tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9020108538297955304.post5248233768436119969..comments2023-06-17T22:02:29.344+08:00Comments on Intel vs ARM - chronicles of the great Semiconductor war: AMD won Dell 2 years too late - I'm not alone180 Sharikouhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01976521382562563035noreply@blogger.comBlogger40125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9020108538297955304.post-7105941205110267442006-10-21T02:18:00.000+08:002006-10-21T02:18:00.000+08:00I hav to disagree with your assessment of the AMD\...I hav to disagree with your assessment of the AMD\Dell deal. I think that the price war affected them more than anything.<br /><br /><br />At this point, Dell needs AMD more than AMD needs Dell. AMD has been profitable for every quarter that Dell has lost revenue. <br /><br />And Intel's new pricing strategy gives them no advantage but a helluva lot of NetBust.<br /><br />They would be Christian H.https://www.blogger.com/profile/16847810167041864292noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9020108538297955304.post-67986671398663280652006-10-06T09:17:00.000+08:002006-10-06T09:17:00.000+08:00It's my general understanding that you would see a...<i>It's my general understanding that you would see a good 4th quarter as a rally for Intel and the start of a good 2007 with Intel pulling back substantial marketshare from AMD.</i><br /><br />Yes to the marketshare question. Not necessarily to them having a good year. I have not made up my mind on that one yet until I see some more indicators on the fall out of the price war, inventory position180 Sharikouhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01976521382562563035noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9020108538297955304.post-65817095883863458852006-10-06T05:54:00.000+08:002006-10-06T05:54:00.000+08:00I assume you don't read AMDZone. It's my general u...I assume you don't read AMDZone. It's my general understanding that you would see a good 4th quarter as a rally for Intel and the start of a good 2007 with Intel pulling back substantial marketshare from AMD. If you had been reading AMDZone then you would know that I've been saying for quite some time that 2006 was Intel's last chance for a strong comeback. Basically, I've said that if Intel Scientia from AMDZonehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11307174874527564058noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9020108538297955304.post-27127441077471636782006-10-06T01:39:00.000+08:002006-10-06T01:39:00.000+08:00Scientia - I'm not trying to gyp anybody and claim...Scientia - I'm not trying to gyp anybody and claim a moral victory if AMD loses some decimal point market share to Intel. I agree - going from 21.4 down to 21.2 is hardly a loss.<br /><br />I'll try and put something as black and white as I can so that you don't feel I'm not willing to put my money where my mouth is and wiggle out through some back door excuse.<br /><br />Here's what I'm thinking180 Sharikouhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01976521382562563035noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9020108538297955304.post-30979391848751498222006-10-05T23:57:00.000+08:002006-10-05T23:57:00.000+08:00I forgot to mention that the Q2 06 volume share is...I forgot to mention that the Q2 06 volume share is skewed because of higher than normal volume from VIA as it was closing out its C3. Can you tell me what the adjusted number should be if we factor out the VIA interference?Scientia from AMDZonehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11307174874527564058noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9020108538297955304.post-85705643121695473902006-10-05T23:50:00.000+08:002006-10-05T23:50:00.000+08:00As I said, a drop below 21% would be a loss of vol...As I said, a drop below 21% would be a loss of volume share. Your 22% figure is not accurate for several reasons. First of all, the 22% figure is rounded up from 21.6%. Secondly, there is some quarterly fluctuation which does not indicate real changes so you need to look at the value over a longer span. For the last quarter of 2005 and the first two quarters of 2006 we have:<br /><br />21.4%, Scientia from AMDZonehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11307174874527564058noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9020108538297955304.post-81670991568791823582006-10-05T12:04:00.000+08:002006-10-05T12:04:00.000+08:00Scientia - I am not disputing your calculation but...Scientia - I am not disputing your calculation but I think I haven't made my point well enough. From a "running the business" standpoint, the first thing Intel wants is market share reversal because it is only once they have won back SKUs with their OEM customers can they think of influencing ASPs by selling them up. The last thing AMD wants to give back is...market share.<br /><br />The battle 180 Sharikouhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01976521382562563035noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9020108538297955304.post-68163330406992794722006-10-05T03:26:00.000+08:002006-10-05T03:26:00.000+08:00Let me see if I can make this simpler.
AMD had a ...Let me see if I can make this simpler.<br /><br />AMD had a volume share of greater than 21% for Q4 05, Q1 06, and Q2 06. Therefore we should be able to say that AMD has lost volume share if its volume share drops below 21%.<br /><br />Unfortunately, revenue share is not as straightforward and depends on total market revenue. At this point I should be able to assert that if AMD drops below 15% Scientia from AMDZonehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11307174874527564058noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9020108538297955304.post-86847228877742842272006-10-05T00:49:00.000+08:002006-10-05T00:49:00.000+08:00Scientia from AMDZone said...
My statement re...<i> Scientia from AMDZone said...<br /><br /> My statement remains the same:<br /><br /> You cannot tell a true market reversal from a single quarter's numbers because one quarter can be temporary.<br /><br /> A decrease in both revenue and volume share in Q4 06 would not actually be a market share reversal unless AMD also shows either decreases in total revenue or big decreases in 180 Sharikouhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01976521382562563035noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9020108538297955304.post-56700435166061946352006-10-05T00:45:00.000+08:002006-10-05T00:45:00.000+08:00Scientia - I am talking about volume market share....Scientia - I am talking about volume market share. Neither AMD nor Intel nor the market are static. Nor is sales and marketing a statistical exercise. Both companies fight for every sale they can make. At this point AMD has 22% voume share and has been on an upward trajectory. Starting Q4 (if not Q3) that trajectory will start to reverse. They will lose market share and go below 22%.<br /><br />180 Sharikouhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01976521382562563035noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9020108538297955304.post-9954974791392124092006-10-05T00:35:00.000+08:002006-10-05T00:35:00.000+08:00My statement remains the same:
You cannot tell a ...My statement remains the same:<br /><br />You cannot tell a true market reversal from a single quarter's numbers because one quarter can be temporary.<br /><br />A decrease in both revenue and volume share in Q4 06 would not actually be a market share reversal unless AMD also shows either decreases in total revenue or big decreases in margin.<br /><br />In other words, as long as AMD continues toScientia from AMDZonehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11307174874527564058noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9020108538297955304.post-73386357583837110622006-10-05T00:27:00.000+08:002006-10-05T00:27:00.000+08:00Scientia - let me introduce you to the concept of ...<i>Scientia - let me introduce you to the concept of market share which is what will reverse in Q4 if not Q3. Yes - both can grow revenue and profits but the point I'm continuing to make here is Intel will re-take market segment share. That's a black & white number...which we will know after the quarterly results. </i><br /><br />I will try again. There are two numbers for share: revenue share Scientia from AMDZonehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11307174874527564058noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9020108538297955304.post-793575234635446602006-10-04T23:30:00.000+08:002006-10-04T23:30:00.000+08:00Yes, I've seen that 50% of their line is 65 nm, bu...<i>Yes, I've seen that 50% of their line is 65 nm, but 50% of that fifty percent is producing 9 series pentium d's, that are still more expensive than AMD's concurrent offerings, have a more expensive platform, and have a higher tdp and resulting failure rate.</i><br /><br /><br />Ashenman - some bold statements. Let's dig in:<br /><br />1. I think you're going to have to prove the failure rate 180 Sharikouhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01976521382562563035noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9020108538297955304.post-6060142666718340062006-10-04T23:13:00.000+08:002006-10-04T23:13:00.000+08:00Scientia - let me introduce you to the concept of ...Scientia - let me introduce you to the concept of market share which is what will reverse in Q4 if not Q3. Yes - both can grow revenue and profits but the point I'm continuing to make here is Intel will re-take market segment share. That's a black & white number...which we will know after the quarterly results.180 Sharikouhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01976521382562563035noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9020108538297955304.post-76992211226436298752006-10-04T22:53:00.000+08:002006-10-04T22:53:00.000+08:00in particular your statement about Intel's product...<i>in particular your statement about Intel's production being only 25% in Q4. In case you missed last weeks announcement, Intel has already announced that they have transitioned > 50% of there volume over to 65nm. As a referesher... the only thing on 65nm is Core 2 material</i><br /><br />I don't know where you got this idea from. Most of the 65nm production is dual core Pentium D and will be Scientia from AMDZonehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11307174874527564058noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9020108538297955304.post-64780791450437459792006-10-04T10:44:00.000+08:002006-10-04T10:44:00.000+08:00Sheepshagger - agree with all your points. Just on...Sheepshagger - agree with all your points. Just one clarification, there are flavours of Pentium D and Pentium Extreme on 65nm:<br /><br />http://indigo.intel.com/compare_cpu/default.aspx?familyID=1&culture=en-US<br /><br />The TDP of these products is down to the 65-90 watt range and if you look at the reviews on Newegg, as long as you're not using the cheap plastic cooler that comes from Intel,180 Sharikouhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01976521382562563035noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9020108538297955304.post-79190391711153080932006-10-04T10:43:00.000+08:002006-10-04T10:43:00.000+08:00This comment has been removed by the author.180 Sharikouhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01976521382562563035noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9020108538297955304.post-88815170903465158122006-10-04T06:54:00.000+08:002006-10-04T06:54:00.000+08:00A couple other things to add before I go off on a ...A couple other things to add before I go off on a rant:<br /><br /><I>greg said...<br /><br />I realize Intel has more assets it can eat into than AMD, since it's made more money longer, but it's using alot of those to upgrade all of its remaining fabs to 65 nm, and build up the resources to convert to 45 nm. This may not seem like as much of an expense as buying an entire other company (AMD/ATI)Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9020108538297955304.post-14271537046944374422006-10-04T06:26:00.000+08:002006-10-04T06:26:00.000+08:00ashenman said...
I don't see how you can say ...<I> ashenman said...<br /><br /> I don't see how you can say AMD will be losing market share in q4. Yes, Intel will have core 2 and qcore 2. But qcore 2 will have an even smaller ramp than core 2 (only 1 million before quadcore opteron in 6 months?). Not only that, but only 25% of Intel's production will be core 2. AMD will have rolled out 4x4 by then, and will have its new 65 nm parts. This Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9020108538297955304.post-71005230783256220522006-10-04T01:59:00.000+08:002006-10-04T01:59:00.000+08:00Dude - you are all over looking one critical facto...Dude - you are all over looking one critical factor. That is the strength of the Intel and Pentium brands. Do not assume because the technology is inferior that means the business is a dud. Netburst has made billions for Intel in spite of being the inferior technology. And now with the Pentium brand down from 130 all the way down to 70 bucks, suddenly many more average Joes can afford this. Just 180 Sharikouhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01976521382562563035noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9020108538297955304.post-63577092033195779562006-10-03T22:40:00.000+08:002006-10-03T22:40:00.000+08:00I'm not talking about just revenue increase as an ...I'm not talking about just revenue increase as an indicator. Pls note - I am specifically calling a market share reversal coupled with a gross margin upswing for Intel.180 Sharikouhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01976521382562563035noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9020108538297955304.post-21559303249947437512006-10-03T22:11:00.000+08:002006-10-03T22:11:00.000+08:00Profits are used to either fund future growth or p...<i>Profits are used to either fund future growth or provide return on investment to shareholders.</i><br /><br />Negative. R&D and capital expenses are subtracted BEFORE determining profit. If you want to count R&D and capital expenses you have to use gross revenue and margin as I suggested. Also, some of Intel's money is transferred to shareholders via stock buyback and not by dividends. Again, Scientia from AMDZonehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11307174874527564058noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9020108538297955304.post-56213919752100710522006-10-03T20:50:00.000+08:002006-10-03T20:50:00.000+08:00Come on Sharikou 180*... You simply must writ some...Come on Sharikou 180*... You simply must writ something about this:<br />http://theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=34827<br /><br />That article must really make Shakira cry,,Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9020108538297955304.post-90475403894084128512006-10-03T15:29:00.000+08:002006-10-03T15:29:00.000+08:00Also, it makes no sense to talk about Intel profit...<i>Also, it makes no sense to talk about Intel profits or AMD profits; these terms are flexible and don't really tell you anything. Intel's profits depend on how much it decides to spend on stock buyback which is flexible. Also, you are adding cash to profit which is counting money that was earned in the past. This is far too sloppy. It is better to go by gross revenue and margin on just the cpu 180 Sharikouhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01976521382562563035noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9020108538297955304.post-67251677870576726732006-10-03T04:13:00.000+08:002006-10-03T04:13:00.000+08:00Obviously, it is silly to suggest that a failed ba...Obviously, it is silly to suggest that a failed battery has something to do with the processor. Sometimes Sharikou just seems to be reaching.<br /><br />Also, it makes no sense to talk about Intel profits or AMD profits; these terms are flexible and don't really tell you anything. Intel's profits depend on how much it decides to spend on stock buyback which is flexible. Also, you are adding cash Scientia from AMDZonehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11307174874527564058noreply@blogger.com