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.
fingolfen it's different this time because Intel not only did a new design in Prescott, they did a die shrink at the same time. AMD only has to do a die shrink this time and you can figure they are getting help from IBM. Intel doing a new design and a shrink at the same time only complicates the changeover.
fingolfen
The scenario looks to be playing out differently this time with Intel stumbling again and again, with one delay after another. As far as how power hungry AMD chips are at .13 micron, A64 has lower thermals than Northwood. I don't expect any change when AMD goes to .09 micron because P4's have always had higher thermals than AMD chips. The last good chip Intel had in terms of thermals was P3 which is essentailly being called Pentium M. AMD is going to attain higher clockspeed at .13 which will be more than enough to keep them ahead of Intel on performance the rest of this year. By the time Intel has Prescott 3.4G, AMD will have FX-53 and likely A64 3700+. Also do not forget AMD and IBM have analiance now which precedes the move to .065 micron. Bottom line Intel banked on AMd's 64 bit offerings failing, and they were wrong. Now they must scramble to find an answer.
greg s the problem is that Intel never typically holds back on touting the virtues of a new chip. And saying it has more transistors and is smaller (but only 15%)means very little. It's all about performance and AMD has taken back the lead. Also a supposed 30% decrease in the cost of making Prescotts over Northwoods by 2005 is incorrect if you figure in wafer prices and declining yields after a die shrink. All Intel can do is stick hope that their optimizations are taken advantage of by the software community ASAP or they will be falling further behind. Don't forget a 64 bit version of Windows is coming which is going to help AMD.
greg s nobody is predicting Intel's downfall, just that AMD has better prospects going forward over at least the next 12 months. AMD is going to take more and more of the high end in desktop and regular size notebooks, as well as taking share from Xeon in the server market. This means AMD's ASP's are going to keep improving which will mean much greater profitability than .12 in a quarter.
greg s Intel has some major problems and there is no diputing that. Intel must deal with the thermal issues as well as the compatibility problems ASAP. Prescotts are getting beating by their Northwood predecessors despite dobling the cache. And Intel has no magical switch in the current steppings of Prescott that they can flip on for 64 bit. It will be next year before Intel has a 64 bit chip other than Itanium. It's interesting to see all the delays by Intel which to some can do no wrong. Intel is finding out the hard way they should have gone with SOI.
GordonH
Intel is not going to cut cost by 30% going from 132mm to 112mm which only amounts to a 15% decrease in die size. Throw in the fact that with each die shrink yields decrease and Prescott runs hot and can't even top Northwood with a die shrink to start and I don't think the picture is so rosy for Intel. Intel has to make revisions on the chip because it simply runs too hot. Plus looking at the benchmarks, Northwood which loses to A64 still beats Prescott and is available at 3.4G while Prescott is only currently available at 3.2G. Looks like Intel has problems.
Read this clueless analyst's take on Prescott
Wedbush Morgan Securities (INTC, SPCH)
E-mail or Print this story
3 February 2004, 08:46am ET
INTC: Reit Buy - TGT$40; Intel officially launched its much anticipated enhanced P4 architecture (code name Prescott) yesterday. This desktop oriented chip includes minor enhancements such as doubling L2 cache to 1MB, adding 13 new instructions, and supporting the multi-tasking Hyper-Threading technology. The real benefit is the smaller die size 112 mm2 vs 132 mm2 of the previous design despite more transistors, because it is based on 90 nm process. The 90 nm process technology allows Intel to price aggressively and still enjoy excellent gross margins. Ramping of 300 mm production for Prescott also promises a 30% cost reduction, realizable fully in 2005. We are increasing our 2005 EPS estimate from $1.65 to $1.70 because of higher gross margin assumption (65% vs 64%) and slightly lower R&D as Intel is likely to rationalize its very ambitious cellular chipset program. We are maintaining our 2004 EPS estimate of $1.33. Consensus has significantly increased over the past 2-3 months to $1.26 for 2004 and $1.47 for 2005. Our investment thesis remains the same - Intel is benefiting from the consumer PC upgrade cycle starting in 2003 and growth in emerging markets, which are now joined by PC upgrade cycle among developed countries (which tend to favor the better margin notebooks). Intel for the first time in over a decade is leading its rival Advanced Micro Devices (AMD-NR) by 3 years in the transition to 300 mm wafer production, resulting in a cost advantage as much as 30% in 2005/2006.
This guy obviously has no clue on the fact that going from 132mm2 to 112mm2 in combination with 300mm wafers is not going to reduce costs by 30%. As anyone knows that estimate is inaccurate even before the fact that yields in percentage terms get worse with each die shrink. What this guy forgets to mention is how this chip as is typical with Intel is slower per clock than it's predecessor, which was the case when Intel went to P4 from P3. At least then they were able to jump from 1G P3 to 1.3G P4, even though as is the case now, the new Intel can't outperform the old. This time Intel has a new chip with lower IPC and lower clock. AMD on the other hand gets better IPC out of A64/K8 than it did out of Athlon/K7. Intel also is getting pressure now to match AMD with a 64 bit solution in despktop because Dell doesn't want to miss the boat, seeing as AMD A64 is gaining steam along with Opteron which mops the floor with Zeon, and is clearly a smarter upgrade path that Itanium in terms of servers.
What are Prescott thermals at 4GHZ
It must take one heck of a cooling system. Intel screwed up first with Itanium, and now with Prescott. The fact that the new Prescott debuts at a speed below Northwood is not very good for Intel since 3.4G Prescott won't even be available for another month or so. No speed bump despite the extended pipeline which is rediculously long. Once again 1 step forward, two steps back for Intel. Intel is in trouble now because folks who buy servers are clamoring for Opteron and 64 bit. Dell can't give it to them so you can bet they are giving Intel ultimatums.
Thanks HailMary for clarification
I see now that Pacific Crest Securities did downgrade AMD so that probably had more to due with the drop in price. Like I said though, the fundamentals still look good for AMD so I don't put any wieght in the downgrade.
KeithDust2000 this is what I think he means
ITEM 4. TERMS OF THE TRANSACTION
Item 4 of the Schedule TO is hereby amended and supplemented to add the following:
The Offer to Exchange expired at 9:00 p.m. Pacific (California) Time on Friday, July 25, 2003. Pursuant to the Offer to Exchange, we have accepted for cancellation all eligible options that were properly tendered for exchange. Options to purchase approximately 18,962,368 shares of our common stock were properly tendered for exchange, which represented approximately 76.14% of all eligible options. Subject to the terms and conditions of the Offer to Exchange, we will grant replacement options to purchase approximately 13,373,064 shares of our common stock on or after January 29, 2004 in exchange for the options cancelled in the Offer to Exchange.
I noticed earlier in the SEC filing that the Price on the options was to be $12 or higher, and obviously everyone will exercise those options because AMD currently trades above that price. My guess is that even though the number of shares under the options is reduced, they are all in the money immediately as of today which increases the number of non-diluted shares immediately. Some folks probably would have preferred that the options just expired and nevr became a factor. Funny if that is the case that it would take till today to have an affect. But I guess that would be why we need to read the SEC filings more closely. My personal opinion is that I am not going to reduce my holdings because nothing has changed fundamentally for AMD. It still looks like AMD will be profitable going forward and that's what counts. Sometimes the market, a sector, or an individual stock are the victims of misinformation, or misinterpretation. This is just part of the game. Thanks to all for all the useful information all of you give. It makes it easier to get to the bottom of things on days like today.
sgolds
Looking at the charts it looks like 14 should be a strong support level. If AMD were to drop significantly below and/or close significantly below $14 the stock could potentially go down to the $10 to $12 range. I guess we will just have to wait and see
sgolds
What is wierd though is the stock opened up on light/moderate volume, then volume zoomed up and the stock fell like a rock. Also I can't seem to find a downgrade, not even at Pacific Crest Securities.
KeithDust2000 who downgraded AMD?
jjayxxxx
The reason that the diluted eps is the same is because AMD doesn't have to count all those shares until profits excede a higher amount in terms of EPS. Somone pointed this out on the board last week. So .12 should be the number used, or maybe .09 if you factor out the favorable charge.
Bapco is nothing but an Intel subsidiary
This company is right down the street from Intel's headquarters, and Intel gives then quite a bit of money. Everyone has known Bapco was a fraud from the time Sysmark2002 came out. The percentages that are assigned to applications in Sysmark 2002 and beyond is nowhere close to reality. Any IT professional knows that Bapco is a fraud and has no credibility. It's not worth getting worked up over because everyone on both sides of the issues knows it's just more phoney Intel hype.
Hasn't anyone else seen this estimate for AMD?
http://finance.lycos.com/qc/news/story.aspx?symbols=NYSE:AMD&story=200401121227_JGN_1224:55270
AMD: reit` market perform - We believe AMD will report in line to slight upside for Q4:03. Our estimates for revenues and EPS are $1.2 billion and $0.16, respectively. Strength for flash and microprocessors has been in line to better than expected during Q4:03, according to our channel checks. In addition, Q1:04 appears to be shaping up for continuing strength for flash for wireless handsets and MPUs for notebook PCs.
These folks seem to have higher expectations than the rest of the analysts. Should be interesting to see if they are right. 0.16 and a strong Q1 outlook would push AMD to $20 to $25 very quickly.
sgolds
looks like action has been taken so hopefully the board will be less cluttered with garbage or nonsense. I should have contacted Matt sooner. Back on topic, I wonder why AMD is announcing on Jan 20, while Intel is announcing on Jan 14. Usually AMD is just a day later. I wonder if they are holding off to see how orders/demand is in early Q1, so they can say whether they expect to turn a profit again in Q104. This is assuming they show a profit for Q403. I believe is safe to say this since AMD always warns within the first week of the new quarter if they will miss, and that time has passed. My guess is that AMD will make somewhere between .08 and .13, which is a downward revision from a few months ago when I expected .10 to .15, but is still above the consensus of .03. If AMD gives guidance for profits in the coming quarters the stock should be able to get past $20. But until Jan 20 we must wait. happy trading.
kpf
AMD warns if they are going to miss within the first week of the new quarter. If we don't here anything from AMD today, just laugh off the Smith Barney comments as rubish. I though I heard the January 15 Calls action was picking up which I read as bullish. Profits for Q403 and guidance for continuing profits will likely push AMD into the low 20's after the Q4 CC of AMD.
KeithDust2000 AG Edwards has a wild sense of humor
My guess is AG Edwards has some relationship with Intel because AMD's balance sheet is growing stronger, with AMD cash flow positive in Q3, and looking at a profit of around .10 to .15 in Q4. Support for Opteron/Athlon 64 is growing as benchmarking shows it to be a clear winner over P4/Xeon. The only one having a rough time right now seems to be Intel in it's transition to 90nm with Prescott, which has been repeatedly delayed. I can't wait till Intel announces Yamhill which will stop Itanium from any additional growth. 2004 should be a good year for AMD, it might even be great.
WOW 32 itaniums sold, let's call "That's Incredible"
dougSF30
Thanks for the info, I hope you are right. I was a little diappointed with Flash in Q3 because I really expected more. In Q3 I guess ASP's were not doing as well even though volume was good. The key for Flash is higher ASP's. I remember when AMD was only getting half of the Flash from FASL and that amounted to something like 450 million that quarter back in 2000 when Flash demand last peaked.
dougSF30
I am curious as to know why you think $1 eps for AMD in 2004 is conservative. I myself hope that AMD makes that much or more in 2004, but I think it depends a lot on how much more revenue comes from Flash. I would appreciate your thoughts on the topic as well as what you think AMD will earn in Q403.
dougSF30
I think sgolds makes some valid points and put some time and effort into his post. I don't think his post was mean't to be the only thing investors focus on. What you should remember is that technical analysis does come into play when many people or institutions are buying and selling stock. The whole idea of this board is the useful exchange of information and that is what sgolds was doing with his post. Technical analysis is just another piece of the puzzle, as is current news, maket sentiment, and sector sentiment. I myself noticed today how AMD's stock fell back and everyone was wondering why. Then someone from another board misunderstood what was said at the CSFB conference, and all of a sudden everyone thinks AMD is warning or lowering guidance on Q4. As it turns out AMD just is not saying anything right now other than saying they see a seasonally strong Q4. Reuters article backed this up and mentioned nothing of continuing losses, so it was just someone misunderstanding what was said.
sgolds
I wonder if the little bit of insider selling in the last month may be weighing on the stock right now. Nothing by Jerry or Hector yet but still some shares have been sold which means some executives may not be as optimistic on AMD short term. I just noticed the recent insider selling today so it must have been updated this week.
KeithDust2000 I missed the AMD talk
I am confused by the posts I have seen but did someone mistake a reference to last quarters loss. Or did AMD say that they were going to show a loss in Q4 as well. I would appreciate if you could clear this up for me, and if AMD gave any specific numbers for Revenue or earnings.
sgolds
I would add him to my ignore list, but I already have 5 folks including elmer on it. I guess the only thing to do is to enjoy AMD's success knowing that it burns the bashers up inside. Switching back to discussing AMD. It seems AMD is hitting some resistance now. I am starting to think AMD needs to give higher guidance for the stock to go any higher short term. My best guess is that AMD will make between .10 and .15 in Q4. This could get the stock into the 20's, but the upside will be limited unless growth continues into the new year. This could happen in Q104 but we will probably see a drop off in Q204.
Windsock Prescott was due out late Q3/early Q4 but Intel was not able to meet that timeline. Someone posted a link from Intel's website yesterday which proved this fact on this board. Intel missed the mark on getting Prescott out by more than 1 quarter.
golfbum you were not paying attention
The intel posters on this board equate 100K shipped to mean 100K sold. That is not necessarily the case as pointed out by sgolds in #18370. You sound as offended as the other Intel backers, but need I remind you if you like Intel so much there is a board for Intel. You Intel folks like to jump down peoples throats if anyone questions any information coming out of Intel. Heck, some of you spin 100k shipped into 100k sold, which anyone knows is not always the same thing. When I point that out, you are quick to go on the attack, trying to belittle AMD posters. So you give it a rest and look at yourself before interjecting yourself into another persons discussion half cocked. PS, don't waste your time responding to this post because you have just joined my I list.
Well said Maui
I agree with your analysis. It just gets annoying when some of the posters just bash AMD. I guess that's why there is an ignore function. What will be interesting to see is if US businesses will start to upgrade their pc's in 2004 in any significant manner. It appears the upgrade cyle may have already started overseas.
Thanks for the post sgolds EOM
SilentBob
Ignore greg, he doesn't have a link that says Intel sold 100k itaniums. He is just hoping to confuse AMD shareholders but is doing a poor job of it. Funny how this is the AMD board and yet all these Intel fans who are nothing but AMD bashers spend so much time over here. I wouldn't believe a word any of them say because they have their own agenda. But the problem is they are failing miserably at convincing anyone of AMD's supposed impending doom. Just add them to your ignore list and be done with them. There are folks on this board like sgolds, buggi, and others who understand the business and who add a lot to this board.
Greg you are incorrect
The 100k shipped quote came from Paul O over at Intel and is backed up by nothing. The analyst mentioned in the Article I gave a link for called Intels claims false, and said what we already know, itanium is not gaining the acceptance Intel had wished. I think you need to get your facts straight before you act all high and mighty, so as not to come off as anything other than an AMD basher. and by the way, I had just removed you off my ignore list earlier this week to see if you had matured, but obviously you have not so there you will return. Next time pay better attention and you won't end up with egg on your face.
Article claims Intel 100k Itanium shipped is false
http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=12790
This article shows how Intel is trying to spin things and exaggerate the success of Itanium. Companies are not fond of itanium as it stands now. Intel is just trying to let lose with more propaganda as usual because Opteron is doing well gaining acceptance and is clearly better than Xeon even on 32 bit apps. on 64 bit Xeon will be crusked unless Intel pulls out Yamhill which will in turn kill itanium.
greg link which disputes intel 100K claims
http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=12790
Looks like you have egg on your face and I have proof.
SilentBob
wbwm is simply another Intel cheerleader who has a problem knowing where the Intel Board is. I guess it's just a reading comprehension problem he has. I myself am putting them both on my I list.
wbmw
Just showing again how you Intel folks will overlook a delay from Intel but not from AMD. I believe the term hypocrisy comes to mind.
wbmw
I was simply pointing out to another poster how elmer pretends to be perfect, when it is obvious he is not. My guess is you guys are buddies or you wouldn't try to attack me. FYI, this is the AMD board not the Intel board, and if you don't like it too bad. But if you think your kind can just run amok you are wrong.
Golfbum
I don't care what Intel says because it does not affect my investing decisions when it is pure fluff like the 100K shipped statement. Intel is just scared because it is quite obvious Opteron is gaining traction and Intel is going to see their share of the server market shrink.
wbmw
Intel would have said sold if they could have but they haven't actually sold all the chips shipped. Knowing how Intel operates it is correct to figure in those chips Intel gave for free to IBM (2000) and 1000 more to HPQ, are included in the number. There is also little doubt that Intel has given more away for free or at a substantial discount because demand is not what they had hoped.
Elmer, how about Prescott being pushed back
You seem to forget that Intel had to bring out P4EE because they have failed to deliver Prescott on time. Early this year Intel said Prescott would be available in early Q4 (October). So before you beat the Intel drum and say "I told you so", look at how Intel's roadmap has slipped. Prescott will not be available till January, a 3 month slip.