They should do the commercials during the superbowl that way no one can escape that kind of advertising! 
I've been saying for some time that AMD was getting itself in trouble - inventory buildup and their ASP (avg. selling price) is down to $98. But really, this news is not "news", it's pretty much built in to the stock's price at this point. Just as was the case with Intel when it went up on "bad" news. The news wasn't really that bad, flat revenues, and Intel had been hit about 7-8 days when tech stocks in general had been hit for big losses. Intel was down so low that on Friday when we had the warning from Intel directly, two major brokers upgraded the stock. I don't think AMD will be upgraded, but I doubt it will be downgraded either.
As some have noted, Intel derives income from many other areas. But one thing that they are really starting to make big $'s on is servers. Yes, it's not a new business for Intel, but they are really starting to eat in to Sun's space. Sun's stock got downgraded today for this and other reasons ...
As some have noted, Intel derives income from many other areas. But one thing that they are really starting to make big $'s on is servers. Yes, it's not a new business for Intel, but they are really starting to eat in to Sun's space. Sun's stock got downgraded today for this and other reasons ...
I'm not trying to say that Intel is a better processor than AMD, but in the big market our favorite CPU doesn't always win. Most of the profits for both Intel and AMD come from OEM and not us overclockers, who will be at the best %1.00 of their entire sales. If you look at any office today, most of them will have Intel-based systems, simply because nobody wants to worry about stability and compatibility of their computers. Small power supply, incorrect driver for video card, absense of IDE patches, etc... Nobody in big corporation has time and willing to deal with that. Until AMD figures out the way to have their processors work correctly without any patches right out the box, Intel is always going to be ahead.
Actually, Yahoo is one of the few internet companies that doesnt owe anyone money, I read an article about how companies like Amazon are on thin ice, but Yahoo actually has some good businessmen running the show and have a nice hunk of cash in reserves. Look for thier dominance to spread when the economy slows down.
Actually Dulanic, basically AMD rested on the success of the Athlon quite a bit.. well what the public saw was AMD resting. they're hard at work for the next CPU (sledgehammer), but it seems this lead to allowing intel to pump up their image somewhat.
of course, this year to us hardcore users has been nothing but AMD this, AMD that. the 'average' person sees this: AMD is the alternative, they're not great but ok, however intel released a P4, which is automatically better.
so you decide? would stock market people actually care about that? no, like modus said, they are idiots for the most part.
that, and AMD should have, (IMHO) rather then played things conservitavely (basically stay barely ahead of the competition), have released the updated CPU not only with better power and heat consumption/creation figures, but with better performance figures.
some ways that they could have done this:
-forget about releasing an updated version of the Athlon end of next year (thoroughbred), and release it right away.
-200mhz (actual throughput about 400mhz) FSB
-support for DDR SDRAM running from 100-200mhz would have been a much better defence to the P4 onslaught.
think about it, because of the FSB and RAM issue, Intel can now boast that their CPU is the best for games, using the basic gamers benchmark to prove it.
even IF AMD didn't release the updated CPU, the faster fsb/memory would still rock Intel's world.
because of AMD's conservitave moves, the public eye still sees them as just another CPU company, but they'd rather depend on good ole Intel, becuase they know that Intel is the main company (hell they might not even know who/what AMD is).
without a doubt, this year has been full of turmoil. in SOME benchmarks, AMD processors won. in others, they lost. not becuase of a inferior chip, but a bad performing chipset, and seemingly no work on optimization for AMD CPU's in games.
AMD's 750 was the best chipset for the Athlon (IMHO AGAIN) until the 760 was reviewed. though the 760 has yet to be released to the public..
however, the 760 is too late to wow the crowd. if it boasted the above specs (200mhz FSB, support for extremely fast DDR SDRAM), it would have swamped Intel severely, becuase the advantages they DID have, (FSB/MEM speed) would have been limited, and this time, Intel's solution would look bad, becuase when you even the bases, the differences in CPU's appears (superior FPU etc).
of course, AMD's been milking the market as much as possible, but they've yet to make a name for themselves in the public eye. this last year was their chance to do so, and they may have won over SOME, but not enough.
companies sole purposes are to dominate their market. to do that, you must prove that in ALL COUNTS, you are superior. and in order to get it through to the blind/religious, you have to do it with amazing numbers, not by winning most/some barely.
sure the P4 lost alot of benches compared to the Athlon, but it also won some, and looking forward, it's going to win alot more vs the Athlon, simply becuase of it's scaleability.
better luck next time AMD.
btw, for those who do not know, I personally favour AMD over intel. my main computer is a K6-2 400@420, if you are wondering.
many of the people on this board know me for rooting for the underdog, so don't try to make it look like I'm biased against them.
of course, this year to us hardcore users has been nothing but AMD this, AMD that. the 'average' person sees this: AMD is the alternative, they're not great but ok, however intel released a P4, which is automatically better.
so you decide? would stock market people actually care about that? no, like modus said, they are idiots for the most part.
that, and AMD should have, (IMHO) rather then played things conservitavely (basically stay barely ahead of the competition), have released the updated CPU not only with better power and heat consumption/creation figures, but with better performance figures.
some ways that they could have done this:
-forget about releasing an updated version of the Athlon end of next year (thoroughbred), and release it right away.
-200mhz (actual throughput about 400mhz) FSB
-support for DDR SDRAM running from 100-200mhz would have been a much better defence to the P4 onslaught.
think about it, because of the FSB and RAM issue, Intel can now boast that their CPU is the best for games, using the basic gamers benchmark to prove it.
even IF AMD didn't release the updated CPU, the faster fsb/memory would still rock Intel's world.
because of AMD's conservitave moves, the public eye still sees them as just another CPU company, but they'd rather depend on good ole Intel, becuase they know that Intel is the main company (hell they might not even know who/what AMD is).
without a doubt, this year has been full of turmoil. in SOME benchmarks, AMD processors won. in others, they lost. not becuase of a inferior chip, but a bad performing chipset, and seemingly no work on optimization for AMD CPU's in games.
AMD's 750 was the best chipset for the Athlon (IMHO AGAIN) until the 760 was reviewed. though the 760 has yet to be released to the public..
however, the 760 is too late to wow the crowd. if it boasted the above specs (200mhz FSB, support for extremely fast DDR SDRAM), it would have swamped Intel severely, becuase the advantages they DID have, (FSB/MEM speed) would have been limited, and this time, Intel's solution would look bad, becuase when you even the bases, the differences in CPU's appears (superior FPU etc).
of course, AMD's been milking the market as much as possible, but they've yet to make a name for themselves in the public eye. this last year was their chance to do so, and they may have won over SOME, but not enough.
companies sole purposes are to dominate their market. to do that, you must prove that in ALL COUNTS, you are superior. and in order to get it through to the blind/religious, you have to do it with amazing numbers, not by winning most/some barely.
sure the P4 lost alot of benches compared to the Athlon, but it also won some, and looking forward, it's going to win alot more vs the Athlon, simply becuase of it's scaleability.
better luck next time AMD.
btw, for those who do not know, I personally favour AMD over intel. my main computer is a K6-2 400@420, if you are wondering.
many of the people on this board know me for rooting for the underdog, so don't try to make it look like I'm biased against them.
Why should Intel always be ahead? Do you think the i820 caused any problems with business/corporate users? Are most of the bugs the business world doesn't want to deal with caused by the cpus or chipsets/motherboards? I'm new to the computer scene and don't understand this "nobody got fired for buying Intel" mentalitily. I understand Intel has been the premier cpu producer for quite sum time. Will it ever change? I mean the Athlon/KT133 platform seems pretty bug free, besides for the power supply issue. Gateway, Compaq, and HP all sell lots of AMD systems. Dell is the only one yet to sucumb. The Rambus/i820 fiasco Intel released hopefully enlightened some business users the reality of todays CPU market.
The reasoning that AMD has given for not having media blitzes (blizti??) is because of the inefficient blanket effect of TV ads. AMD focuses it's marketing dollars into IT rags and the New York Times and stuff. They also get secondary advertising from the retailers and OEMs. These guys get much better profits selling AMD systems(except for DELL) so they often push them more. Open up the Sunday ads in your local newspaper and you'll see the AMD logo somewhere. Another reason not to spend all your dollars on advertising, when you can't make any more to sell. AMD has been reasonably capacity limited in recent months. If Michael Dell wanted a second source for his boxes, AMD couldn't meet the supply he'd need. Unfortunately the integrated cheapo motherboards haven't helped Durons sales any but hopefully they'll be release soon. At any rate, AMD is going to need to purchase a new fab or build one or buy somebody to make chipsets/motherboards in the next 12-18 months, and that's expensive!
Unfortunately I think AMD could have, maybe should have ramped the Tbird more agressively than they have been. I'd like to have seen the 1.5 Gig Tbird in January, but its not going to happen. Also, if AMD isn't going to have a vocal marketing dept. at least they could hire a PR group to set the facts straight when some misinformed "journalist" or "stock analyst" goes off the deep end.
Which brings me to another point. Don't anybody ever equate stock market performance to a company's success or competence. The baseless opinions and lies of "analysts" and (COUGH!)cnbc(COUGH!) is enraging. Most of the mindless trading that goes on these days, isn't based on anything but emotion.
The recent price cuts are interesting, It's either because of 1)Low demand 2)Desire to gain marketshare 3)Moving inventory for Palomino release. Personally I think its 2, and hopefully 3. Theres not much reason for the drastic price cuts of late because of poor demand, they were already sufficiently competitive and it is only going to lower ASP's.
Myself, I'm looking forward to the Hammer series. It can offer something Intel can't, backward compatibility. That's what PC's have been all about for years. By then, IT managers might actually get the suits to trust AMD and they could break into the business sector.
Unfortunately I think AMD could have, maybe should have ramped the Tbird more agressively than they have been. I'd like to have seen the 1.5 Gig Tbird in January, but its not going to happen. Also, if AMD isn't going to have a vocal marketing dept. at least they could hire a PR group to set the facts straight when some misinformed "journalist" or "stock analyst" goes off the deep end.
Which brings me to another point. Don't anybody ever equate stock market performance to a company's success or competence. The baseless opinions and lies of "analysts" and (COUGH!)cnbc(COUGH!) is enraging. Most of the mindless trading that goes on these days, isn't based on anything but emotion.
The recent price cuts are interesting, It's either because of 1)Low demand 2)Desire to gain marketshare 3)Moving inventory for Palomino release. Personally I think its 2, and hopefully 3. Theres not much reason for the drastic price cuts of late because of poor demand, they were already sufficiently competitive and it is only going to lower ASP's.
Myself, I'm looking forward to the Hammer series. It can offer something Intel can't, backward compatibility. That's what PC's have been all about for years. By then, IT managers might actually get the suits to trust AMD and they could break into the business sector.
Personally, I don't trust AMD enough to buy any of their stuff. I prefer stability over cutting edge and AMD just can't provide that. I think they're doing a good job of providing to this small niche market of PC enthusiasts, but they won't go much higher until they can build a solid reputation with the rest of the computing markets. This may take several years, and may never even happen. Think of Intel as any of the big car companies...producing a wide array of products to fit everyone's needs and doing so in large quantities. AMD is the small performance car maker with a dedicated following. Sure, the big company can make performance cars too, but the smaller one specializes in this market and can better suit its customer's needs. The comparisons can work with any other industry, really.
As everyone has said, basically, corporate IT buying is probably one of the most conservative areas on earth. They want a solution that will be troublefree, from a vendor that they've always worked with. There is basically no compelling reason for an IT department to switch to anything -- price is no real object, performance doesn't matter that much, the only thing that matters is stability, and both AMD and Intel provide that.
I aint saying that its right -- I think its dead wrong -- but there really is nothing AMD can do about it.
All the people saying "AMD should make it so their products dont need patches" -- what the hell can AMD do about it? The people who determine that is Microsoft -- and you know what, you'll need all those same new patches for new Intel systems, like a P4, also.
istallion,
Excellent analysis.
Andrey,
<<If you look at any office today, most of them will have Intel-based systems, simply because nobody wants to worry about stability and compatibility of their computers.>>
And in buying AMD, they don't have to. But these people are trained by Intel-bred old school IT professionals to whom anything but Intel is a knockoff and stability means a certified idiot at the other end of a 24hr support line.
<<Small power supply, incorrect driver for video card, absense of IDE patches, etc... Nobody in big corporation has time and willing to deal with that. Until AMD figures out the way to have their processors work correctly without any patches right out the box, Intel is always going to be ahead.>>
Oh, brother. That's just the kind of small-minded reasoning that keeps Intel at 80% market share and AMD at 20%, depsite all logicall price/performance/reliability comparisons.
Guess what? The number of patches required for an AMD system to run just as reliably as an Intel system is . . . drumroll, please . . . 1 (ONE). If you, as a supposed information technology professional, can't be bothered to install the one VIA patch necessary for impecable stablity on an AMD platform, then you bloody well don't deserve the privilege of faster, cheaper CPU's. You deserve a one-company industry, and that's exactly what you're promotting whenever you promote the mindless corporate conservative philosophy that keeps Intel on top.
R0b0tn1k,
<<I prefer stability over cutting edge and AMD just can't provide that.>>
You're so sadly mistaken. In fact, AMD systems are so stable that half of the servers running these very AnandTech forums are built on AMD Thunderbird processors and VIA KT133 motherboards. If that's not a testament to the superb reliability of AMD platforms, what is?
Remnant2,
<<All the people saying "AMD should make it so their products dont need patches" -- what the hell can AMD do about it? The people who determine that is Microsoft -- and you know what, you'll need all those same new patches for new Intel systems, like a P4, also.>>
Exactly. What's more, "industry standard" Intel i815 boards currently require more patches for optimal operation than VIA KT133 boards!
Modus
Excellent analysis.
Andrey,
<<If you look at any office today, most of them will have Intel-based systems, simply because nobody wants to worry about stability and compatibility of their computers.>>
And in buying AMD, they don't have to. But these people are trained by Intel-bred old school IT professionals to whom anything but Intel is a knockoff and stability means a certified idiot at the other end of a 24hr support line.
<<Small power supply, incorrect driver for video card, absense of IDE patches, etc... Nobody in big corporation has time and willing to deal with that. Until AMD figures out the way to have their processors work correctly without any patches right out the box, Intel is always going to be ahead.>>
Oh, brother. That's just the kind of small-minded reasoning that keeps Intel at 80% market share and AMD at 20%, depsite all logicall price/performance/reliability comparisons.
Guess what? The number of patches required for an AMD system to run just as reliably as an Intel system is . . . drumroll, please . . . 1 (ONE). If you, as a supposed information technology professional, can't be bothered to install the one VIA patch necessary for impecable stablity on an AMD platform, then you bloody well don't deserve the privilege of faster, cheaper CPU's. You deserve a one-company industry, and that's exactly what you're promotting whenever you promote the mindless corporate conservative philosophy that keeps Intel on top.
R0b0tn1k,
<<I prefer stability over cutting edge and AMD just can't provide that.>>
You're so sadly mistaken. In fact, AMD systems are so stable that half of the servers running these very AnandTech forums are built on AMD Thunderbird processors and VIA KT133 motherboards. If that's not a testament to the superb reliability of AMD platforms, what is?
Remnant2,
<<All the people saying "AMD should make it so their products dont need patches" -- what the hell can AMD do about it? The people who determine that is Microsoft -- and you know what, you'll need all those same new patches for new Intel systems, like a P4, also.>>
Exactly. What's more, "industry standard" Intel i815 boards currently require more patches for optimal operation than VIA KT133 boards!
Modus
Dulanic
Diamond Member
- Oct 27, 2000
- 9,968
- 592
- 136
Again you are speaking nonsense..... they sat around? What are you talking about? Intel sat there with the P3 1Ghz forever while AMD is out releasing the 1.1 and 1.2 and 800 Duron. We have Palomino coming up soon.... we have DDR coming, we have 266Mhz FSB coming.... I dont think thats sitting around.
Once again, AMD did NOT report a loss, they are projecting flat to a slight gain in earnings.
WSJ
"The chip maker said it expects to report sales that are unchanged or only slightly higher than the $1.21 billion reported for the third quarter, compared with an earlier forecast for sales to rise on a percentage basis in the "high single digits"
Also note
"AMD said demand for its Athlon chips running at speeds of one gigahertz and faster remained strong and it still expected to sell out of the Athlon products this quarter. Demand for the less-expensive Duron products wasn't as strong, though the company expects it to improve in the first quarter as more chip sets for that product become available."
It doesn't make a lot of sense to spend money to advertise when you expecting to sell out of everything you can make.
Looking forward the integrated chipsets should help the Durons. AMD has been accepted by one of the main boxmakers in Germany. They are making inroads to the office environment.
WSJ
"The chip maker said it expects to report sales that are unchanged or only slightly higher than the $1.21 billion reported for the third quarter, compared with an earlier forecast for sales to rise on a percentage basis in the "high single digits"
Also note
"AMD said demand for its Athlon chips running at speeds of one gigahertz and faster remained strong and it still expected to sell out of the Athlon products this quarter. Demand for the less-expensive Duron products wasn't as strong, though the company expects it to improve in the first quarter as more chip sets for that product become available."
It doesn't make a lot of sense to spend money to advertise when you expecting to sell out of everything you can make.
Looking forward the integrated chipsets should help the Durons. AMD has been accepted by one of the main boxmakers in Germany. They are making inroads to the office environment.
I think intel has cose to 10 fabs, while AMD has two(i think). The thing is, AMD's deresden fab is more advanced than any other intel fab. I even heard that only one intel fab can currently make those p4s....
again, I am not sure about any of this info...
again, I am not sure about any of this info...
I just have one thing to say to you Amd zealots. WAKE UP!!! If you don't realize that Intel is dominating than you are pretty blind. Fact of the matter is that Intel can start pumping out crappy processors and still have a much higher stock than that of AMD. Why is this? Intel is not an all cpu company like AMD. Intel has MANY other areas of expertise that will remain dominated by them. And the Intel name is the hardest thing to beat. Once the P4 starts getting higher speeds and if the Palomino and other AMD chips lose to the P4, AMD is just about screwed since they have no other industry to hold them up as a crutch like Intel has so smartly done. And did you read the Intel roadmap about having like 10 ghz processors out by then? Just hope AMD has something up their sleeves that will reach that high since after all, the things that sell to a non-computer literate person are MHZ and Intel.
Intel isn't advertising the P4 yet because they aren't planning for it to be a mainstream processor until late 2001 or early 2002. In addition, their current socket is going to be dropped soon and the current P4 will be a deadend solution. Much like the Itanium is to Mckinley.
Intel derives something like 80% revenue from its cpu biz.
AMD derives about 70% from its cpu's.
AMD's award winning flash memory is about 85% sold out for the next 2 years.
Intel derives something like 80% revenue from its cpu biz.
AMD derives about 70% from its cpu's.
AMD's award winning flash memory is about 85% sold out for the next 2 years.
AMDEmAll: Can you change the subject title? AMD did not come in with a Q4 loss. The title is misleading. [edit Thanks, AMDEmAll ]
Also, I believe that AMD sold off it's networking division recently, but I am not sure of this. Even if they didn't, you'll notice that they didn't mention it in their earnings press release at all so it can't be a significant source of income for them.
Istallion: Intel's derives 80% of it's revenue from the Intel Architecture Group - which includes chipsets and motherboard sales in addition to just CPU's. Intel doesn't provide a breakdown of IAG's revenue that I am aware of, but 80% doesn't come just from CPU's. See the very bottom of this. AMD's processor group contributes to ~50% of AMD's overall revenue. See here
Also, I believe that AMD sold off it's networking division recently, but I am not sure of this. Even if they didn't, you'll notice that they didn't mention it in their earnings press release at all so it can't be a significant source of income for them.
Istallion: Intel's derives 80% of it's revenue from the Intel Architecture Group - which includes chipsets and motherboard sales in addition to just CPU's. Intel doesn't provide a breakdown of IAG's revenue that I am aware of, but 80% doesn't come just from CPU's. See the very bottom of this. AMD's processor group contributes to ~50% of AMD's overall revenue. See here
Syborg1211:
You're the one sounding like a zealot here...
"Intel is not an all cpu company like AMD."
FYI (to add to what pm pointed to...)
AMD Processors
AMD Embedded Processors
AMD Non-Volatile Memory
AMD Networking
AMD Telecommunications
recently spun-off into a partnering company with AMD
You're the one sounding like a zealot here...
"Intel is not an all cpu company like AMD."
FYI (to add to what pm pointed to...)
AMD Processors
AMD Embedded Processors
AMD Non-Volatile Memory
AMD Networking
AMD Telecommunications
recently spun-off into a partnering company with AMD
Oops. I stand corrected. Thanks, CQuinn.
I admit that I'm an idiot. <slaps forehead> One quick look at the AMD homepage would have shown me that they have a networking group. In fact, I did go to the homepage and clicked a link just below the Networking group to get to their earnings page.
This was the division sale that I was thinking of.
I admit that I'm an idiot. <slaps forehead> One quick look at the AMD homepage would have shown me that they have a networking group. In fact, I did go to the homepage and clicked a link just below the Networking group to get to their earnings page.
This was the division sale that I was thinking of.
Ultimately the real issue here is not which processor is better, but that AMD stock is severely UNDERVALUED. They make a great processor IMHO, but as previously mentioned that is about 70% of their business. They make some of the best and most widely used Flash memory in the industry. Their network division, while not threatening any real marketshare, is well respected in the industry. And finally, as has also been pointed out previously, the earnings are expected to be flat to slightly higher WHEN COMPARED TO THIRD QUARTER EARNINGS!!!! And lets see......third quarter....oh, that's right....ONE OF THEIR BEST EVER!!! I will now step down from my soapbox.
wow modus, what you and istallion said basically agreed with what I said a while back. why does no-one ever read my posts??
at least we're agreeing, not flaming..
at least we're agreeing, not flaming..
Dulanic
Diamond Member
- Oct 27, 2000
- 9,968
- 592
- 136
And yes AMD is one of, if not the biggest flash memory manufacturer, I know they are very heavily into Flash Memory and that sales are doing excellent there... demand is higher than supply, and im about 75% sure they are the biggest flash memory company.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 22K
-
News NVIDIA and Intel to Develop AI Infrastructure and Personal Computing Products- Started by poke01
- Replies: 384
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
Facebook
Twitter