Analysis on IT trends and competitive strategies, with emphasis on micro processors, computer systems and networks. Based on latest news, backed up with real data, this site intends to provide a true and realtime picture of the fast changing IT landscape. This journal strives to be accurate on facts and sharp on criticisms. You may email your opinion to sharikou@yahoo.com or post comments here, be cool and intelligent.
Freelance journalist on IT matters. Some of my writings have been published on online IT journals. Any original content on this journal is Copyrighted, but it's free for non-commercial use. Any Trademarks used on this site belong to their respective owners. Some of the pictures are links. If there is any issue with the content of this site, please email sharikou@yahoo.com .
The rule has changed. AMD is taking market share across the board. Those $99 2.6GHZ AMD64 X2 CPUs are impossible to resist. Why getting a copycat Core 2 Duo when you can buy the real thing? If you examine the market share of AMD in developed countries such as U.S., you see it takes about 50% of the pie. The inescapable conclusion is that Intel only dominates in 3rd world where bribery and kick-backs work.
posted by Sharikou, Ph. D. @ 1/15/2008 01:44:00 PM
6 Comments:
Um so when is AMD going to make money.
Why has Intel's market share increased again for the 3rd Quarter in a row?
Why do you continue to LIE Sharidouche?
AMD X2 processors are excellent value. Take the 5000+ X2 Black edition for example it has an unlocked multiplier and can reach nice speeds without a voltage change. AMD is leading, because the only Intel processor with an unlocked multiplier is the expensive extreme edition. AMD is the logical choice for enthusiasts.
Core2Duo might be faster than the old Pentium D, but it's still relic technology. C2D is also inefficient in 64Bit. Penryn will not save Intel.
AMD is where the value is, while Intel charge much for copycat products.
Why choose C2D?
Maybe because $99 buys you an E4000-series processor thats faster than AMDs whole line-up?
Or the E4500 which when overclocks smokes your POS 5000+.
Let's wait for AMD's earnings tomorrow, or shall I say lack of..
Why has Intel's market share increased again for the 3rd Quarter in a row?
Because the market is growing maybe!
-------------
Just to annoy my Intlite friends, I feel like making predictions, so here goes:
If the market goes down and the PC industry slows down and corporate CAPEX is reduced this should be good for AMD.
Why?
Simple, since AMD screwed up so badly in processing and K10 bugs etc. this will give them some time to catch up while the industry is down.
During this time Intel should suffer a hell of a lot more, especially this year (2008):
a) $2.x BILLION in European commission fines
b) Processing difficulties (to come)
c) Architecture problems/bugs (to come)
d) Product delays (due to 'b', 'c' and too many distractions in their pipeline like 'consumer' processors and graphics processors etc.)
e) Market loss in the laptop market to AMD (due to Puma's success)
By the time the industry recovers and corporate CAPEX is increased to record levels (early/mid 2009), AMD should have ironed out all manufacturing glitches, fixed processor bugs, enhanced/optimized virtualization, and very close to marketing/releasing Fusion.
My only concern is the move to Hi-K processing.
I've always expected Intel to make a come back after AMD's early 200x success. Would have been stupid not too.
But by the end of 2009, AMD should gain the lead on Intel and I believe AMD will keep that lead for many, many years to come.
By mid/late 2010 Intel will loose about half of its weight, similar to IBM in the early 1990's. They will never bankrupt, but they will have to recollect and regroup.
By this time Intel will have lost its #1 crown to Samsung.
How did Intel miss their own predictions? Revenue and profit were both within Intel's predictions in Q3'07.
Post a Comment
<< Home