Last message on previous page: I pretty much stopped investing, with the exception of some stock I wasn't able to get out of in time, and that I didn't have a stop on.... stupid me!
Yeah, as you said.... other than that, I am not even touching the market. I could try to be a short seller, but I am not even willing to do that. I pretty much stopped investing about 2 1/2 months ago. I am focusing my time on more conservative means of making money.
So you think the massive profits ATI had before the buyout will put AMD in the pink?
Thier best quarter ever was ~ $50M.
That will probably not cover the interest on the buyout loan.
AMD's biggest problem is thier distance to profitability. They have to cover the capex on Fab 36 and the cash paid out for ATI, before they can break even.
Having said that, Hector has a plan, so it's all good right?
Personnally, I'd say $20 by nov., but only if I dont buy any shares.
the efficiency's of scaling will increase ati profits - ati was too small before, now with amd they can reduce costs and drive profits up.
the dual gpu = 3870 x2, results are based on the dx10 gaming of crossfire 3870's and some data just published last week.
Even now that the new 3800 gpu's look competitive - it will take a few months, for people to think as ati products as nvidia equals. There is really very little interest in buying amd/ati as high end or high middle systetms -mean while 780i is out of stock everywhere.
If the tests of 3-4 way crossfire and the new 3780 X2 continue to demonstrate the competitiveness and possible superiority of ati there will be a market shift in perception of amd's spider and intel x38. Yes, few people buy these products but perception drives the lower end products.
The markets perception nvidia can not go any higher, amd's can not go much lower - the pendulum never stops.
As i said before - this change comes out of nvidia's pocket and ends up in both intel's (cpu's or chipesets combined with ati) and AMD's (cpu, chipsets and gpu's) pockets.
Nvidia stock down again today $1, they say the market predicts things 6 months in advance - the stock peaked in October that translate to the new 9800GTX will be released in march with only marginal improvement in performance from the 8800GTX. Again, assuming the flagship market perception trickles down to buyers from laptops to $100 graphics cards, amd stock should escape the $8 resistance. of coarse guessing the future is impossible!
AMD is up 8% this morning
and Intel is still falling - the trade thing could hurt intel for a long time if intel goes as low as 18 - it will trade in the 18-22 range untill the antitrust smoke blows over.
by the way, i am not a financial adviser (i was once) and this is not advice to buy or sell stock - o ya - i do not trade or own any these stocks individually!
He's making a prediction based on the facts that we know, and as others have pointed out, they are reasonable and may prove to be true. Nobody knows for 100%, but speculating and having some fun tyring to put the pieces together to form a logical predication in the way he did does NOT make him a fan boy... I know you said otherwise about yourself, but when you vigorously dispute his opinion the way you did you kind of come off as one yourself
I think where we're REALLY going to see the 3870x2 take off is when two of those suckers are Crossfired. ATI's multi-card solutions are way ahead of nVidias at the moment, and are just going to keep getting better. I'll definately pick up a 3870x2 because of the whole price/performance/heat stuff, but also because in a year or two if it starts slowing down on me I can just toss in another one hehe
Im not sure if your referring to me on this post, but my point is that before the 8800 series and the 2900 series came out everyone was saying the same exact thing "based on the facts", that the ATI cards would crush EVERYTHING that Nvidia has to offer. That was not even close to reality as ATI was a year late and they STILL couldn't beat the 8800 series. Now using the same type of information we had about the first gen cards everyone is trying to "predict" that ATI will "again" crush EVERYTHING Nvidia has to offer. Im simply saying that their predictions "based on the facts" did not come to fruition last time, so unless I see some proof, the only "fact" is that ATI can not compete with Nvidia at the high end. Just like AMD can not compete with Intel on the high end.
EDIT: And I am a fanboy, but not for any particular company.. My last machine was an AMD X2 with a 6800GT.. When the nvidia card died, I couldnt afford much and ended up getting the ATI X1650.. When I had the money to upgrade the entire platform, I went with the best performers at the time, Intel and Nvidia. I have no loyalties except to performance. And when I hear companies say they will provide so much performance, I expect it. They can compete in the performance per dollar, but AMD and ATI have not provided anything in terms of pure performance.
someones gonna flame you bad on that post, but i see what your saying. If all nVidia has to go on for this half of the year till g100 is just 2 glued together g92 gts' after dominance for sooooo long, thats a bit sad. with ati keeping things cheep and simple - a sort of back to basics approach - thats understandable, but from the market leader, its not
That said 2 dual gpu cards fighting it out is unprecedented.
Im not sure if your referring to me on this post, but my point is that before the 8800 series and the 2900 series came out everyone was saying the same exact thing "based on the facts", that the ATI cards would crush EVERYTHING that Nvidia has to offer. That was not even close to reality as ATI was a year late and they STILL couldn't beat the 8800 series. Now using the same type of information we had about the first gen cards everyone is trying to "predict" that ATI will "again" crush EVERYTHING Nvidia has to offer. Im simply saying that their predictions "based on the facts" did not come to fruition last time, so unless I see some proof, the only "fact" is that ATI can not compete with Nvidia at the high end. Just like AMD can not compete with Intel on the high end.
Put it this way, ati are unlikely to screw it up twice in a row. Plus since the inception of r600 they have been bought out, had their management replaced and seen their new parent company slide into very harsh times. The environment that spawned the r600 is not present anymore, but a nasty shock and a sense of urgency certainly is. The sort of grandious (pretty advanced and ambitious stuff) yet muddled (just 16 rops and tmus) new architecture they brought out early last year in the r600 therefore wont be likely to happen again. Despite the length of time the r600 has been out (in the sense of itself and the 95% similar refresh), its not like ati historically to be well off the pace at the top, if at all arguably.
If anything I have always, until the r600, known ati as being the company that made crappy midrange cards (x700, x1600) and expensive but supremely fast top of the range cards (x850 xt & pte, x1900xt & xtx &x1950 xtx). Hence I plumped for cheap but quick midrange Nvidia cards in the 6600, 6600gt, 7600gt & 7900gt and hence it still seems strange to see them switching roles. Radeon 3850 for 100 quid anyone? Thats what my 7600gt cost!
Note: Its a short time i know, but I do know that 9700 and 9800 were also lord and master over the nvidia 5 series, but that the geforce 4 was hugely popular and people gamed with them for years after.
1st prize goes to the poster who first said dead cat bounce.
BUhhhhhhht, lets face it. AMD is here to stay for awhile. I have stated since early 2007 that Nehalem would be the end of AMD as we know it and I stand by it, but someone will be able to produce competitive x86 processors based on IBM technology. Be it a buy out or restructuring, AMD will still be around. Even if AMD is called McDonalds and its flagship processor is the McQuad with SOI.
AMD ATI may not be able to compete with Nvidia on the high-end currently, but it's not a huge concern when ATI offers excellent performance for an affordable price tag. ATI is where the bang for buck is why pay a price premium for small gains with Nvidia.
1st prize goes to the poster who first said dead cat bounce.
BUhhhhhhht, lets face it. AMD is here to stay for awhile. I have stated since early 2007 that Nehalem would be the end of AMD as we know it and I stand by it, but someone will be able to produce competitive x86 processors based on IBM technology. Be it a buy out or restructuring, AMD will still be around. Even if AMD is called McDonalds and its flagship processor is the McQuad with SOI.
mc-chips -lol
i take double chez, fries and 2 Mc-amd black's please!
AMD ATI may not be able to compete with Nvidia on the high-end currently, but it's not a huge concern when ATI offers excellent performance for an affordable price tag. ATI is where the bang for buck is why pay a price premium for small gains with Nvidia.
Theres nothing wrong with that. My good friend couldnt spend more than $200 in his new card and I had him get the 3850. What I said before though was that "in terms of pure performance" ATI can not compete. When I purchased my 8800GT for $260 I could have got an 2900HD for almost $400. Did I buy the 8800GT because it cost less? No, I bought the 8800GT because it smokes the 2900 in all the games I play. The fact that its a hell of a lot cheaper was just icing on the cake.
EDIT: I could have waited a little bit and got the ATI 3xxx for a little less.. I wasnt looking to pay less money though, I was looking to get more performance.
Message edited by blackened144 on 01-11-2008 at 09:14:26 PM
1st prize goes to the poster who first said dead cat bounce.
BUhhhhhhht, lets face it. AMD is here to stay for awhile. I have stated since early 2007 that Nehalem would be the end of AMD as we know it and I stand by it, but someone will be able to produce competitive x86 processors based on IBM technology. Be it a buy out or restructuring, AMD will still be around. Even if AMD is called McDonalds and its flagship processor is the McQuad with SOI.
End of AMD as we know it?Amd has never traded space with Intel,or maybe you are talking in terms of fastest chip manufaturer.The way I see it is AMD should have never passed Intel in cpu speed or maybe once in a decade,but they have.Intel will once again move left when they should have gone right and find themselves on the mat.AMD will find there way back ,soon
Well, AMD went up to $6.44, but has since dropped fast to $6.22. Of course, several other stocks are doing the same. Almost looks like the thrill of the proposed help from the Fed has blown over and reality is sinking in. Intel's dropping as well, so its not like AMD is sitting by itself. sure wish things had kept going up for a few more days at least.
---------------
Evil lurks in the databanks as it lurked in the streets of yesteryear. But it was never the streets that were evil.
End of AMD as we know it?Amd has never traded space with Intel,or maybe you are talking in terms of fastest chip manufaturer.The way I see it is AMD should have never passed Intel in cpu speed or maybe once in a decade,but they have.Intel will once again move left when they should have gone right and find themselves on the mat.AMD will find there way back ,soon
End of AMD as we know it =
AMD brand bought by another company (what happened to ATI and Cyrix)
AMD only making sever chips and out of desktops or notebooks.
AMD only making niche processors/GPUs or getting into foundry work.
AMD bought, split up, dissolved into micro companies.
You know, AMD no longer being a primary x86 processor manufacturer.
"Intel will once again move left when they should have gone right and find themselves on the mat"
Yeah this happens so often, lets take a quick look at history, hmmm it happened once. I think that doesn't constitute a trend. Let's see what else has happened only once in the past, oh here we go, Cyrix went titz up.
