Eric D

AMD Bears Continue To Emerge

No need for me to comment further on ignorance. Looks like the article is correct. AMD is in the 14s now. I think that $13 target is very realistic over the next month or two.

AMD Bears Continue To Emerge

I guess it is time for some real facts!

I. Unless you are a stock analyst, I wouldn't consider you an authority on whether $13 is reasonable as a future target. I beleive it is, but then again, that is speculation on my part. YES, the most recent lawsuit was very rediculous and unsubstantiated. I read it... and YES, much of it was dismissed. Read here: news.zdnet.co.uk/itman...

II. Yes bud, they are resting. And I don't think they will do ATI any justice. I only bought one ATI product after they were starting to re-emerge as a dominant force. After the AMD purchase announcement, I will no longer consider them.

III. 64 bit was around for Intel since Pentium 4 prescott. Core 2 Duo is ALL 64 bit. There is no 32 bit only flavor for Core 2 Duo. I don't know where you get your facts, but check the specs. The specs don't lie.

IV. Name one AMD chip that beats a Core 2 Duo. As of July 14th, Tom's Hardware (who has almost religiously favored AMD) ran an article titled: "Gane Over? Core 2 Duo Knocks Out Athlon 64" www.tomshardware.com/2.../
There are plenty of other references and benchmarks from toms hardware as well as annandtech. I would get tired siting test after test.

V. So what. They have already been doing that. And Dell never left Intel. You can still buy Intel based Dells.

VI. I already commented on this.

VII. Yeah... you too.

VIII. Intel made AMD who they are. Should they keep doing that? Don't you think it's about time for AMD to stand on their own?

IX. Ok

X. Itanium is still alive in a new flavor... not one I care about though.

XI. So.

XII. So.

XIII. Not true at all!! Microsoft has had 64 bit available for quite some time. And I am currently running Vista 64 on a Core 2 Duo.

AMD Bears Continue To Emerge

I do NOT think that it is overexagerated.

I. Today's value has NOTHING to do with a future target value. I beleive that the $13 target value for AMD is quite reasonable and likely. AMD had shown desparation with frivolous lawsuits to try and make a quick buck instead of focusing on output. Much of that lawsuit was thrown out (in I am not mistaken) and likely the whole thing will be thrown out.

II. AMD is in fact resting, just as Intel was. The table has turned and I am affraid AMD bit off more than they can chew when they acquired ATI. This is going to spread them thin and lower their ability to deliver.

III. The Athlon64 processor is aging just as the Pentium processor is aged. Why do you think Intel changed product line names to "Core Duo / Core 2 Due, etc??"

IV. Look it up... Intel Core 2 Duo systems are beating the closest contenters of AMD in every benchmark. The Quads are going to really put AMD way back in the dust. I have yet to find a review site that has put ANY AMD processor in the lead over Core 2 Duo.

V. Customers change orders at the drop of a hat. A couple of those and AMD is in for a lot of pain. The price break on an AMD processor is not significant today.

VI. Intel doesnt ONLY offer 32 bit. They have plenty of 64 bit options. 32 bit is actually a lesser available option in the Intel line currently. Powerful graphics are not just attainable by ATI. nVidia is just as good if you ask me. ATI is likely to decline in performance / value / availability now that AMD owns them.

VII. Yes, ATI was historically improving. I wouldn't bet on those improvements to continue at the same pace. I would instead bet that we will see performance declines now that AMD owns them.

VIII. As much as I am not impressed with AMD, I would definately still like to see them in the picture. Competition is good all the way around. It keeps everyone on their toes - and it keeps prices down. So as long as AMD is still around, I can buy a better processor from Intel at a decent price.

IX. I think you need more than one goal to succeed. I think you know that too, since you stated "one goal" but listed more that one. I think Intel has that and more covered.

X. Itanium in its beginning was not just an Intel product. I am not sure where it is today, but it is not a large market and there is NO AMD counterpart. If you want to compare apples to apples, stick with the consumer chips.

XI. Speaking of Apples, if AMD was so great, why didnt Apple chose THEM for their processors? If memory serves me, Apple recently decided to put Intel Inside of the Apple machines. So Intel has the PC and the Apple market.