Another dull day
Ever since DELL went AMD, the amount of interesting news fell off a cliff--probably because AMD is too busy supplying chips. Azul's Vega2 chip might be a killer, but unless one can buy one for less than $5K, it will be irrelevant for the mass market.
SUN's Jonathan Schwartz talks about losing sales on big machines, it is indeed worrisome. As AMD64 chips get faster and denser, the only way to keep revenue up is by pumping volume. DELL has a full supply chain in place to crank millions of $299 desktops and still make a profit. SUN's future depends solely on the success of Solaris 10, but, with Linux and Windows dominating the market, the future of Solaris is far from certain.
posted by Sharikou, Ph. D. @ 12/07/2006 08:23:00 PM
27 Comments:
Hi Sahrikou,
Why did you skip covering the release of 65nm chip from AMD and their promise to release a 45nm version in another 18 months?
Perhaps this is of interest now that AMD owns Ati ?
http://www.dailytech.com/article.aspx?newsid=5245
AMD and Intel news might not get interesting till the next financial results now that Brisbane, QuadFX and Kentsfield are all out ?
Yeah but 32 itanium 2's beats the azul 2's 768 cores with only 64, given its very convenient to have half the processors with similar performance however, I don't know how well the azuls consume power, ect. however you can check the stats, the azul 2 with 16 processors got 800-900 k range and the 32 itanium 2's got 1 million, also if you linearaly scale opterons, which the actual should be less than that, to 32 p, it is around 1148200, by multiply the 4p on up. So technically both amd and intel cores are more powerful than the individual azul 2 cores, only based on this test, which compares the only benchmark I was able to find on the azul, jbb2005. BTW a 2 way intel woodcrest beats a 2 way opteron, and almost beats a 4 way in this benchmark, while the 4 way has double the ram. This is only one test and is a poor gauge of performance however it is the best I could find. But still with only 16 processors thats still damned good, however I'm figuring that the actual price is more than most other platforms.
http://www.azulsystems.com/press/120406_world_record.htm
Not all that dull.
AMD has leaped ahead to 7th place on the top ten chip sellers world wide.
AMD has had a 91% increase in revenues to get to 7th place.
Intel is barely holding on to the number 1 position with a 12% decline in sales revenue due to lack luster sales of the conroe and there bad platforms.
If Intel keeps up there declining sales they should drop out of 1st place in just a few weeks.
If AMD continues there massive sales growth rates they will probably over take 1st place by this time next year.
I expect the intel CEO will be fired shortly due to intels massive revenue decline which is in the billions.
So the big news is not only has AMD leaped ahead with massive sales growth, they will probably go to 1st place shortly on the top ten sales list.
As AMDs production ramp up contiues intels unsold inventory will burden intel to near BK.
Another dull day =
A) No good negative Intel news to spin
B) It's getting real hard to defend this 4x4 POS
C) I could not find some obscure Chinese/Japanese/etc website which shows a single positive benchmark about AMD that I can link to
D) My calculation on 65nm capacity are completely off given the actual die sizes and all of my BK predictions are falling apart so I need some time to defend these **see below
E) I'm trying real hard to explode a Core Duo with batteries that aren't defective but I can't seem to do it (it's the chip dammit, trust me on this, I'll prove it eventually!)
F) All of the above
** when I said Intel would BK in Q3'07, I mean, Q4'07, uh I mean, Q2'08, I really meant BK (runrate)...I will define what BK (runrate) means AFTER the Q2'08 financial results are posted.
http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=36232
Dell has a supply chain - one that's messing with AMD's
I cant see AMD getting any faster.
Given the push that Java received from the recent license change to GPL, Sun should consider doing the same to Solaris.
Not all that dull.
AMD has leaped ahead to 7th place on the top ten chip sellers world wide.
AMD has had a 91% increase in revenues to get to 7th place.
Intel is barely holding on to the number 1 position with a 12% decline in sales revenue due to lack luster sales of the conroe and there bad platforms.
If Intel keeps up there declining sales they should drop out of 1st place in just a few weeks.
If AMD continues there massive sales growth rates they will probably over take 1st place by this time next year.... snipped other sycophantic drivel
Wow we have a Sharikou Jr. in our midst.... Sharikou you may have to let a better spinner take over your blog and I think this anonymouse coward is just the person. Shilling for AMD isn't as easy as it used to be.
And you thought AMD would be a better is in it for the good of the world.. Well Sharikou, AMD is not a monopoly yet and they have been jacking you up for the graphics chip prices.. Imagine if they are a monopoly!
http://theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=36258
Come on, AMD going to #7 was their purhase of ATI.
So the big news is not only has AMD leaped ahead with massive sales growth, they will probably go to 1st place shortly on the top ten sales list.
As AMDs production ramp up contiues intels unsold inventory will burden intel to near BK.
Good God, are you joking? This is laughably idiotic. It's like saying e.g. New York has the #2 largest economy in the US, so they'll probably overtake California in a few weeks.
You are a clueless idiot. The chance of AMD overtaking Intel for the #1 sales spot in terms of silicon is about...0.00000001% of a chance.
To reflect that - you give me $50 if AMD doesn't take #1, and I'll give you $1 billion if they do within 6 months. Any oddsmaker would call you a simpering twit for taking that bet.
Why don't you check the facts of what you call a spinner junior before you go crying your stupidity ? ah yes, your too dumb to actually figure that bit out. here, have a cracker to your wet eyes.
AMD has leaped ahead to 7th place on the top ten chip sellers world wide. AMD has had a 91% increase in revenues to get to 7th place.
This is really a no brainer the rise of AMD to number 7 is aided by 2 things first of all Infineon has split into 2 companies ranging 12 and 14 on the list together they would have been no 5. But mainly it is the acquisition of ATI by AMD that brings the number up 91%.
So to expect AMD to continue the growth and replace Intel as no 1 is nothing less that idiotic. AMD nor ATI did not show any growth that would suggest them to take over the no 1 spot anytime soon. If the 2 companies had not merged I would guess that AMD would be in 15 spot with a revenue of 5 billion and ATI would be no 25 with 2,5 billion in revenues (this number is based on the 3. quarter filings of ATI. http://media.corporate-ir.net/media_files/IROL/10/105421/reports/ATI_Q306.pdf)
So it is nothing new really.
Intel is barely holding on to the number 1 position with a 12% decline in sales revenue due to lack luster sales of the conroe and there bad platforms.
If Intel keeps up there declining sales they should drop out of 1st place in just a few weeks.
Have you seen the charts? even with the drop in revenue and the rise of number 2 and 3 on the list. Intel still has approximately the same revenue as number 2 and 3 combined. http://images.dailytech.com/nimage/3247_large_isuppli.png and they are still 4.2 times larger than the AMD-ATI company
Really, another dull day is a day without an AMD 65nm CPU review... where the hell are these vaporware cpu? I'm "a little" disappointed...
One other thing to keep in mind - do you think the rapid loss of all Intel integrated chipset business over the next 1-2 quarters will be offset by the 1-2% market share gains AMD has been showing (in terms of IGP revenue).
This will only happen if AMD freezes Nvidia out of the AMD business, which they claim they won't. And if this does happen what does that say about the AMD is all about "building the ecosystem" and would be a great monopoly?
Q3 already showed a LARGE drop in IGP business for ATI..
AMD is a rather dull company, aren't they?? Maybe AMD is really Dull's ultimate soul mate?? Dull chips for Dull PCs??
They haven't shipped anything new since the Opteron, a design that was stolen and then implemented by a team that is no longer working at AMD.
There are hundreds of innovations that AMD could be doing on their chips. But they are not. Because the source of their innovations has dried up. No more smart ideas to steal.
And damn, life is tough when you actually have to invent something. Witness how long KL8 is taking. A strategic error to do KL8 instead of taking the architectural improvements (if there are any) of KL8 and rolling them into existing 2 core processors.
As much as the Azul is interesting, they are missing some important angles on the market. Azul has a few bright engineers, but stone cold morons for marketing and business development. Probably a retard for a CEO too.
It will be... INTEL... that provides the next wave of innovation. It makes sense as it was Intel that provided the first wave with AMD stealing their wave for a moment, only to slide under the water. Oh well.
But mainly it is the acquisition of ATI by AMD that brings the number up 91%.
It is always interesting when people challenge an obviously incorrect statement with one just as misleading.
It is true that AMD is in no danger of overtaking Intel tomorrow or next year or even by the end of 2008. This is not a function of popularity or technology; it's just a simple matter of production capacity.
Even when both FAB 36 and FAB 39 are at full output this will not be half of the market. AMD won't be in a position to really challenge Intel until it can produce 40% and that won't happen until AMD builds a third FAB. To take more than 50% of the market AMD would need four FABs. Even if AMD does decide to build four FABs this wouldn't happen before 2012.
Now as far as AMD's position on the rankings goes the counter argument is not really accurate at all. Intel's position ranking includes chipset production and always has. There is no reason not to count ATI's chipset production as part of AMD's share. True the 91% growth does include ATI however removing ATI still shows phenomenal growth by AMD. AMD's net revenue has doubled since 2004 while Intel's net revenue will be roughly the same as 2004.
AMD's actual growth was about 39%. This beats every other company in the top 20 except Elpida. And, only 3 other companies (Hynix, Qualcom, and Broadcom) are close. I would estimate that by the end of 2008, AMD's ranking will be 3rd or 4th.
"Infineon has split into 2 companies ranging 12 and 14 on the list together they would have been no 5. But mainly it is the acquisition of ATI by AMD that brings the number up 91%."
You are totally wrong.
First, the split of Infineon doesn't affect AMD only, but all other companies as well. It'll by itself raise AMD's ranking by two at most (that is, from 12 to 10).
Second, AMD spun off its memory group of 2bil revenue and acquired ATi of about 2.2bil revenue. The base revenue increase is less than 5%. In fact, AMD's core processor business grow 32%, still the highest in the industry.
"To reflect that - you give me $50 if AMD doesn't take #1, and I'll give you $1 billion if they do within 6 months."
I don't understand your logic. You missed two things:
1. He said "If AMD continues there massive sales growth rates..." Well, it won't be true unless AMD magically increases its capacity 2x and sells all of them. But this doesn't mean his statement is false - it only means you overlooked his assumption.
2. He said "they will probably over take 1st place by this time next year...", not in 6 months as you comfortably challenged.
Before saying others idiotic, you should revise and make certain your own logic first.
ATI is losing massive market share after only ONE quarter with AMD. They will no doubt take over the number one spot in a year.
http://www.the-inquirer.net/default.aspx?article=36191
what is happening doc? did the matrix get you?
Question on AMD product schemes:
They just announced a X2 5600 for $505 (2.8GHz, 1MB L2/core). The FX62 is $713 (2.8GHz, 1MB L2/core)...
Now why again is there 2 of the same product with 2 different names and prices. Are they obsoleting the AM2 FX's?
And why not cut them to the price of the "new" 5600? I smell a lack of 5600's in the near future while they gouge the consumer for an extra $200 for as long as they can.
Notice there were no reviews - wouldn't want the public to know the 5600 will perform the same as the Fx62 chip (it's the same damn chip) and prevent them from gouging Joe consumer for a little while longer...
Oh and is socket 1207 cheaper? Why is the FX 4x4 chips cheaper (per chip) than the EQUIVALENT (speed and in some cases cache) AM2 versions? Especially when the 4x4 chips are more complex (2 extra HT links no?). It seems like AMD is screwing the folks who went to AM2 and trying to push the 4x4 on folks who want the higher end chips.
And fortunately they have differentiated the sockets to prevent consumers from buying the cheaper (4x4) version and trying to plug one into an AM2 board.
The 4x4 is making less and less sense every day...
"Even when both FAB 36 and FAB 39 are at full output this will not be half of the market. AMD won't be in a position to really challenge Intel until it can produce 40% and that won't happen until AMD builds a third FAB. To take more than 50% of the market AMD would need four FABs. Even if AMD does decide to build four FABs this wouldn't happen before 2012."
By end of 2012 market will need much more CPU's than it does now and I doubt four fabs would be enough fot AMD to supply half of world needs.
Scientia I think you have misunderstood my point. I was commenting on the claim that AMD would take over the first spot anytime now. The charts are all semiconductor business so I stand by my claim that of a increase in revenue of 3.5 billion the main part 2.5 billion is revenues fro ATI and the last billion is from AMD it selves. I only responded to the claim from the previous user I did not want to analyze business divisions of the companies.
BTW the year on year growth of amd are 25% not 39 (4 to 5 billion) and I to would believe that AMD could rise another spot or two on the list in the coming years.
Edward
First, the split of Infineon doesn't affect AMD only, but all other companies as well. It'll by itself raise AMD's ranking by two at most (that is, from 12 to 10).
It will raise AMD’s rating by one from 8 to 7 as the split company dropped to 12 and 14 place instead of a combined 4. And yes all companies from rank 4-11gained a spot the company in 13 spot stayed the same place and from 15 and down they missed one spot.
FXs cater to the enthusiast market. Eg you know stuff like clock multiplier unlocked.
Try doing that with regular X2s.
"1. He said "If AMD continues there massive sales growth rates..."
The majority of the "growth rate" was the acquisition of ATI (Not sure about the 32% number but let's assume its true, overall revenue growth was what, 91%?)
Thus to "continue at this (meaning 91%!) growth rate", AMD will need to triple their CPU growth rate, or ridiculously improve the GPU/chipset growth (highly unlikely) or continue to acquire $5Bil companies (also unlikely)...
None of these seem realistic whether it's 6 months or 1 year...
BTW - I think Scientia is dead on with capacity analysis, especially considering some of this fab capacity will start being used for GPU/chipsets. Sharikou's whole 2 300mm 65nm fabs = >50% of the market analysis is just ridiculous!
Post a Comment
<< Home