Please Note: Blog posts are not selected, edited or screened by Seeking Alpha editors.

AMD : Intel Market Share

Summary

AMD share v Intel total market is 2 to 3%.

Intel at 97% on back in time surplus.

AMD successfully focuses to grow specific channels.

AMD does engage in Intel grade SKUs competition.

Adaveinus2 and Author Kwan-Chen Ma,

In response to your inquiries;

A Christmas Carol For AMD

Q - Again from where do you get these numbers?

Data gathered weekly presents an index of e-bay broker offers begins Ivy Bridge Xeon at Haswell Desktop records Intel and new AMD CPUs by grade SKU.

Every week, every e-bay Intel and AMD grade offered by CPU, CPU + Board, tower, desktop slim line, workstation, notebook, tablet, game, stick, server tray, sled, box offered is queried, recorded, tallied. Primary research results in ability to plot product supply waves, determine grade SKU split, calculate average weighed price by product categories.

Q - Other than Ivy Bridge where can I find these data points?

A – Numerous SA authors have government briefing examples.

Index of 1 = 1 CPU offer that is paid or consigned inventory in brokerage for resale equals AMD and Intel market share. Because that index of 1 equals 1 CPU for sale Xeon total volumes are deflated 2P, 4P, 8P in chassis.  Still it’s sufficient against known volumes for production economic analysis. My 2017 long run data begins P5 1993 associated with FTC Docket 9288 discovery aid begins May 1998. Volume by quarter across 158 processor production runs is tracked and tallied.

Ivy Xeon at Core Haswell running weekly 'supply wave' total and all following product weight is known back 235 weeks. Intel production economic analysis supports Docket 9341 monitoring; volume, revenues, margin, cost, elasticity, Intel Inside®  charge sum check, monopoly price overcharge at price > 9x to 11x cost. Intel CPUs priced less than their production cost on tally required, in September 2013, a new method for estimating percent Intel CPU volumes produced per quarter by product category. Supply signal delineation erodes and that 21 year signal transmission ends in 2015. 

From e-bay running result Intel production metrics are determined, by grade SKUs weight is revealed for calculating average weighed price. Percent SKUs applied against known long run volumes determine individual category grade SKU volumes I state including AMD Intel displacement potentials.

During supply signal era broker offer data is relied solely for determining grade SKU weight needed to calculate CPU Average Weighed Price. AWP is essential using Total Revenue Total Cost : Price model for estimating Intel processor total revenue, marginal revenue and marginal cost trajectories.

As signal cipher is discontinued makes my production economics task more difficult on the diminishing Intel signal data. I needed a new data source to perform production economics and began to record weekly e-bay CPU offers.

Doing that task I found as FTC Docket 9341 discovery aid yet another signal system. E-bay Intel and AMD broker offer data provides production indicators seen in supply volumes that deliver wave forms for system analysis; percent production volume at risk, ramp, peak, crest, run down, run end, grade yield curves. Signals buried into wave forms are reminiscent of those buried into Intel demand and supply plots associated with prior supply cipher signal.

Until September 2013 Intel supply signal is relied for determining the exact Intel CPU production mix. Signal system enables receivers who are financial houses, board OEMs, Intel direct competitors to reassemble a disintegrated story problem 'cipher' specifically relied for determining quarterly volumes by product category. At signal peak use between 2006 through 2012, is accurate up to eight quarters into future time for calculating INTC revenue and margin for gaming the stock price. System begins 1997 is discontinued in 2015 after having documented its uses to SEC, FTC, Intel and the justice department.

For 10K transparency I have no issue with Intel or AMD reporting production volumes after the fact. Intel supply signal on the other hand is specifically designed, sold into the investment community for insider trading by Intel, SoftBank and the Ziff Davis Publishing Company.

INTC trading has always been rigged. Industry veterans are aware of these and other Intel system tools relied to rig markets, steal from unknowing targets, shift PC products share, revenue value, transfer wealth from non cartel to cartel members.

On A2 observation I have no problem with SoftBank JV investment in AMD, although industrial network associated with AMD may have issues on AMD targeting during the 1990s and 2000s.

I've stated AMD needs $3 B in capital to guarantee foundry procurement.

While 1990's accelerated sales systems raise industry capital for fabrication advance, which AMD benefited directly and Cyrix indirectly, both enterprise channel product flows are intentionally restricted. Channel access is limited by the Bill Ziff Davis and then Soft Bank Ziff Davis Companies who not only manage but police Intel channels for dissent. Dissenters are eliminated. The task falls to ZD Media after 2001 not to forget PC World Review Gauntlet. 

With Intel marketing SoftBank Ziff Davis are instrumental in the worldwide roll out and administrative management of Intel Inside 3-step tied charge back system. That closed financially system severely restrains AMD and the AMD supply channel, delivers many commerce barriers still in place today.

Any SoftBank JV with AMD cannot be in exchange for the $5.5658 B in Intel Inside consumer tollway charges paid by Intel to SoftBank ZD as brand fee rewards charged to PC end buyers.

Long on Statute of Limit Honorable SB Board of Directors have been asked to return Intel Inside payments to USDOJ for WW redistribution supporting the consumer recovery matter. There is no action against SB. The request simply seeks acknowledgment a theft occurred, returns Intel Inside tollway charges cost to PC buyers, by a combined cartel operation engaged in administrative product routing and Intel microprocessor registered "sales flow" metering.

Q - "I don't understand what you mean by down? Is the inventory down?

A - Some inventory cleared discharging holding cost from AMD and supply chain.

Over last 6 weeks these are the AMD movers;

1200 down 55.7%

1600X down 31.4%

1600 down 22.9%

1700 down 16.1%

1700X down 15.7%

1800x down 13%

1500x down 12.7%

1300X down 5.2%"

A - Those grade SKUs cleared over six weeks. However in the last 3 weeks equates to a slim 2.5% clearance discharging AMD inventory through open market (e-bay) broker channels.

Open market brokers are master distributors. Relied by first tier PC Suppliers to resell processor overage procured for volume discounts on non-demanded values. Banked values are a cache for Intel and AMD future sales. Brokers move product coming off lease, refurbish and salvage lots of consumer and commercial products including servers and network equipment.

Lots of computer equipment is sold hand me down to commercial, education, science, business enterprise which is how computers have always been sold.

There are secondary markets. Noteworthy much of the last five years of Intel production is actually obsolete unless you’re in business of compute, cloud infrastructure, high performance modeling simulation, financial, transaction processing and some reservation systems. For everything else back in time Intel is an everyday applications performance value.

AMD inventory before Ryzen, on the other hand, rots on the shelf presenting a financial liability.  It takes valued assets to guarantee into future foundry supply orders.

There are also Intel SKUs rotting on the shelf primarily Atom and Core i5, i3, Pentium and Celeron. In relation to surplus processor values Intel down bin grades are for the most part unwanted. Most are bundled into PC OEM sales packages.

Extent of time a processor is commercially viable pursuant holding cost has little to do with design and data processing ability. it’s the original volume discount establishing a resale price floor. The deeper a processor’s original discount the longer its channel shelf life in relation to new offerings meant to replace or displace older offerings.

BW E5 2600 v4 is heavily discounted up to 86% off Intel $1K list. Discount provides channel runway to recover that investment in surplus procurement for resale. 

Q - Possible to breakdown those numbers like mindshare.de?

Yes and SA Authors are in receipt of examples.  I will provide full run TR / Ryzen grade SKU data here;

1950X = 3.21%

1920X = 1.88%

1900X = 0.66%

1800X = 10.61% 

1700X = 12.29%

1700 = 25.296%

Pro 1700 = 0.01%

1600X = 6.87%

1600 = 13.34%

1500X = 5.98%

1400 = 8.50%

1300X = 5.20%

1200 = 6.16%

AWP = $321.11 / 3 = $107.10 each AMD and GF gross, and PC OEM development fund. It's a basic rule not a hard fact and seems to fit. 

vs. specific Intel grades market share is given in my original comment.

AMD and Intel costs are stated throughout my comment page and here:

Mike Bruzzone's Comments

AMD Vs. INTEL Production Cost - Mike Bruzzone

Q - You are saying AMD now has 24.29% of Kaby Lake desktop?

A - Yes for the week, AMD TR/R vs. KL i7/i5/i3/P desktop grade SKUs volume held by e-bay brokers extrapolated to whole market. Intel relies on e-bay channel to service world market through Intel Solutions Summit program.

Don't think AMD has 24.29% share v Intel because share is based on total inventory holding’s that’s a channel financial investment. That investment has to clear before channels procure something new.  

AMD sales target specific Intel grades and retail channels where head-to-head market shares can be stated. Still AMD only has a 2.4% or less share considering channel financial investment in total Intel inventories. This is how Intel holds channels; financially through supply much of which is not demanded in real time but sells over time.

Some Intel product never sells through and ultimately will be given away. 

Intel knows how to consume resource; development, manpower, financial ability to stock anything else. Intel controls the primary 'virgin' processor market and Intel controls the secondary 'surplus' processor market.

Q - So what was the gain from last Qtr.?

A - In relation to the channels total investment in Intel holdings; up about 1.6% in relation to KL desktop primarily a function of e-bay channel selling off Intel more rapidly than AMD while AMD inventories grew in period.

AMD is attempting to create a channel cache viable as long as AMD products can be discharged before their price collapses in relation to new and old competing products alike. Like Intel AMD is attempting to manage a first in first out channel sales system.

Currently on e-bay data Xeon E5 2600 v3s are very competitive in relation to AMD and Intel desktop offerings. 2600 v3 is current enthusiast, home office, personal computing, Windows and Linux application performer. 

A - AMD Share in relation to KL and SL full runs plus viable Xeon is 2% to 3%. For 30 years AMD share is actually calculated in relation to channel total inventories. Still commercial analysts attempt to convince us market share is solely determined within current generation. This has always been concerted misinformation by actors interested primarily in newly enabled value flows that are not market driven but system manipulated.

AMD can hold specific retail channels and does engage in head-on guerrilla SKUs competition but that does not equate to overall market share.

I'm all for AMD obtaining a true 20% overall share but there is no stating AMD overall share prematurely, because Intel legal will rely on that misrepresentation to escape antitrust address and remedies.

Mike Bruzzone, Camp Marketing

Disclosure: I/we have no positions in any stocks mentioned, and no plans to initiate any positions within the next 72 hours.