Friday, January 19, 2007

The Geek has problem comprehend

See here.

24 Comments:

Anonymous Anonymous said...

I read the inquirers comments on Kents article.
I felt that Kents article was very unAmerican and unfair to american labor.
1500 American hi tech jobs are just what this nation needs and anybody who belittles american labor should leave the country.
I commend AMD-ATI and N.Y. for cranking out a deal thats good for AMD, NY, and american labor.
With outsourcing to another country being so popular I happy to see New York State and AMD helping to hold some hi tech jobs here in America.
Support New York, buy AMD and keep America strong.

4:52 PM, January 19, 2007  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Lets state a few facts

INTEL has multiple fabs in the US; Arizona, Oregon, New Mexico, Mass., Calif., Colorado ( for sale ). And a few overseas in Ireland and Isreal. It continues to invest large amounts of capatial in the US and does all major development in Az and Or.

AMD on the other hand pays someone else to do development. Has NO factory in the US. Shipped them all to Dresden for the sweet tax deals and huge subsidies giving by the Goverment of Saxony.

AMD is only in the USA or considering it because it is getting a billion dollan handout.

INTEL pays and invest far more in the US then AMD as a precentage of revenue/profits or per employee.

AMD is the one not willing to support or put manufacturing jobs in its home country. INTEL continues to invest.

AMD is at the brink of BK and need handouts. INTEL on the other hand makes billions while still paying high US wages to manufacturing people and engineers.

6:54 PM, January 19, 2007  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I applaud AMD's decision to invest back in the US for their next manf facility. I used to work for Hector when he was running Motorola SPS into the ground. I clearly remember at one of his first communication meetings he gave us his vision - to move as much manufacturing as possible to overseas foundries. I thought that was where he was heading w/ AMD based on the Chartered deal, but I'm glad to see that's not the case.

8:02 AM, January 20, 2007  
Blogger Azary Omega said...

AMD is about to start fraging intel even more!!
Look here, i mean 65nm is here and they are only 115$

4:13 PM, January 20, 2007  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

commend AMD-ATI in NY?

comment Hector?

WTF are you smoking?

The only reason he is considering NY is they bought him to the tune of billions in handouts..

Give anyone a billion and they would put a factory in at a superfund site..

duh

6:53 PM, January 20, 2007  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Azary Omega said...

AMD is about to start fraging intel even more!!
Look here, i mean 65nm is here and they are only 115$


Sorry. Us Intel users have enjoyed the benefits of 65nm technology for over a year now. By the end of this year we will be able to enjoy 45nm products.

12:03 AM, January 21, 2007  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

What a link..

LOL a 65nm Brisbane that is only as fast at their 90nm.. WOW

INTEL has 65nm ramped in 3 factories pumping COre2s and Pentium Ds at double digit prices and with huge margins.

45nm is on track for 2007 and by 2008 there will be 3 factories pumping 45nm and still 3 factories pumping 65nm...

AMD going BK

9:22 AM, January 21, 2007  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Quote: "AMD on the other hand pays someone else to do development. Has NO factory in the US. Shipped them all to Dresden for the sweet tax deals and huge subsidies giving by the Goverment of Saxony."

(1)AMD had to shut its FAB in the USA many years ago due to Intel's illegal activity. This fact is part of AMD's law suit against Intel.
(2)Intel receives subsidies not only from the US tax payer but also from tax payers in the rest of the world. They have plants in Europe, Israel and the Far East. I hear they are planning new plants in China and Vietnam.

So who is exporting US jobs? Who is getting hand-outs? Intel, of course!I suggest you pay a visit to faceintel.com and prepare to have your sight restored!

9:40 AM, January 21, 2007  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

WTF IS WRONG IS WRONG WITH AMD, 1 THE SOCKET F CHIPS SHOULD BE 65 NANO BASED SINCE THEY ARE ALREADY THERE, 2 THEY SHOULD RELEASE A QUAD SOCKET BOARD AND CHIPSET FOR THE DESKTOP JUST BECAUSE THEY CAN, 3 ADD THE SHARED 2MB-3MB L3 CACHE TO EACH CHIP;F_ _K IT CALL THEM PRE K8L'S, THIS WOULD BE MY IDEAL LINUX BOX.

1:02 PM, January 21, 2007  
Blogger Jeach! said...

It continues to invest large amounts of capatial in the US and does all major development in Az and Or.

So what? This only proves that business is strong in the US otherwise they'd invest even more around the world to avoid shipping charges. It makes no sense on building a processor for $100 and having $10 in shipping charges.

AMD on the other hand pays someone else to do development. Has NO factory in the US. Shipped them all to Dresden for the sweet tax deals and huge subsidies giving by the Goverment of Saxony.

So what's your point? If the government offered you monies worth half the value of your next house... would you take it or complain on how insolvent you've become?

Seriously, one of the most important aspect of business management is the art of negotiation! If AMD can negotiate $500M to $1B subsidies doesn't that prove how great they are? And remember, no matter how much this deal DOESN'T make sense to you, the government doesn't give hand-outs and ALWAYS ends up winning when giving money.

AMD is only in the USA or considering it because it is getting a billion dollan handout.

Shows how little you know! This is only the second reason... the first is to save shipping costs. Now that it will be selling millions of processors through DELL and has conquered the desktop business segment, this only makes perfect sense.

INTEL pays and invest far more in the US then AMD as a precentage of revenue/profits or per employee.

AMD is the one not willing to support or put manufacturing jobs in its home country. INTEL continues to invest.


AMD purposely kept manufacturing at a minimum... so what's your point?

AMD was willing... but Intel's monopoly prevented them from ever doing this! Only now will AMD be capable of this feat by outmaneuvering its fierce monopolist opponent.

Just wait and see how much percent of Intel's expenditures come over to the U.S now that China is on the map... very little!

AMD is at the brink of BK and need handouts.

Right!

INTEL on the other hand makes billions while still paying high US wages to manufacturing people and engineers.

This really just kills me! First you'll argue that Intel's production costs are way lower than AMD's, but when it comes to 'very high salaries', 'best manufacturing technologies', 'best fabs', etc, etc. you agree that Intel outspends AMD. How can Intel consistantly outspend AMD but can produce products at a lower price. You guys just make me laugh! I agree that Intel outspends AMD, but this is why AMD produces at a lower price... especially now (without huge L2/L3 cache)!

1:11 PM, January 21, 2007  
Blogger S said...

I was puzzled what your recent criticisms of SUN really meant.

I didn't know that you had advanced knowledge of this : http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=37089

1:31 PM, January 21, 2007  
Blogger Core2Dude said...

Hey Shakira,

Looks like Sun is jumping the ship.
http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=37089

Any thoughts?

7:01 PM, January 21, 2007  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

What a joker this guy is let me help him..
"So what? This only proves that business is strong in the US otherwise they'd invest even more around the world to avoid shipping charges" Shows you how little he knows about where INTEL is getting most of its revenue and growth NOT in the USA you narrow red neck.

". It makes no sense on building a processor for $100 and having $10 in shipping charges." You think INTEL ships using the same shipping that ebay vendors use. Do you know how many CPUs can fit in the a box or suitcase?

"AMD purposely kept manufacturing at a minimum... " LOL wasn't ti Jerry that said real men have fabs. Problem this little man had no balls to build a real fab.

"Just wait and see how much percent of Intel's expenditures come over to the U.S now that China is on the map... very little!" Did this chip just admit that investments are mostly in the US?

"How can Intel consistantly outspend AMD but can produce products at a lower price. You guys just make me laugh!" The monkey is really showing his IQ. INTEL outspends by being first to the next node. INTEL has been making CPUs on 65nm for more then a year. As such they plowed billions into RD and manufacturing. What did they get? DIe size that is 1/2 the size as if they did it on 90nm. Silcion technology that is 30% faster for more performance. By being early they have higher yields and more learning. Smaller faster die, higher yields means lower cost. Can you comprehend you chimp! Why can't AMD throw more cache? Because they don't have yields nor small cache size as a INTEL. Comparing a INTEL 65nm SRAM cell vs a AMD 90nm the ratio is 1:4. That is why INTEL invests and AMD sucks NewYorker's tax happy legistators dick!

7:49 PM, January 21, 2007  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"It makes no sense on building a processor for $100 and having $10 in shipping charges."

Please tell me you are really not this stupid....

A) Chips are still packaged overseas even if the WAFERS are made in NY (due in large part to labor cost)
B) Shipping charges of ~$10? you are probably off 2 orders of magnitude

"How can Intel consistantly outspend AMD but can produce products at a lower price."

Because labor is not really that large a part of the cost to manufacture a CPU!

"Just wait and see how much percent of Intel's expenditures come over to the U.S now that China is on the map... very little!"

Are you on crack? Where does majority of capital equipment go? Where is the largest % of Intel's employee base?

"Shows how little you know! This is only the second reason... the first is to save shipping costs. Now that it will be selling millions of processors through DELL and has conquered the desktop business segment, this only makes perfect sense."

I understand now - you really are on crack. How much do you think it will cost AMD to SHIP a finished wafer to Dresden (or elsewhere) for C4 bump / then packaging? Even if AMD builds a fab in NY, unless Dell starts up it's own packaging plant, where exactly do you think the 300mm wafers will go once they're finished in the NY fab. Oh and just how the hell are they shipping these CPU's? In gold packaging?

So if susbidies is the 2nd reason (and this is ~1 Bil); you are hypothesizing that AMD will save >1Bil in shipping by producing wafers in NY which are then shipped to Dresden or China for packaging and then back to Dell?

remember - it is better to keep your mouth shut and have people think you are a fool then to open your mouth and prove it!

7:50 PM, January 21, 2007  
Blogger Jeach! said...

I know I'm right! Unlike you, too scared to put an identity to himself.


What did they get? DIe size that is 1/2 the size as if they did it on 90nm.


You know NOTHING about this business... go back to your monkey books and let the smart people chat!

Even if yield has theoretically increased since going to 65nm and 300 mm and then expect to increase again when moving to 45nm... IT'S ONLY THEORY!!!

I'll say it again! IT'S ONLY THEORY!

The sad truth is that Intel has gone dual core and quad core and has added huge amounts of level 2 and shared level 3 cache on their processors because of their INFERIOR technology, resulting in die sizes very similar to when they were producing dies on 130nm.

The only added capacity was by investing in extra FAB's which is why their overall balance sheet is taking a hit.

Intel can not maintain this level of expenditures!!

10:41 PM, January 21, 2007  
Blogger Kalle said...

"The sad truth is that Intel has gone dual core and quad core and has added huge amounts of level 2 and shared level 3 cache on their processors because of their INFERIOR technology, resulting in die sizes very similar to when they were producing dies on 130nm."

Funny, you could change Intel to AMD and it would still be true :)

Do you know the die sizes of 130/90/65nm K8's, x2's and K8L's? I guess not

2:31 AM, January 22, 2007  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Quote: "That is why INTEL invests and AMD sucks NewYorker's tax happy legistators dick!"

Eek, eek, eek, ooho, ooho, ooho!

9:13 AM, January 22, 2007  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Fanbois looks like even SUN is going INTEL... Why because AMD products suck, because AMD roadmap is broken, because 65nm process is broken, because Brisbane is butt slow, because Barcelona is DOA on A0..

Prove me wrong; show me volume 65nm fast Brisbane, show me where is the Barcelona demos and benchmarks, its been a quarter + since TO. Where is that fancy APC and record TPT AMD says help them. Howcome we don't seen any Barcelona's.. because the native quadcore is a disaster.

Poor AMD and their fanbois.. You guys are as stupid as the PS3 no lifers.

6:51 PM, January 22, 2007  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"The sad truth is that Intel has gone dual core and quad core and has added huge amounts of level 2 and shared level 3 cache on their processors because of their INFERIOR technology, resulting in die sizes very similar to when they were producing dies on 130nm."

That's nonsense - with one exception. Intel throws on lots of cache because they can afford to:- their die sizes are still quite small despite using 4mb of cache on Conroe. On the Core 2 processors with only 2mb of cache it's been proven time and time again that there's less than a 5% difference between 2 and 4mb of cache.

The exception is Tulsa. It's netburst based. Paxville was utterly dreadful, so they took two netburst cores, shoved 'em together with there own L1 and L2 caches, then gave both cores access to a massive 16mb shared L3 cache. It works pretty well. It's not ideal, but it does allow for a huge performance gain over Paxville. The result is something that is a lot more competitive with Opteron in the 4P and up market.

As for adding cache, AMD is doing the same thing. K8L quad core is meant to feature independent l1 and l2 caches, with a shared l3 cache. K8L on release will probably have about the same amount of cache as Tigerton when it's released.

1:14 AM, January 23, 2007  
Blogger Jeach! said...

Prove me wrong; show me volume 65nm fast Brisbane, show me where is the Barcelona demos and benchmarks, its been a quarter + since TO. Where is that fancy APC and record TPT AMD says help them. Howcome we don't seen any Barcelona's.. because the native quadcore is a disaster.

To prove you wrong of AMD's amazing success is VERY easy!

But I don't have to show you products or technologies that didn't make it to market just yet. To show you how successful AMD is all I have to show you is that every AMD processor is SOLD! That's right, you heard me right! Every processor produced by AMD is sold at a margin HIGHER than Intel... how is that for proof of a great business.

Brisbane, quads, 65nm, 4x4, K8L... all those will come eventually (in due time). But as of yet, Intel DOES have 65nm, quads, C2D and they are STILL loosing market/revenue share!

5:04 AM, January 23, 2007  
Blogger Dr. Yield, PhD, MBA said...

Jeach! said...
To show you how successful AMD is all I have to show you is that every AMD processor is SOLD! That's right, you heard me right! Every processor produced by AMD is sold at a margin HIGHER than Intel... how is that for proof of a great business

Well... lessee.

AMD just reported that inventory grew from 466M to 814M- a 75% increase. That can not be wholly attributable to the acquisition, especially since AMD had to write off 62M in ATI inventory (which was most of the 4pt. difference between GAAP and non-GAAP GM).

AMD GAAP GM was 36%. Non-GAAP was 40%.

Intel, GAAP GM was 49.6%. Non-GAAP was 50.6%.

Conclusions?

1. AMD didn't sell everything they made.

2. Their margins are in fact 11-14 points worse than Intel's.

3. Jeach! is 0 for 2.

1:43 PM, January 23, 2007  
Blogger Dr. Yield, PhD, MBA said...

Correction to my last posting-

according to the conference call, AMD (non-ATI) inventory grew $34M. So while it didn't grow 75%, it did grow during what should be the busiest quarter of the year. Intel shrank inventory in the same quarter. Still not an indicator that AMD sold everything they made that quarter. Sorry Jeach!

2:14 PM, January 23, 2007  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

LOL looks at this monkey's post

"To prove you wrong of AMD's amazing success is VERY easy!

But I don't have to show you products or technologies that didn't make it to market just yet. To show you how successful AMD is all I have to show you is that every AMD processor is SOLD! That's right, you heard me right! Every processor produced by AMD is sold at a margin HIGHER than Intel... how is that for proof of a great business."

Yup they sold every CPU and how did they do this quarter.. a LOSS

You a stock owner.. buy at 28, 25, or maybe you thought you were smart and bought it cheap at 20... AMD is going down down down.

Sucking RED all of 2007 sucker..

BK in 2008

6:50 PM, January 23, 2007  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"Jeach" you really need to get a grip on reality

"To show you how successful AMD is all I have to show you is that every AMD processor is SOLD! That's right, you heard me right!"

And so Q4 inventory for AMD increased why? How can inventory increase as much as it did if every processor is sold?

"Every processor produced by AMD is sold at a margin HIGHER than Intel..."

This is why AMD's gross margin fell to 40% in Q4'06, while Intel is at 49% (which, oh, by the way, includes low margin flash, chipset and misc non x86 chips as well!)

I've also noticed that when you're obvious delusions get called out you ignore it and move onto new ones...

We are all still wondering how it cost $10 in shipping for every CPU and how shipping savings by having a plant in the US is greater than the ~1Bil grant NY is giving!

Also wondering how you fail to grasp that wafers that eventually get made in the NY fab will have to get shipped back overseas anyway for packaging.

It's Ok to be a fanboy, but if you really are this stupid, try to avoid using such blatantly obvious incorrect facts in your arguments.

You know, use terms like "market share runrate", "frag", etc....

6:55 PM, January 23, 2007  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home