Replies to post #49667 on Advanced Micro Devices Inc (AMD)

[bobs10]

I would think gamers would be chomping at the bit to get their hands on a 64 bit O/S from MSFT. Certainly I can't see any of them buying a non 64 bit machine, and given the move to 64 bit games why would any of them buy anything but a 64 bit O/S?

Also, while I agree that Longhorn will probably be the first O/S that makes full use of the 64 bit hardware, given MSFT's penchant for pushing back intros it could well be 08 before we see the product in the market. In the meantime I can't see many consumers buying a 32-bit machine if the difference in cost with a 64-bit machine is negligible. How long do you think it will be before 32 bit has that passe stigma attached to it?

Granted 32 bit will be around for a long time in markets where price is everything, but I don't want AMD doing anything in those markets other than what's necessary to keep INTC honest, at least until fab36 comes online.

I’m really interested in how AMD64 and in particular how A64 is doing this q. That should give us a pretty good indication as to how well sales will go when a 64 bit O/S is available. I still think, starting in h205, there will be more than enough demand for 64bit to soak up all AMD's capacity until fab36 comes online. Especially if AMD64 product is still viewed as being superior to INTC's offerings.

Right now say AMD is selling 8m chips a q, probably closer to 8.5m . If 60% of those are AMD64 that’s 4.8m chips being sold without a 64 bit O/S from MSFT. If AMD can sell another 4m with a 64 bit O/S, AMD is maxed out at 90nm. This doesn’t seem unreasonable to me given the way AMD64 sales have been growing q/q.

[kpf]

Joe

In Serverspace adoption could be faster, as A64 delivers instant benefit and driver issues are less relevant. OTOH, these folks are known to be reluctant in adopting new code. 50% within a year sounds very optimistic for my ears.

K.