AI
Saturday, March 06, 2004 2:15:02 AM
Dan, thanks for the little bit of history. I guess I was right about Intel not creating another 64-bit x86 ISA... they just made theirs compatible with AMD's. I did, however, underestimate the hype that 64-bit could generate, since it clearly forced Intel's 64-bit hand sooner than they would have liked.
Speaking of history, however, how well do you remember this post, made 2 years ago?
It's over, over, over, for Intel, and all because of AMD.
Not that Intel won't keep selling lots of CPUs, but they will never again sell $25 parts for an ASP of $200.
Because of the competition from AMD, they now have to sell $125 parts for $130.
The minute they stop pouring just about every dime they can scratch together into keeping 6 of their FABs competitive with AMD's one FAB, they start losing market share.
Their problem is that they're trying to maintain production of 3 times as many CPUs as AMD ships, and their parts are almost twice as big, so it takes them 6 FABs to keep up with AMD's one.
What Intel wants to do is to go back to the days when there wasn't any competition, and they could sell cheap-to-FAB parts made with old, already paid for equipment. Instead, Intel has to junk $10 million dollar machines and replace them with new ones every 18 months - and while they're doing that, they can't make any money.
Intel can hang on to their business, but as soon as they try to take any money out of it, AMD starts gaining share again.
http://www.siliconinvestor.com/stocktalk/msg.gsp?msgid=16904311
How many quarters of profit and/or market share gains has Intel had since you made the prediction that "It's all over" for them?
Speaking of history, however, how well do you remember this post, made 2 years ago?
It's over, over, over, for Intel, and all because of AMD.
Not that Intel won't keep selling lots of CPUs, but they will never again sell $25 parts for an ASP of $200.
Because of the competition from AMD, they now have to sell $125 parts for $130.
The minute they stop pouring just about every dime they can scratch together into keeping 6 of their FABs competitive with AMD's one FAB, they start losing market share.
Their problem is that they're trying to maintain production of 3 times as many CPUs as AMD ships, and their parts are almost twice as big, so it takes them 6 FABs to keep up with AMD's one.
What Intel wants to do is to go back to the days when there wasn't any competition, and they could sell cheap-to-FAB parts made with old, already paid for equipment. Instead, Intel has to junk $10 million dollar machines and replace them with new ones every 18 months - and while they're doing that, they can't make any money.
Intel can hang on to their business, but as soon as they try to take any money out of it, AMD starts gaining share again.
http://www.siliconinvestor.com/stocktalk/msg.gsp?msgid=16904311
How many quarters of profit and/or market share gains has Intel had since you made the prediction that "It's all over" for them?
