likes of HP and Dell, yet the mistake they made was in the percentage of overall cpu's they delivered to such companies, making it tough for their dedicated fan base like yours truly to find a cpu for a custom built system.

Is Core 2 duo Killing Amd? In the very high end of the market the benchmarks speak for themselves, yet amd's new pricing scheme is somewhat competitive. The worst damage that the likes of Core 2 has done to Amd is make intel desirable again for high end gamers, it seems those not in the know are influenced by such and would rather buy a mobile cerleron over a mobile sempron regardless of benchmarks (neither is an absolute winner, but of course some will argue either way). The public has always got its sweethearts, there is no grey area in the public eye of consumerism when dealing with the masses. Intel's got yall's valentines for now (and the e6300 cpu running my gaming rig =).

Barcelona may change that though, I'm all for competition and all for AMD coming back strong!


RE: In a nutshell...
By Viditor on 3/5/2007 9:57:40 PM , Rating: 3
quote:
I too don't believe AMD was wrong in focusing on delivering large shipments of processors to the likes of HP and Dell, yet the mistake they made was in the percentage of overall cpu's they delivered to such companies, making it tough for their dedicated fan base like yours truly to find a cpu for a custom built system


Agreed...
Remember that while Intel are masters at understanding the inventory needs of OEMs, AMD is still relatively new to the game (welcome to the NFL).
It's a nasty and steep learning curve...

You should also keep in mind that C2D has a far smaller impact than the price war does...
The price war has even cut Intel's income by 41% year on year, so imagine what effect it's had on AMD!


don't get confused..
By DeepBlue1975 on 3/6/2007 8:11:44 AM , Rating: 2
One thing is what Hector Ruiz can tell the press, and other, possibly very different one, is what he actually knows about their situation.

IMHO, saying something like "Hey, Intel came down with C2d and blew our retail sales away in just a few months and right now we don't have anything competitive enough to regain that lost share in the short term" would be probably honest, but wouldn't get him the best image, at least not amongst AMD's shareholders.




RE: don't get confused..
By Viditor on 3/6/2007 9:04:19 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
IMHO, saying something like "Hey, Intel came down with C2d and blew our retail sales away in just a few months and right now we don't have anything competitive enough to regain that lost share in the short term" would be probably honest, but wouldn't get him the best image, at least not amongst AMD's shareholders


The problem with this theory is that Intel hasn't had enough volume (yet) on C2D to do that...they will only hit 40% of their chips as C2D by the end of this quarter.


Tech people are short sighted
By staypuff69 on 3/7/2007 2:31:13 AM , Rating: 2
Wow anyone remember when Athlon first came out.... wow it was the one to get..... then along comes Pentium 4 and holy crap was that the proc to get.... then along comes Athlon 64 .... and it beat the crap outta Intel hands down..... then lo and behold along comes Core 2 Duo and AMD is caught running behind again.....

Anyone see a sequence here.... lmao don't count AMD out till you get the bankruptcy report on credible news sites...

The nice thing was that Intel finally got their head outta their asses and made such a huge leap in architecture that it's taking AMD quite awhile to catch up

I wonder what we'll all be posting if Barcelona trumps Core 2 Duo and Intel's quad cores.... "OMG Intel is in trouble"

The time between new technology shifts are getting shorter and shorter... eventually we won't have a year to rag on one company or the other... we'll only have a month or two to crown the new king.... Let's see what this summer brings shall we???




price competition...
By ncage on 3/5/2007 9:40:06 PM , Rating: 1
bad for AMD; good for us. AMD is badly in need of a die shrink right now so they can pull more chips out of a wafer and increase profits. Since core 2 duo has came out they have had to compete with intel on price or they would have dramatically lost market share (except for huge multi cpu systems where the opteron still reigns king because of hypertransport).

Ncage




"Vista runs on Atom ... It's just no one uses it". -- Intel CEO Paul Otellini

DailyTech Poll
Which web browser do you use on your primary personal machine? 






44 Comments









botimage
Copyright 2009 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki