Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
AMD continues to lie!!! But what choice do they have?
FROM NEWSFACTOR.COM
"AMD Sets Speed Mark with New Athlon Chip"
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/nf/20030514/bs_nf/21506
FROM TOMSHARDWARE
"Conclusion: The Athlon XP3200+ isn't a Hit, But a Paper Tiger"
"XP 2800+ would have been a more realistic label for the processor, which wouldn't have been a problem for anyone, if AMD still wants to go toe-to-toe with Intel's P4"
http://www6.tomshardware.com/cpu/20030513/athlon_xp-22.html
re:"think part of the reason for this is that gateway,compaq,HP etc have always thought it was in thier best interest to have at least two suppliers of cpu's to keep the price down"
I think the issue is that the system OEMs can't stand to have price and mix dictated to them, as Intel can do when it is the only game in town. The problem is that having a competitor in the mix like AMD may reduce the ability for Intel to "dictate", but it also introduces a uncertainty in pricing. Intel is more likely to "react" to the completion, and as a result product (system) in the pipeline and channel run the risk of being obsolete sooner than expected. I think the major OEMs have a harder time managing the product line with an AMD in the market than they would without an AMD, but I doubt many would admit it.
Some might look at Intel as a benevolent dictator when they are the only game in town. They do squeeze customers to change product mix and intro new systems, but at the same time they are motivated to drive volume and to keep the channel healthy.
Nitt
re"AMD Ending Relationship With UMC"
Did one ever really start?
AMD cuts most of the investment in internal capacity to focus on joint investment with a 3rd party (UMC)for the next generation technology. Then they jump to a new 3rd party (IBM) for the next next generation, but they drop the first 3rd party before they even get to the next generation. So, how do they support this big ramp they are expecting... or maybe it's not going so big. What the heck is Hector doing?
re:"Interesting Hammer Article. Good Reading."
From the article "I'm sure that you shouldn't expect much from the Hammer architecture on the desktop market - the best performance gain will be reached on the market of SMP systems. In case of desktops the advantages are the support of the x86-64, SSE2, and more efficient models. But this is enough to attract potential customers."
This quote, if it turns out to be true, should make it very scary for AMD investors. AMD cannot build a big profitable business around CPUs for the share of the server market they will take from Sun, IBM, HP, and Intel solutions. They need significant desktop volume also to help pay for the development. In addition they are at least first ship date plus a year... probably two years before IT managers and data centers would consider doing more then evaluating the AMD. In the meantime, Intel will have two more spins of Itanium and Xeon... and Sun is not planning to go away either.
64 bitness alone will not save AMD, they need applications and solutions that will sell systems.
re:"If true, it sounds more like a Reg. FD violation than a scoop."
Doesn't sound like a FD violation... more like SG Cowen took the words "up to" and spun a report that has some people believing that an Intel spokesperson said something new. I think that up to 6% is in line with the outlook they gave at the Q3 earnings call when they said $6.5 to $6.9B for Q4, which is a growth of 0% at the low end up to 6%.
They will probably narrow the range at tomorrow’s call as they usually do. Maybe they will even raise the high end a bit.
Nitt
re:"I think he was joking."
I thought so too, but I wanted to make my point for some of the coolaid drinkers who still might not get it.
Nitt
re:"Intel strongarms Dell - brow beats them - threatens to cut them off - exercises monopoly control - and Dell rolls over."
Dell is not a market developer and Itanium was very much in the market development phase a few months ago. In addition, IBM and HP had chipset support, while Dell needed to wait for Intel. Dell never sells paper, they sell system and they sell them more agressivly than the other guy... especially companies like HP and IBM. They are still probably entering a bit earlier then they would like, but this is a very good sign for Intel.
Regarding Opteron; like I said, Dell is not a market developer and Opteron needs a hell of a lot of market development to take place before it would make sence for Dell's business model. I'm sure Dell used the threat of AMD to make sure that they got the best deal possible for Itanium. HP probably has a built in advantage since it was a joint design, and Dell was probably very concered about that.
Nitt
re:"Maybe I'm not paying attention. Didn't AMD just say, at their analyst meeting, that they would be leading with the server market, and would follow later in the year with the desktop market?"
My take is someone finally told Hector that they have to give away a bunch of the opteron stuff to seed the IT market and get the IT people to look at it. So they decided to take the handful of units they might have and sell them to the diehards in a "desktop". Parts will be pricey and they will sell all of the very few they have... but that beats giving stuff away, and it might buy them a few more weeks. Hector also probably figured out that IT managers will not buy this stuff for a year or two in any volume, so he will just maximize profit as long as there is tension in the market, and hope it catches on in the much larger desktop market.
I’m waiting for some analyst to comment on this major change in the roadmap only weeks after the analyst meeting.
Hell of a strategy.
Nitt
re: Hector’s quote "I urge you to demand that those companies who are currently serving you today begin developing technology not for its own sake. Not in isolation from the real world. But in line with what you are really trying to do."
This makes total sense... the only problem is that Intel took the lead on this one long ago and I don't expect the IT managers to be fooled into believing AMD can actually do better. Yes, Intel will continue to move forward with new and faster products, at the same time they work with the industry to develop H/W and S/W building blocks that end up making better solutions. When AMD had the clock speed lead all they did was scream they were faster. When AMD lost the lead, they said it didn't matter. Now AMD is saying people can't live without their new 64bit chip because they are having a hard time getting more than a $50 ASP for their 32bit stuff.
AMD might have had a chance if Hammer came out in the middle of this year... they are now looking at the middle of next year for volume, and they will launch with a desktop version. Once all of the diehard AMD fans each buy one I expect demand to dry up, or ASP will dry up in order to keep demand up. My guess is most IT managers will sit on the sideline waiting to see how things shake out for AMD. In this economy, nobody is going to get fired for not trying the new Opteron or Athlon 64.
AMD’s claims that they will be number one in computing are even more bold then Transmeta’s were regarding mobile, and even more unlikely. Intel has been battling for over 20 years in this space… There was the 68K, Z8000, MIPs, SPARC, PowerPC, Alpha, HPPA, ARM, along with all the clones (I’m sure I missed a few). Now there is AMD with X86-64. This is AMD, a company in terrible debt, stripping 15% more of its work force, moving to a new fab-less model relying on a company half a world away to develop a process to support 100M+ transistor devices. At the same time, Intel's pipeline, process and manufacturing technology, and capacity capability appear to be stronger in all computing segments than they have ever been.
I know a lot of people on this thread are Intel cheerleaders, but I’d like to hear from anyone who can articulate how AMD pulls this one off.
Nitt
re:"If you saw the presentations from Comdex, you'll see that there is a lot of interest and commitment."
The companies supporting AMD on Hammer have little to lose if AMD fails... I doubt the bigger names (MS, Redhat, etc) have put a lot of resources into it to date, and they can always switch customers to a Pentium or Itanium solution if the Hammer flops. The problem still facing AMD is that they are still many quarters away from solutions that are more than betaware. It will take 18 to 24 months to shake all the pieces down an get true production quality stuff that offers what an IT manager or data center manager is really willing to bet her job on. Intel has waged this battle for years versus Sun with both Xeon and Itanium... they are winning the low-end battle with Xeon, and making headway with Itanium.
AMD has bet the company on Hammer... there is no reason for a PC OEM to invest a dime in supporting Athlon anymore. OEMs are sitting and waiting to see if Hammer is delivered, and if it delivers on it promises, while Intel just keeps raising the bar and delivering the goods.
We'll see how this turns out.
Nitt
re:"I believe that you have Ruiz well-pegged. He comes across as a manager rather than a zealot (like you-know-who)."
The problem is that it took Jerry's extreme bravado and cheerleading to keep AMD going in the past. I did not like the style, but it served AMD well compared to the potential alternatives. Someone looking a bit closer at the business might conclude that trying to fight the 800lbs gorilla may shrink the gorilla a bit, but at the end of the day you die trying. If AMD tries to continue broadening its attack on all segments of the CPU market, they probably end up losing. It looks like AMD may be changing it's direction a bit, and I’m sure that cost cutting will necessitate some of the change. The problem AMD faces is a very tough marketplace at a time when Intel's product portfolio appears to be stronger and broader than ever.
Nitt
re:"More likely, they are waiting to see how Hyperthreading performs, so that they do not embarrass themselves with too aggressive a rating."
I doubt Intel performance matters when it comes to their model rating. They are waiting to see where Intel's clock rate goes so they can make up a model number that sounds competitive. Even if hyperthreading does well, AMD will discount it claiming there is no software, yet at the same time they will use nonexistent 64 bit SW to defend their model number. It doesn’t appear that anything embarrasses AMD.
Nitt
re:"So what is this charge going to do to AMD's already weakened cash position?"
If they are writing down capital assets, then there should be no cash impact. If they are taking a charge for layoffs, then that would eat into cash ultimately. My guess is there will be some combination of the two. Writing down assets is a bit of a game if it is only meant to reduce recurring depreciation chargers in future quarters. If they actually close or sell off stuff, then it's much more above board. Anyone know the rules on this kind of stuff?
I guess we'll here more soon.
Nitt
Bone,
re:"They seem to be getting T-bred B's out the door despite the bonehead delays. 2600s and 2700s are shipping and in boxes (alienware)"
I saw the Best Buy add this weekend for the 2700+ at $1899 too. I'm not sure they are really shipping yet. No sign of anything over 2400+ on the Alienware site, while the Pentium IV 2.8Ghz is very visible. I haven’t gone to Best Buy to try and configure a 2700+ at the build to order kiosk, but my guess is I couldn't get shipment of the system right away. Anyone actually order one and get a ship date yet? This appears to be a very feeble attempt on AMD’s part to hold some shelf space for the holiday season and maybe pull a few bucks out of Intel pocket.
Nitt
re:"but I thought that AMD was working with UMC to create a more specialized process just for the Athlon core. If that is true, then AMD may not suffer such a huge yield penalty."
The advantage that Intel has is they control ALL of the "dials" in the fab. This allows them to fine tune the process for best yield and best performance. In addition, the process people at Intel also can have a say on what changes might be needed in a design. AMD will never have control all of the dials in someone else's fab. Intel also has the ability to create a "copy exactly" methodology for any or all parts of the process in order to reduce excursions across its fabs... I'm not sure AMD will be able to dictate this especially if Intel keeps their foot on the gas and keeps moving the target that AMD and its fab partner will be trying to hit.
Of course AMD and UMC say they are working on a process for the Athlon core, but UMC also needs to deal with supporting a bunch of other customers. The only way AMD can keep UMC more focused on them then others it to pay more for wafers and buy more wafers. AMD’s financial health will play a role on how much focus they get from UMC.
I don’t remember anyone trying to make such a complex device in such high volume that needs to be sold at such a low price out of the gates in order to enable the future success of a company. AMD really has its hands full.
Nitt
Deleted
re:"Toward the end of November, PC makers are expected to come out with computers containing AMD's Athlon XP 2700+ and 2800+ processors."
I know he mentioned that virtually every PC maker was introducing the 3Ghz system with and Intel CPU, but you think he would also point out that a limited number of OEMs are expected to introduce a system with the Athlon 2800+. I sometimes think these guys are rooting for the underdog.
Nitt
He clarified that his remarks were a theory; all you appear to be doing is removing the doubts that most of us on the thread had about that theory when he mentioned it. So why don't we get back on the topic and forget about the people who we believe might be baiting us.
Nitt
re:"How in the world did AMD score that US Government Red Storm deal?"
AMD didn't win the deal with the government, CRAY did. My guess is AMD offered Cray a lot to be part of this. I'm sure the parts worked enough to give Cray confidence. What will be interesting if how the Itanium 2 and 3 based systems look by the time this system emerges. My bet is that Cray has the right to swap out CPUs in this deal going forward. A bit of PR for AMD, but these super computer deals don't mean a lot to most people.
Also, I'm sure there is still some bad blood between Intel and Cray since Intel was in the parallel supercomputer business a few years back and proved you could do it a lot cheaper with standard building blocks... that was basically the end of Cray's strangle hold on the business.
Nitt
re:"That(Hammer) has the potential to be a very strong contender vs Xeon."
Yes it may, but the enterprise customers do not just run out and buy a new system and drop it into a data center. The department server guys are pretty risk adverse to. AMD has at least 12 if not 24 mos of real missionary work ahead to get anyone to consider the Hammer in mission critical environments... and this effort will cost real money. They might get a pop of volume up front just from filling the channel and getting a copy of one into the hands of anyone evaluating it, but then things will stall.
Oh and remember, 12 to 24 months after Hammer is launched, there Intel will be two or three spins ahead of where they are today with of both Xeon and Itanium. The squeeze is on.
Nitt
re:"Has anyone come up with a good explanation of how they are going to cut costs dramatically?"
Here are a few ideas:
-Write down a bunch of capital so they don't get hit with as much depreciation every month.
-Get more people classified under R&D. You look at what they do, and if it smells like R&D then it is. This could include lots of heads that may have been included in cost of sales before. Applications engineers and TME's (Technical Marketing Engineers) along with their support staff are good example.
-Close and or sell existing FABs and then go to a foundry. They could actually sell a fab and then agree to buy capacity.
-Cut heads.
-Across the board pay cut with some kind of performance metric that creates a bonus system would reward all on company performance.
-Stop paying Jerry and Hector so much and shut down the Socal executive wing and dump the limo.
-Spin off the flash business... they were puffing it so much on the conference call, it makes you wonder.
I'm sure there will be some combination of the above.
Nitt
From AMDs Earnings Release:
"Conversion of AMD Athlon XP processors on 130-nanometer technology is now complete, and the Company's Fab 30 plant in Dresden, Germany is now producing 100 percent of its wafer-outs on 130-nanometer process technology. AMD plans to begin production shipments of Hammer-based processors in the mid first half of 2003"
They completed the conversion, yet no real volume of high performance parts. Note that hammer based stuff is now "mid first half" versus Q1... another slip.
What amazes me is that people are buying the outlook from AMD. This is a company that updated the quarter with a $100M miss after the quarter was closed! If there is any good news on the demand front for AMD in Q4 the news should be even better for Intel.
Nitt
re:"AMD To Be Pushed Down To # 3???"
They are number 2 in X86, but they are nowhere near the top in semiconductors. If they keep current trajectory, Transmeta or Via may pass them in X86.
Nitt
re:"I will believe no statements about market share from either Intel or AMD until I see confirmation from an independent like Gartner or Mercury Research"
I think AMD said in their quarterly miss announcement that PC demand was down. "In the absence of any significant improvement in PC demand in the just completed quarter, we accelerated our efforts to reduce processor inventory in the PC supply chain.". AMD will be out this week. If AMD says units were down, and Intel has already said units are up, then I think that is real data about the change in market share for units sold in Q3. Is it 3%... we will never know unless Intel and AMD just disclose absolute units sold. In addition AMDs $ share is much lower than what ever their unit share is... probably closer to 5% than 15%.
As far as mercury and gartner go, they probably have less reliable data then Intel... but I'm sure they will confirm Intel's gain in Q3.
Nitt
re:"We the users simply do not need all the power like in cycles gone past. This was the basis for the Corvette post."
Yea but you may need to buy a PC. Intel has 85-90% market share, they can for example still say "we don't have any of the CPUs at price X, but I do have some available at X+$25 or $50." User don't pay a bunch more at the system level, but that extra money for the CPU falls right to the bottom line at Intel. I agree that there is not a heck of a lot of real need for the faster stuff, but there is both want from some buyers and the ability to manage mix to some extent when you have market share. If AMD doesn't get up real soon, I expect Intel to have at least one more run with the CPU business... maybe not to $75, but a real run from today’s level. How their other businesses pan out will determine if Intel can run even further.
Nitt
re:"I presume that the fab depreciation had to be amortized over a smaller number of units. Then why was this not factored into the September guidance?"
I think Bryant's answer was that they were expecting to get even more cost out in the quarter but it didn't happen.
Bryant said you could shut a line and take a one time write off for the remaining depreciation... but they prefer to risk underutilization in order to have capacity available for an up tick (the investor view versus the trader). The good news is the capacity can still be used for saleable products. This puts Intel in a very good position for an upturn, but they do have to deal with the potential for underutilization charges each quarter. But remember, this underutilization reduces EPS, but it does not eat into cash since the cash has already been paid in capital expenditures. Not a bad place to be when you didn’t borrow any money to buy the stuff. While Intel appears better prepared than most for an extended downturn. It appears they will be doubly rewarded if and when there is an upturn in technology spending… Dollars can go up faster, and margins go up faster because underutilization charges go away. If there is no upturn in the next 12 months… Intel may still be the last one standing.
Nitt
re:'Intel will release the first server chip in Q4 using advanced manufacturing technology"
A Xeon will be released on .13 faster and bigger cache.
Nitt
Tim and Yoseph,
I've been watching this little spat, and I can't seem to find the original insult from Yoseph. He just offered the opionion that IBM does not offer the same process to 3rd parties that it uses on its newest CPUs. I don't know if this is true, but it makes sense that their absolute bleeding edge is reserved for in house stuff. The escalation I see seems to be a waste of cycles... can anyone offer data on what IBM does and does not offer to foundry customers?
Nott
re:"In fact, during keynote sessions at the Gartner Symposium/ITxpo in Lake Buena Vista, Fla., Enck and Weiss predicted IA-64 penetration of about 7-8 percent."
Hard to interpret this point unless the denominator is defined. It's a big number if they are talking 7-8% of all systems sold. 150M+ systems will be sold and many of the enterprise systems have 2 or more CPUs... that's >12M CPUs/year at an ASP of possibly $1000 or greater. It's a small number if they are talking about 7-8% of servers and workstations sold. Anyone know what was really meant?
Nitt
re:"IBM to unleash new PowerPC chip"
Does anyone know if the Power 4 has a 32 bit mode that is binary compatible with the G4? If this is not part of the 970, then Apple will need to emulate or they will need a lot of SW recompiled. This move should enable apple to hang onto their loyalists and/or swap a new apple user for one they lost, but I doubt is changes the market share over the long run.
Nitt
re:"One new outstanding part per year seems to be Intel's cadence with Itanium. In no time at all, it should easily tower over any other competitive part"
I think this is key to Intel's strategy to win the entire segment. They made a part with the features and functions needed in the segment, they and their partners spend a bunch on building the base of solutions, and now Intel turns on the afterburners with their process technology and lets Moore's law lead to a doubling of performance every 18 mos. The "boutique" architectures like Spark and Power will be hard pressed to compete. The price tag for a competing architecture goes up every day. Intel is moving both up and down with this architecture in the future. They are going to continue to move up with the 32bit line and they will probably add 32 bit extensions at some point… unless they are able to establish IA-64 as the standard and just bring it down to the masses through silicon scaling.
Sun may choose to not give in due to ego alone, but that would lead to their end. IBM will take it and lead with it; their money is in services anyway.
I don't care what Gartner said about market share in 2007, if Intel keeps its foot on the gas, there is no choice for the system houses and the IT shops.
Nitt
I agree that AMD has a chance. They need a lot to go very right for them and they also need a few things to go wrong for Intel. In addtion they need some unexpected good new in the economy. The game is not over yet and the betting public has beaten up both Intel and AMD as it is being played.
I'm not going to argue process, but I will say I have much more confidence in Intel at this point then I do in AMD and any of their partners.
Nitt
re;"We know AMD has a rather large inventory of parts that they can sell while they ramp Hammer so they can afford to move more wafer starts to Hammer than they would otherwise have to."
I don't know if they have a big inventory, but if they do, it's stuff that has an ASP of ~50 now and is dropping. They can throw wafer starts at Hammer, but I do not believe they sell any real volume before Q2 since it is scheduled to be launched in Q1, which has meant late Q1 or even early Q2. And we have seen AMDs last two launches where parts don't show up in the channel for another couple of months.
re:So, the 2400+ goes for $199 I'd say that a 3400+ would go for around $299 which is ok by me, that should bring AMD back into the black."
The 2400+ is at $199 today (pricewatch) with very few parts being chased. As volume ramps this and the 2600 and 2800 will need to drop. They can sell thousands at $200 and more, but not millions in an unconstrained market. Same is true for hammer... if they sell thousands they will get $299 maybe more, but if they try to sell 1Mu they need to drop below $200, and to sell 2 or 3Mu in a quarter they need to drop below 150. AMD need to sell 6MU/quater at and ASP over $90 to stop the bleeding and build some reserves. If they sell 4Mu of the old stuff at a $50ASP that means they need to sell 2Mu of the new stuff (Hammer, 2600/2800+ at an ASP of over $180. Right now with everything up to the 2200+ being sold, their ASP is around $50 and they can't seem to sell what they have... AMD has a very tough road.
I know that many people like to root for the underdog, but in the case of AMD vs Intel, it appears that Intel has gotten things running well with some room for error while AMD needs to hit everything exactly right to even have a chance to survive… and they would need some additional help from a quick recovery in the global demand for PCs.
Nitt
re:your corvette post
I don't agree with your concept for a few reasons:
1)The car itself is a complete item, but the CPU is one component of a larger system. You are talking about a $45-50K car in a world where cars average price is less then half that. And yes there are sub $10K cars, but the buying public sees some value in spending over $20K on average. The CPU as a component to a $600-$1500 system is quite different. There is room for sub $100 CPUs and >$200CPUs… and Intel’s goal is to get the ASP north of $200… in the absolute worst of times…the past year they appear to have it somewhere north of $175, while there competition peaked around $100 and is now back down to around $50.
2)The car market is very fragmented, lots of brands, and lots of models. Even with a pretty large market for $40K plus cars, there are lots of choices. Intel has over 80% of the CPU business in units, and even more in dollars. Intel can drive the mix much more effectively then a single car model can in a sea of choice.
3)As ASP pressures mounted on the desktop, Intel continued to expand its market to very high ASP parts for servers and workstations with the Pentium pro then the Xeon family and soon Itanium. They also have done this with mobile product which have held up well verses the competition from AMD and Transmeta, not to mention there own desktop CPUs.
4) Intel created a “value brand” to compete against AMD mostly, and AMD continues to be stuck competing with Celeron.
5) Moore’s law continues to work. Intel doubles performance every 18 month and prices for systems come down. The Corvette has offered incremental changes as best… we would all have cars that go from coast to coast at the speed of light and get a million miles per gallon if Moore’s applied to automobiles. Oh, and every time we make systems faster, programmers seems to find a way to fill the cycles… or at least buyers believe they need to be prepared.
Yes, I think Intel needs to grow other business over time, and I think ASP are under pressure more from the economy now then from any competition. But, I think Intel is in a very good position as THE computing platform building block supplier to the world… maybe Sun and Apple will finally come over to the light.
Nitt
re:"Comm hasn't looked too good, and you have the ARMHY warning. Still a guess, I could be very wrong."
I'm not expecting any real good news on revenues from Comm... just hoping for some more cost controls kicking in.
Nitt
re:"the MB manufacturers have had Hammer samples for many months now"
Yea, but without production silicon any validation is suspect. System manufactures who care will need to do a lot of testing to make sure stuff works once they get all the pieces. This will not matter as much to some of the white box guy's, and it won’t matter to some of the people who just have to have the newest everything (a very small number).
Re"Most Hammer boards will come with USB 2.0, AGP 8x, Serial ATA and Firewire on board."
Like I said, anyone can make literature for a new product. There are even product slicks available for P4 from 3rd parties that offer all those features. One thing to remember is, hammer boards don't "come" at all yet. If a volume OEM wants those features for a model, they will have it build if the economics make sense to integrate everything versus an add-in card.
How about we get off this,who has features on a motherboard that is missing a CPU, and get to some of my other comments. I told you why I thought Hammer would have a rough ramp... do you have a counter argument? How does hammer go from 0 to 1Mu/month, 5Mu/quarter,30Mu/year, and on what timeline and in what segments of the market? Oh, and at what ASP?
Thanks
Nitt
re;"There are tons of Hammer boards waiting for CPUS. These boards have the latest feature sets on them unlike the Intel MBS for the P4. Of course these boards are not available for purchase yet but they were due in Q4/02, Q1/03 last time I looked. So, the support is there for Hammer, it’s AMD that's holding everything up."
It easy to put out a flier on your new mother board, or even make couple... now they need to get all the pieces together (hardware, software, bios, etc) and start debugging. When does this part happen, before or after AMD claims to be shipping production? How long are the "supporter" going to put the needed resources into supporting this product?
If this product is going to be "released" in Q1, then you can assume that volume capability happens at the start of Q3 at the earliest. I can't imagine what will compel someone to buy a Hammer system with 32bit XP on it... and no, I don't believe much if any of the 64bit SW will be ready to ship as production, and if it does you will be hard pressed to see an advantage over the existing 32bit sw. Yes there will be the AMD diehards and general techie diehards who will plunk down the bucks to buy a system… this does not create the 20-30Mu businesses AMD needs to survive. I think most buyers safe and see what happens to hammer. Yes AMD is holding things up, but I've got to believe "supporters" who have other work to do are not investing anything more than paper to this effort right now.
BTW, there is a broad choice of features and function among P4 motherboards. Intel, the OEMs and motherboard suppliers are continuing to spin new one regularly.
Nitt
Re:"Anyway, all of AMD's products that I mentioned are not "powerpoint" products but real products that have been demonstrated at numerous venues. The only valid question that you have is whether AMD can manufacture these things. My guess is yes."
I'm not sure how a "demonstration" means a lot. This chip will compete with Pentium on the desktop first if AMD expects to get enough volume to matter. It's not clear the chip will matter on the desktop from a performance standpoint because it is not clear there will be any 64bit code that will make people care. The server space will take time to get a foothold in. Network owners do not take risks... it will take time to get SW in place and then it will take more time to get users to evaluate it completely and then deploy (24 months would be fast). You have to ask yourself, how compelling will Hammer be?
I also believe that despite the press releases regarding support, most companies "supporting" Hammer are really watching their spending and waiting to see if AMD can get it out. The first versions of any SW will not be best in class out of the gates… and some will be beta. There will be less support for Hammer than there is for Athlon... less motherboards, less chipsets, less OEMs offering systems. This economy keeps everyone risk averse... that's why Intel's big support machine adds so much value in the worst of times and AMD has no answer for that.
Nitt
re:"The real key will be the general comments on visibility going into 1H'03".
If history is the key, Intel will stick to Q4 outlook on the call. How the month of October looks along with orders for the rest of the quarter will be key. If Q3 played out as I suggested in my previous post, then there could be continued positive comments about the turns environment and product mix... all would bode well for Intel considering AMD appears to be out of the game for at least Qs 4 and 1. Hopefully the rest of Intel has slowed the bleeding also which would help EPS outlook.
Nitt
re"Although this year seasonal demand has not soared as before, board manufacturers have still felt relatively stronger buying sentiment compared to other IT product makers."
Based on this along with other information regarding a ramping September (be it a modest ramp), along with AMDs warning that said the PC market is down, I'm beginning to believe Intel is probably at the high end of the range... maybe right at the top.
Here's my thinking: The sale of AMD's stuff seems to have tanked in the later part of the quarter causing >$100M miss. We are getting reports that September seems to have strengthened vs. previous months, but AMD did not participate. That leaves Intel participating with CPUs and probably chipsets and motherboards. In a turns situation, it's much easier for Intel to say "we don't have as many of those really cheap CPUs... can you take the one's that cost a bit more"?
My guess is the quarter will come in at $6.65-6.8B, margins will be at or above the 51% mark, and EPS will be $0.14-0.16.
Guidance for Q-4 will probably be tempered and start with a range of whatever they have in Q3 actual up to Q3 actual plus $600M… they will leave room to update at mid quarter. So assume somewhere between $6.65B and 7.2B or $6.8B-7.4B. Margin outlook will be 52 or 53 plus or minus a few points for Q4.
That’s my shot… I’m not sure what it does to the stock price with all the uncertainty on the market, so I just hold at this point.
Nitt