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.
I don't believe his claim of having no position in AMD. Unless he's simply nuts.
Was it when you became moderator of the AMD iHub board that your ego underwent hyperinflation, or was it earlier?
mas was given a two week 'vacation' for his inability to control his potty mouth and follow the board rules.
"not inconsequential" != "dramatic"
Yeah, well, the "AMD price cut" effect is happening already. You'll see.
Yeah, that guy (eachus) should be nominated for Blowhard of the Year.
despite tight production capacity and possible erosion of its profits, the sources said.
Q2 and Q3 are going to be UGLY.
weaker than expected demand in Q2
Much of that seems to have been deliberately engineered by Intel, and their talk of Q3 price cuts.
Turns out, AMD can't afford to cut X2 prices as much as they'd like to against Intel's prices. Seems to be a question of them turning in quarterly losses...
http://www.siliconinvestor.com/readmsg.aspx?msgid=22536699
Buggi, no need for the tract, it was merely an abstract example.
Good grief, it was just an example of how a mix change can increase ASPs even if all prices decline. It wasn't meant to represent reality.
It's no longer 1999. :)
Well that logic doesn't work... I can cut prices 50% across the board, but if I change from 90% low end to 90% high-end, and my high-end is 10 times more expensive than my low-end...
That's what BUGGI is playing at. The problem is that the price cut factor is much larger than any improving mix factor.
Maybe AMD's coming huge price cuts will convince you? If not, their quarterly results surely will.
You'll see. :)
Oh dear, you've got it backwards. Intel froze out Q2 and Osbourned AMDs AM2 sales on purpose, and AMD has been forced to cut prices based on Intel's Netburst and NGMA pricing. The problem for AMD is, they'll no longer have a high end, outside of 4S+ servers. And that spells big ASP drops.
The fact that they have waited until now shows to me that Q2 will be ok
If "ok" means revenues down 15% QoQ, maybe.
It's not bitterness just a desire for the truth to be heard,
I think it's rather the manifestation of an overdeveloped ego.
X2 copes quite fine as is with E6600 and down,
Oh, yeah, sure it does mas. :) Even the $1000 FX-62 is beaten by the 6600.
X2 opposition? To Conroe? There basically isn't any-- the contest is already over, and the X2 lost badly. Better luck with the K8L, maybe.
Have you ridden AMD shares or options down to $26.xx ? Is that where all this bitterness is coming from?
And what did he say about AMD?
K8 will gut P4 like a pig at the same price points in open competition in retail and you know it
I guess it'll take AMD's Q2 miss to wake you up.
and good for AMD You are completely wrong. You will see how wrong in a few weeks.
Tell me again, Intel are *purposely* disabling 2MB of cache on Conroes for market segmentation reasons ?
Yes, so the enthusiasts don't all buy the lowest speed grade and overclock it to 3GHz, which they all seem capable of running at.
I assume it is because AMD stock is now at $26.xx
How about the majority of buyers who want to preserve their warranty and won't overclock ?
Pentium D, for most of them.
Good grief, mas, it was only meant to be an example for BUGGI, of how low-volume, high-ASP price cuts can affect overall ASPs, despite being low-volume.
When X2s are $150-200 what do you think most cost-conscious buyers will buy ?
If you mean cost-conscious enthusiasts, low-end Conroe.
How could this LOW VOLUME, which you point out every
and every day, support AMD ASPs?
Because the LOW VOLUME has a HIGH PRICE. You understand multiplication, right?
Compare: .9 * $50 + .1 * $500 with .9 * $50 + .1 * $200
That's $95 vs. $65, all from the change in ASP of a part with LOW VOLUME.
Amazing, that multiplication, isn't it?
Any other questions I can help you with?
There is tremendous pent-up demand for X2s
Tremendous? Only the small enthusiast segment cares that much about a processor, and they all now want Conroe instead.
AMD's ASP is supported by high-priced X2s which help offset the boatloads of $50 Semprons they sell in China. You can check back in with me after AMD warns or misses for Q2. :)
I doubt whether you will actually be able to get any Core 2s on its 'launch' just as I doubt the immediate availibility of Woodcrest too on its launch. Add 2-4 weeks for true availibility I would say.
What are these doubts based on?
AMD's Q2 and Q3 will be just fine and the stock should get back into the 30s once it is shown their profits will not be affected.
You're kidding, right?
AMD's Q2 will be below guidance and expectations, and Q3 outlook will be sour indeed. If you think AMD's profits will not be affected by Intel fighting with price AND performance, you're in for a rude awakening.
Bingo. Rev G = dumb shrink.
No it doesn't sound 'reasonable'. It is just plain wrong, based on what Dirk and other AMD folks have said, and Hans agrees it is wrong:
http://www.aceshardware.com/forums/read_post.jsp?id=120058172&forumid=1
1) The picture used (blue single core) is not a Rev.G it is a
manufacturing prototype which will never go into production.
The empty area below L2 is really empty.
2) The encircled area's are: MicroCode Flash, 2xTag-Rams, 8kB ECC.
Not complex decoders or buffers.
3) Rev. G is supposed to be a dumb shrink. Thus, using scaled copies
of the HiP8 megacells. The blue single core uses all new megacells
from the IBM alliance and is a major re-layout, not a dumb shrink.
Some folks are certainly getting imaginative, though. Rev G just *can't* be a dumb shrink, because that would be so bad for AMD, so let's pretend it isn't!
higher end X2s are thinner than NGA will be at launch, so the pressure will be there.
And indeed, as mas posted below:
"On 24th July, Athlon 64 X2 would drop 35% to 50% to against Conroe"
Voila!
Q3 guidance will be crappy, and if news of this gets out, this might make Q2 even worse that it is already tracking, as X2 buyers wait for July.
No, that is just wrong:
Rev G is a simple shrink.
Rev H is the K8L.
The die photo shown in April is neither Rev G, nor Rev H, it is a never-to-be-produced manufacturing prototype.
Rev "GH" sounds like a typo.
http://www.siliconinvestor.com/readmsg.aspx?msgid=22532614
and from the AMD Japan roundtable the day before Tech Day:
YOU linked to it here: http://www.siliconinvestor.com/readmsg.aspx?msgid=22499424
- As for the next of Rev. F with Hound CPU architecture to expansion
K8 "Rev. of the new generation F (Revision F)" AMD which is announced. In the past, AMD the possibility even with the following 65nm process core Rev. G of doing architecture expansion was reported with this corner, but that was the mistake. Rev. G in the almost remains same functional core, as Rev. F the following "Hound (the hound)" does the large-scale architecture expansion of the K8 core in the family. AMD June 1st (the Japanese time June 2nd nighttime) with "AMD Technology Analyst Day", is the schedule which makes the CPU road map clear, but leading that, with the round table which is held in Japan it made part clear.
It is the chart where the bottom compares the CPU core part of AMD. As for this time having become clear, as for the central core in the engineering sample which does not commercialize, differ from actual Rev. G. Most with the Hound core under, architecture is expanded at a stroke.
K8 Processor Cores
(You open in another window)
As for PDF editionthis
Dirk Meyer of AMD (darkness mayor) person
Dirk Meyer of AMD (the darkness mayor) the person (President & COO), you talk as follows concerning this chart.
"On in the figure (the CPU core) it is Rev. F. Center with production PROTOTYPE, it is not Rev. G. As for those which you under call Rev. H, we ' Hound (the hound) ' with are one among the next generation cores which are called ",
Meyer recognized, when the AMD core moves to the Hound family functionally from Rev. F. In other words, with Rev. G which becomes first 65nm process, there are no extensions from of Rev. F. According to a certain AMD authorized personnel, as for Rev. G you say that it is the core which almost is close to optical shrinking.
The $500 AMD parts become $200 AMD parts, etc., etc.
The speculation about Rev G is BS, as the die photo relied upon was not Rev G, nor anything else to ever be produced, per Dirk Meyer. Rev G is a simple shrink of Rev F.
There's been some discussion of this on SI, too, and I'd make the same argument here: The number of parts that yield non-working full cache, yet work fine with 1/2 the cache is tiny, due to built in redundancy in cache design. The vast majority are almost certainly 1/2-cache disabled on purpose, to fill a lower price-point.
This model has 512K * 2 on die, just half disabled. (It's a BH-E4) Wouldn't you have advocated a special smaller die part?
Let me have that crystal ball that identifies market-moving factors with certainty when you're done with it!
I suspect this is some analyst way out there with a high AMD price target (Pru, perhaps?) trying to rumor up AMD's stock price.
But it looks like it caught Woodcrest Flu this afternoon... maybe due to Anand's review vs. Opteron?