"We think it is reasonable to expect AMD to continue to eat into Intel’s domination of the processor market."
When a sentence begins with that many weasel words you know you're dealing with a severe case of wishful thinking. With AMD losing ground to Intel on so many fronts, it's not only unreasonable to expect them to "eat into Intel's domination", it's borderline delusional.
The unasked question is how will AMD survive when they continue to fall behind on process shrinks and are about to lose their two advantages in architecture (HyperTransport, IMC) ?
I just read that Ockham Research's motto is "efficiency is valuable." That's ironic since they seem to have zero appreciation for the value of efficiency in technology. AMD is being killed by Intel on that very basis and no amount of gimmickry named "Puma" "Fusion" or "Asset Lite" is going to save it.
______________________... Hey Cleetus (a.k.a. Pompous Ass Coward) where r u hiding? We want to know more about the plague of innumeracy!
1) How is it possible for "half of AMD's growth" of 2.2% be at the expense of Intel when Intel's loss was just 0.7 percent?
2) Why does the author fail to mention that on a quarter-to-quarter basis, AMD just LOST market share to Intel? In fact, from Q4 '07 to Q1 '08 AMD's share dropped from 14.1% to 13%, while Intel's climbed from 78.5% to 79.7%.
3) Why do people think that they can make something sound bigger by expressing it as a percent? Only an idiot or someone catering to idiots would say "3700% bigger" rather than "38 times." Anyway that's not even the correct number since, as of today, Intel's market cap is closer to 34 times that of AMD ( = 109B/3.2B). Sorry I mean "3300% bigger."
4) When exactly will "macro-economic" forces improve so dramatically as to push AMD's shares from $5 to $12? In 2008 with a projected earnings loss of $1.44/share? Or maybe in 2009 with a loss of just $0.63/share?
Sort by:
Latest | Highest ratedAMD: Chipping Away at Intel [View article]
When a sentence begins with that many weasel words you know you're dealing with a severe case of wishful thinking. With AMD losing ground to Intel on so many fronts, it's not only unreasonable to expect them to "eat into Intel's domination", it's borderline delusional.
The unasked question is how will AMD survive when they continue to fall behind on process shrinks and are about to lose their two advantages in architecture (HyperTransport, IMC) ?
I just read that Ockham Research's motto is "efficiency is valuable." That's ironic since they seem to have zero appreciation for the value of efficiency in technology. AMD is being killed by Intel on that very basis and no amount of gimmickry named "Puma" "Fusion" or "Asset Lite" is going to save it.
______________________...
Hey Cleetus (a.k.a. Pompous Ass Coward) where r u hiding? We want to know more about the plague of innumeracy!
AMD: Chipping Away at Intel [View article]
The 2.2% gain is relative to the pie not to AMD's initial portion of it.
www.isuppli.com/news/d...
Think about this very hard and then get back to me.
Eagerly awaiting your reply,
Jenn
AMD: Chipping Away at Intel [View article]
1) How is it possible for "half of AMD's growth" of 2.2% be at the expense of Intel when Intel's loss was just 0.7 percent?
2) Why does the author fail to mention that on a quarter-to-quarter basis, AMD just LOST market share to Intel? In fact, from Q4 '07 to Q1 '08 AMD's share dropped from 14.1% to 13%, while Intel's climbed from 78.5% to 79.7%.
3) Why do people think that they can make something sound bigger by expressing it as a percent? Only an idiot or someone catering to idiots would say "3700% bigger" rather than "38 times." Anyway that's not even the correct number since, as of today, Intel's market cap is closer to 34 times that of AMD ( = 109B/3.2B). Sorry I mean "3300% bigger."
4) When exactly will "macro-economic" forces improve so dramatically as to push AMD's shares from $5 to $12? In 2008 with a projected earnings loss of $1.44/share? Or maybe in 2009 with a loss of just $0.63/share?