Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

AMD loses dominance in US retail channel to Intel + tidbits

Last response: in CPUs
Share
April 10, 2007 10:35:45 PM

http://www.tgdaily.com/content/view/31562/137/
Quote:
AMD was able to quickly expand its presence in U.S. retail to a stunning 77% in Q1 2006. Following a negligible drop to 76% in Q2 2006, AMD has been suffering a rapid decline in this segment – due to Intel’s aggressive pricing of Pentium 4 and Pentium D processors as well as the introduction of the Core 2 Duo. In Q3 2006, AMD held 66% and 54% in Q4. Current Analysis estimates that AMD achieved only 43% in Q1 2007.


Quote:
Availability adds another variable to this equation and it appears that there is some confusion on the market at this time. While we are hearing from some sources that Barcelona is on track and will make an early debut in Q3, some server vendors have told TG Daily that they do not expect volume availability until Q4 and therefore tell customers that systems will not ship until late Q4 2007 or early Q1 2008.


Quote:
Meanwhile, Intel is preparing its 50-series of Core 2 Duo processors running on FSB1333 and DDR3-800 memory platforms. Information is scarce, but reliable sources are indicating that these processors will be seeing a “substantial” speed increase. One industry source mentioned to TG Daily that benchmarks comparing Intel Bearlake-X enthusiast platforms compared to AMD X2/Nvidia 680 platforms indicate that Intel will be going after AMD in a “vicious” way. “AMD looks pretty weak right now,” the source said. Besides releasing new products, Intel is also believed to be releasing a BIOS update for the 975X chipset to support FSB1333 processors.
April 10, 2007 11:57:37 PM

Interesting news to say the least.

I'm actually surprised to see less retail desktop sales as most of the PCs I see in retail shops have been AMD Live! or Viiv E6300.

I guess if nothing else we can all get together and laugh at the people who ended up with P4 or Celeron since the general consensus around here is that even X2 isn't worth buying.

This is just so reminiscent of the months before the Opteron launch. I wish both companies well but Intel doesn't need my "support" as the industry leader.
April 11, 2007 12:13:25 AM

Quote:
Interesting news to say the least.

I'm actually surprised to see less retail desktop sales as most of the PCs I see in retail shops have been AMD Live! or Viiv E6300.

I guess if nothing else we can all get together and laugh at the people who ended up with P4 or Celeron since the general consensus around here is that even X2 isn't worth buying.

This is just so reminiscent of the months before the Opteron launch. I wish both companies well but Intel doesn't need my "support" as the industry leader.


That X2 isnt worth buying is your shtick. Part of your "If you dont agree with me, you're anti AMD" mentality. 9 months ago when an E6600 was $359 and a X2 5000 was $600+, the AM2 was not worth buying. Now, with the X2 6000 (the E6600s true competitor) at $235 vs the E6600 @ $305, the AM2 is a much better value and the 6600 is not worth buying in terms of value. You are one of a only a few fanboys who assign value to the product because of your perception of coporate morality vs the actual price/perfromance value of the product. The rest of us either want the best there is, or the best bang for the buck. Right now the best bang for the buck is clearly AMD.

Get over yourself
Related resources
Can't find your answer ? Ask !
April 11, 2007 12:20:23 AM

I didn't read up on the Nvidia 680 yet, but I had the impression that there's the coming AMD enthusiast chipset which would be the one to beat. I'll be looking to read up on it over the next week.

Anyone already researched this?
April 11, 2007 12:24:08 AM

Quote:
Interesting news to say the least.

I'm actually surprised to see less retail desktop sales as most of the PCs I see in retail shops have been AMD Live! or Viiv E6300.

I guess if nothing else we can all get together and laugh at the people who ended up with P4 or Celeron since the general consensus around here is that even X2 isn't worth buying.

This is just so reminiscent of the months before the Opteron launch. I wish both companies well but Intel doesn't need my "support" as the industry leader.


That X2 isnt worth buying is your shtick. Part of your "If you dont agree with me, you're anti AMD" mentality. 9 months ago when an E6600 was $359 and a X2 5000 was $600+, the AM2 was not worth buying. Now, with the X2 6000 (the E6600s true competitor) at $235 vs the E6600 @ $305, the AM2 is a much better value and the 6600 is not worth buying in terms of value. You are one a only a few fanboys who assign value to the product because of your perception of coporate morality vs the actual price/perfromance value of the product. The rest of us either want the best there is, or the best bang for the buck. Right now the best bang for the buck is clearly AMD.

Get over yourself


The point is that someone is obviously missing that as the article clearly refers to better sales of P4/Celeron.

I personally just hope that margins improve with K10. That of course means higher prices and perhaps the reason why Intel is so furiously trying to get more quad core out cheap.

Another interesting thing in the article was that AMD is not talking much about Agena and Kuma, though they have completed the chipset for them(790G) and Agena FX is supposed to ship with Barcelona.

Since AMD is supposedly 100% 65nm at Fab 36 which supposedly has a 25,000 WSPM capacity and Chartered is ramping 65nm now, it seems like there shouldn't be a K10 availability problem unless they have horrible yields. And realistically there is the opportunity for errors in any chip based on size - i.e. 240mm is 240mm whether it's a quad or dual core.

Again though I will be interested to see the Mercury/iSuppli numbers for overall share. It is possible that there was just a shift in that Dell seems to be using a lot of chips as the article says. HP took over in share and they are churning out new AMD models all the time, as is Lenovo.
April 11, 2007 12:37:47 AM

Quote:


I guess if nothing else we can all get together and laugh at the people who ended up with P4 or Celeron since the general consensus around here is that even X2 isn't worth buying.



X2 not worth buying? What utter nonsense! I actually ordered an X2 3600 Brisbane today. Amazing how much computer you can put together for $350 anymore.

Oh and Baron, I actually feel like chapter 11 is starting to look like a pretty good option for AMD.
April 11, 2007 12:39:21 AM

As long as they squeeze the R600 out first, fine.
April 11, 2007 12:42:01 AM

With who?
April 11, 2007 12:51:41 AM

That isn't an excuse of debt - it's a transfer of equity, and given the current poverty of AMD cashflow but excitement of new technology, the creditors might well be happy with this.

Better something than nothing - they can at least sell to IBM ;) 
April 11, 2007 12:54:48 AM

Quote:


I guess if nothing else we can all get together and laugh at the people who ended up with P4 or Celeron since the general consensus around here is that even X2 isn't worth buying.



X2 not worth buying? What utter nonsense! I actually ordered an X2 3600 Brisbane today. Amazing how much computer you can put together for $350 anymore.

Oh and Baron, I actually feel like chapter 11 is starting to look like a pretty good option for AMD.

And all that had to happen was the pricing collapse for dual core. Sometimes, consumers need to settle for less so they can get more next year.
April 11, 2007 12:55:39 AM

Quote:
That isn't an excuse of debt - it's a transfer of equity, and given the current poverty of AMD cashflow but excitement of new technology, the creditors might well be happy with this.

Better something than nothing - they can at least sell to IBM ;) 


At any rate the fab keeps pumping out the AMD cpu's we all know and love 8)
April 11, 2007 1:24:08 AM

If done right, chapter 11 can really turn things around.

Just ask Donald Trump

The Donald Bankruptcy Article

Bankrupted his company not once but twice.
April 11, 2007 1:49:04 AM

Quote:
the general consensus around here is that even X2 isn't worth buying.


Cry me a river :roll:

Quote:
I wish both companies well but Intel doesn't need my "support" as the industry leader.


You're right, in times like these, I'm sure AMD would appreciate a Quad FX sale :lol: 
April 11, 2007 3:08:26 AM

Quote:
If done right, chapter 11 can really turn things around.

Just ask Donald Trump

The Donald Bankruptcy Article

Bankrupted his company not once but twice.



Lemme give you an 'Amen Brother'

I tell people DT went BK twice. They dont believe me.
April 11, 2007 3:13:40 AM

As for the chances of a BK filing, the company which knows better than most is Morgan Stanley. It is Morgan Stanley who loaned AMD 2.5 billion for the ATI purchase. They didn't loan the money to see it disappear in a few months.
April 11, 2007 4:14:25 AM

IBM is known for developping processes with mediocre yields and my suspission is that AMD's 65 nm which is based on collaboration with IB, is no differen in that regards. This would explain why barcelona is delayed, I bet their yields are in the 20-30% range.
April 11, 2007 4:54:24 AM

Quote:

Since AMD is supposedly 100% 65nm at Fab 36 which supposedly has a 25,000 WSPM capacity and Chartered is ramping 65nm now, it seems like there shouldn't be a K10 availability problem unless they have horrible yields. And realistically there is the opportunity for errors in any chip based on size - i.e. 240mm is 240mm whether it's a quad or dual core.


Well, your logic in this case is sound.... but as is take 8-12 weeks to get silicon from start to finish, and they just completed their 'all 65 nm starts a few weeks ago', they are not quite 100% 65 nm now are they?

Nonetheless, if they get to 25,000 WSPM that will not occur until 2008.... maybe later since they now cut capital by 500 million.... when a company quotes "the fab is built with a capacity of X WSPM", doesn't mean they are instantaneously tooled up for it... so this could be one factor.

Yields, as you mention, is another --- considering that the slow availability of 65 nm from launch to retail and lack in the hands of OEMs, this would suggest a horrid yield problem.

Jack

It could also have been the first effort for AMD to only release in worldwide volume as could be implied by the R600 delay.

I realize that them reporting all wafer starts being 65nm doesn't imply 100% capacity. I remember reading a report that Fab36 was at 10-15K almost 6 months ago(didn't put that in the memento file either).

I don't remember hearing specifics about the change-over other than that the German gov't would pay for it (admittedly it was the 300mm changeover for Fab 38 - though the implication is that certain retoolings are subsidized).

I don't really see a yield problem though as AMD is "used to" the monolithic core. Again though it's a factor of how good APM is. If they have an advanced predictive algorithm for defect detection that responds to necessary adjustments, then I don't expect the yields to vary more than 10-15% for dual vs. quad (predictively, of course).

The proof of course is in the pudding and Tech Report is claiming Agena FX demos on the 23rd. And because all "3rd graders" know that a 283mm die at 65nm 300mm (providing for a 10% advantage for the native design process) will produce more chips than a 223mm die at 90nm 200mm.

This maybe the best thing to happen to AMD if executed well.
April 11, 2007 7:47:34 AM

The point a lot of analysts have been neglecting to mention is that Intel has been waging its end of the "price war" against AMD without change to the price structure for C2D. Basically, Intel is eviscerating AMD's margins by flooding the market with cheap P4s and Pentium Ds. It's astonishing to me how successful Intel has been in this area, given the the crappiness of these Intel CPUs relative to Athlon.

But anyways, the point is that Intel really hasn't even launched its main attack yet. What we've seen so far was just a harassing attack. The real price war begins when Intel finally slashes C2D prices 4/19/07. E.g. E6600s at $224 per 1000 units.

Given everything we've seen so far, any reasonable person has got to believe AMD is gonna have an utterly horrendous 2Q 07. They are gonna cough up huge chunks on market share. Period. As for revenue, it's gonna be pitiful - 1Q 07 is gonna look like their best quarter ever by comparison. Can anyone imagine a scenario where this is not the case?

If Barcelona is significantly delayed like the link above suggested, AMD won't even make it to 2008 as an independent interest. If just for that reason, I think Barcelona will launch on time 3rd quarter 2007. One way or another, it's got to.
!