Replies to post #4031 on AMD strictly moderated (AMD)

[mas]

Well considering Athlon XP aka K7 was 90% unit sales up until a year ago what I am saying is not so far fetched ;-). AMD are probably still heavily reliant on cheap processors for their bread and butter sales. IF they ever break major corporate accounts this may change but it's not for no reason why they have been the overclocker's price/performance king for some time.

[oc detective]

Morgan Stanley's (analyst report 28th Feb.) estimate for Q4 2005 was that AMD mpus had an ASP of just over $90 compared to just under $150 for Intel. Obviously this increased (for AMD) during Q1 of 2006 however I wouldnt expect it to be much higher than $100.

Quote from report.

"We estimate that AMD’s MPU ASP was just over $90 in the fourth quarter, and this compares with our estimate that Intel’s ASP was just under $150. We believe that approximately 1/3 of this difference is explained by legacy issues that have caused AMD’s ASP for the same SKU to be 10%-15% lower than Intel’s. However, we believe that 2/3 of the difference is explained by mix. Provided AMD executes, its long-term product mix should look a lot more like Intel’s, which suggests that long-term ASPs between the two companies should converge over time."

[jhalada]

wbmw,

That doesn't seem to coincide with the fact that nearly every single design out there, both in terms of retail, OEM, 3rd/4th tier, channel market, etc, seems to come with plenty of availability of Athlon based processors. Your 16% volume characterization is like from some other kind of alternate reality.

I think you may be closer to reality (than mas) on the product line breakdown, but I think you may be a bit high on pricing. I haven't run it through the spreadsheet, but I think you are probably some $5 to $10 too high on Sempron, and maybe even $30 too high on A64. There are a lot of 3000, 3200 and 3500, relatively few 3700 to 4000 processors.

Joe