"AMD vs. Intel - Analysis And Forecast"

[9-inch]

As competition between Intel and AMD heats up with the much anticipated release of Intel's new "Woodcrest" server CPU manufactured using 65-nm technology one cannot resist the temptation to analyze and forecast possible outcome of these new developments. The following analysis summarizes key economical, psychological, historical and technological data that reveals high-stake gamble at which AMD has a good chance of success.




Historically Intel has been a powerful and profitable giant (if not a monopolist) targeting large markets with rich margins while Advanced Micro-Devices has been a small struggling underdog catering low-end markets and earning miniscule revenue when not losing money.

Discounting tech bubble of 2000 during the past decade AMD's performance was cyclical: regular ups (when there was income) and regular downs (when there were losses), while Intel's performance was more or less steady.

Both companies have fairly "fresh" CEOs with Paul Otellini leading Intel since 2005 and Hector Ruiz running AMD since 2002.

If you look at stock value chart for Intel during Otellini's tenure as CEO you will see a steady decline, while AMD's performance during Ruiz's tenure shows a steady improvement.

Clearly, Hector was doing something right since he managed to turn around sinking AMD and get it into a position where it could seriously threaten Intel's dominance. In the same time Otellini cannot be blamed for Intel's apparent downfall for his role is more that of rescuer since he has just recently succeeded Craig Barrett who ran the company since 1998. Thus it is Barrett who must be blamed for Itanium's futile gamble and x86 64-bit blunder. It is under Barrett a decision was made at Intel to drop backward compatibility with x86 instruction set and pursue radically new EPIC architecture that lead to an epic disaster. I do not know about you folks, but when I heard the news and read about EPIC compiler challenges I knew that Itanium was doomed.

Full story can be read here:
http://techsearch.cmp.com/blog/archives/2006/06/amd_vs_intel_an.html

 

[CptCpu]

Who cares about all of that rubish just as long as I can get my Core 2

 

[gr8mikey]

Both companies have fairly "fresh" CEOs with Paul Otellini leading Intel since 2005 and Hector Ruiz running AMD since 2002.

If you look at stock value chart for Intel during Otellini's tenure as CEO you will see a steady decline, while AMD's performance during Ruiz's tenure shows a steady improvement.

Of course, that is only if you dont factor in the 40% decline in AMD stock price since it peaked on March 3. But even at these levels, it is still doing much better than the bottom it hit back in 2002.

 

[Viperabyss]

As competition between Intel and AMD heats up with the much anticipated release of Intel's new "Woodcrest" server CPU manufactured using 65-nm technology one cannot resist the temptation to analyze and forecast possible outcome of these new developments. The following analysis summarizes key economical, psychological, historical and technological data that reveals high-stake gamble at which AMD has a good chance of success.




Historically Intel has been a powerful and profitable giant (if not a monopolist) targeting large markets with rich margins while Advanced Micro-Devices has been a small struggling underdog catering low-end markets and earning miniscule revenue when not losing money.

Discounting tech bubble of 2000 during the past decade AMD's performance was cyclical: regular ups (when there was income) and regular downs (when there were losses), while Intel's performance was more or less steady.

Both companies have fairly "fresh" CEOs with Paul Otellini leading Intel since 2005 and Hector Ruiz running AMD since 2002.

If you look at stock value chart for Intel during Otellini's tenure as CEO you will see a steady decline, while AMD's performance during Ruiz's tenure shows a steady improvement.

Clearly, Hector was doing something right since he managed to turn around sinking AMD and get it into a position where it could seriously threaten Intel's dominance. In the same time Otellini cannot be blamed for Intel's apparent downfall for his role is more that of rescuer since he has just recently succeeded Craig Barrett who ran the company since 1998. Thus it is Barrett who must be blamed for Itanium's futile gamble and x86 64-bit blunder. It is under Barrett a decision was made at Intel to drop backward compatibility with x86 instruction set and pursue radically new EPIC architecture that lead to an epic disaster. I do not know about you folks, but when I heard the news and read about EPIC compiler challenges I knew that Itanium was doomed.

Full story can be read here:
http://techsearch.cmp.com/blog/archives/2006/06/amd_vs_intel_an.html
lolz..
so what does this story tell us? Henri is a better CEO than Paul, and nothing more. it doesn't say intel's doomed as your best buddy sharikou claimed. it also doesn't say AMD's future is bright as your second best budy MMM claimed.

9nm, you really should read through the passage before even posting.

 

[BadTrip]

cool location. I wanna come help.

 

[tmac]

:lol: :lol: You've been busy boy looking for anything that spins AMD
in a good light. saying so - doesn't make it true -

25 days to conroe. Enjoy any spin now

 

[Action_Man]

This analyst knows about as much you, fock all!