Intel Is Kicking Silicon at AMD

Sidebar Sidebar
Previous Next
Mr.IncrediblyBored

Mr.IncrediblyBored

Lifer
Jun 18, 2000
11,015
551
126
From the article:
Still, AMD is betting big on the success of Clawhammer. Losses from existing products have eroded the chipmaker's financial health in the past year. On June 30, the Sunnyvale (Calif.) company had $1.1 billion in cash -- enough at the current burn rate to last one year. "Our cash position -- we are not concerned about that," says Drew Prairie, an AMD spokesperson. But its financial obligations are daunting. AMD has $2.31 billion in debt. Half of that is long term, with $207.9 million due in 2003, according to a company filing.
Click to expand...
Debt? Nuts to that, they should have Arthur Anderson doing their books.
 
A

AndyHui

Administrator Emeritus<br>Elite Member<br>AT FAQ M
Oct 9, 1999
13,140
6
81
Seems like a reasonable assessment of the situation to me.

The analyst at the end talking about the 1GHz lead only underlines the fact that the unknowing massses still look at clock speed only.
 
Vic

Vic

Elite Member
Jun 12, 2001
49,669
12,398
136
I think it has more to do than just the "MHz Myth." Most of the unknowing masses are completely unaware that AMD even exists.

I really hope that AMD pulls through. Intel without competition means $1,000 dollar chips again :|

On another note, INTC stock isn't exactly perfoming well either. Less risky buy than AMD though...
 
V

Valinos

Banned
Jun 6, 2001
784
0
0
I hope AMD doesn't lose any more market share. Personally, I think AMD should raise their prices to combat their growing debt. Even if they raise the prices of their Athlons 20%, they're still a better bang for the buck than Intel. I have no loyalty to either company, but I unlike many on this board I see the value of competition. Where would we be today had the Athlon never been released?

AMD is seriously hurting itself with the pathetic paper launch of the 2400+ and 2600+ and then the delay of the Barton and Clawhammer. I want to see AMD gain a 40-50% market share, but I have a feeling they may be gone in a few years if they keep stumbling like this...A 50-50 split between AMD and Intel could possibly be the best thing to ever happen in the CPU biz.
 
Babbles

Babbles

Diamond Member
Jan 4, 2001
8,250
0
76
I think AMD needs to do more and better marketing. Unless my memory isn't working, I don't recall ever seeing an AMD commercial on TV, yet there are Intel ones.

I think, bascially, AMD needs to get their name to be a household name. Sure, bunch of hard core online guys and gals know of AMD, but I think the mainstream mom and pop type folks never heard of them.
 
Freejack2

Freejack2

Diamond Member
Dec 31, 2000
7,751
8
81
I really do hope Clawhammer is a hit. Without AMD all there is left is Via C3. Intel's response to that will be. Yeah umm here's our celeron 1.6 for $60. Too slow you say? Well how about our p4 3ghz for $2000 or our p4 5ghz for $3500?
AMD was Intel's first real competition. In 1991 they put out a 386DX-40 which turned Intel's ripoff pricing structure on it's ear. If I recall correctly Intel's fastest 386 was the 33mhz. The 486 had came out in 89 but it was so dammned expensive noone could afford it even in 91. Intel moved slow and charged out the ass. I don't know about anyone else but I sure as hell don't want to see that again. :(
 
W

Wingznut

Elite Member
Dec 28, 1999
16,968
2
0
Don't worry... AMD isn't going anywhere. One of these days, the market will turn around and both AMD and Intel will be selling their chips for $1000+ each again.

(You guys do realize that AMD was charging $1200 for their 1ghz Athlon, right?)
Originally posted by: AMD
AMD is currently shipping its 1GHz AMD Athlon processors priced at $1,299 in 1,000 unit quantities. AMD is also announcing the availability of 950MHz and 900MHz AMD Athlon processors. The 950MHz AMD Athlon processor is priced at $999 in 1,000 unit quantities. The 900MHz AMD Athlon processor is priced at $899 in 1,000 unit quantities.
Click to expand...
 
B

brtspears2

Diamond Member
Nov 16, 2000
8,659
1
81
Originally posted by: Wingznut PEZ
Don't worry... AMD isn't going anywhere. One of these days, the market will turn around and both AMD and Intel will be selling their chips for $1000+ each again.

(You guys do realize that AMD was charging $1200 for their 1ghz Athlon, right?)
Originally posted by: AMD
AMD is currently shipping its 1GHz AMD Athlon processors priced at $1,299 in 1,000 unit quantities. AMD is also announcing the availability of 950MHz and 900MHz AMD Athlon processors. The 950MHz AMD Athlon processor is priced at $999 in 1,000 unit quantities. The 900MHz AMD Athlon processor is priced at $899 in 1,000 unit quantities.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Crap, thats one to cry about for a few days if you chip the core.
 
S

Supahfreak

Golden Member
Jul 21, 2001
1,378
0
0
Originally posted by: PSYWVic
I think it has more to do than just the "MHz Myth." Most of the unknowing masses are completely unaware that AMD even exists.

I really hope that AMD pulls through. Intel without competition means $1,000 dollar chips again :|

On another note, INTC stock isn't exactly perfoming well either. Less risky buy than AMD though...
Click to expand...

Thats how I feel, competition= lower prices.

FreAk:D
 
S

spp

Golden Member
Jul 9, 2001
1,513
0
76
no i think most people just go with the package deal.... and intel is getting the market for those right now
 
Linflas

Linflas

Lifer
Jan 30, 2001
15,393
78
91
Originally posted by: Babbles
I think AMD needs to do more and better marketing. Unless my memory isn't working, I don't recall ever seeing an AMD commercial on TV, yet there are Intel ones.

I think, bascially, AMD needs to get their name to be a household name. Sure, bunch of hard core online guys and gals know of AMD, but I think the mainstream mom and pop type folks never heard of them.
Click to expand...
Yep Intel has been very good at marketing and positioning their product. People that know little about computers know "Intel Inside" and have likely seen the Intel ads running on TV.
 
K

kherman

Golden Member
Jul 21, 2002
1,511
0
0
Anyone read Anand's article about NVIDea and ATI. I found an intereting part of it that I am not interesting looking for the quote of.

NVidea's next upgrade of the server farm to run simulations on isn't going to be Intel. THey are holding out for the Opterion. They said htat Intels next Gen is going to be nice, but that AMD's opterion is what has them really excited.
 
dullard

dullard

Elite Member
May 21, 2001
24,339
2,564
126
too bad those "fast" p4's with high clock speeds can't crunch $ for $ with AMD
Click to expand...
Good point, lets look at the faster P4's and compare them $ for $ to Athlons if you order today:

2.4 GHz P4 on 533 MHz fsb: $189 shipped
Similarly performing 2400+ Athlon XP: $199 shipped

2.53 GHz P4: $234 shipped
Similarly performing 2600+ Athlon XP: $313 shipped

Dollar for dollar, the faster P4s got the Athlons beat.

Of course as usual, if you go slower, then AMD is in the price/performance lead.

I really hope that AMD pulls through. Intel without competition means $1,000 dollar chips again
Click to expand...
Chips sell at the price that the market will pay for them.

Mid 1990's: economy good and getting better. AMD had chips that were not quite at Intel speeds but catching up. Both AMD and Intel charged in the $600 range for equally performing chips. Sure Intel had even faster chips costing more, but we are comparing equally performing chips.

Around year 2000: AMD had a great chip that beat Intel and the economy was as good as it has ever been, AMD charged $1299. Intel also charged about $1299 at the same time although you got slightly less performance.

Today: the economy is bad and AMD's top chips sell for $200-$300 while equally performing Intel chips sell for $200-$250. Sure Intel has faster chips than that, but again we are focussing on equally performing chips.

Don't you see that the economy has far more to do with the price than anything else (including amount of competition). Competition just means that the equally performing top chips have roughly the same price. The location of that price isn't affected by competition, but it is affected by the economy.
 
J

jjones

Lifer
Oct 9, 2001
15,425
2
0
I haven't been following the CPU wars but it seems to me that AMD has been losing the OEM market as it appears, at least to me, that less and less boxes are sporting AMD chips. They need to regain their strength there.
 
M

MrBond

Diamond Member
Feb 5, 2000
9,911
0
76
Originally posted by: jjones
I haven't been following the CPU wars but it seems to me that AMD has been losing the OEM market as it appears, at least to me, that less and less boxes are sporting AMD chips. They need to regain their strength there.
Click to expand...
Yeah they are losing OEM's. Like someone said, the high end chips are actually cheaper from Intel, and I imagine intel-exclusive OEM's get substantial discounts on processors to make the lower end p4's/celerons a good deal too.

People like that intel name because they've heard it before. Who doesn't know how the little four note intel jingle goes?

The "mhz myth" is a big factor too. A lot of people were burned by old Cyrix chips and are leery of AMD now that they use the same naming scheme. Remember not everyone gets online and looks at benchmarks before they buy a new computer.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom