One week to go: My AMD Prediction.

[Dputiger]

I thought I'd post something here regarding what I think AMD will announce for 2Q sales, just to see if I'm right. http://sysopt.earthweb.com/forum/smile.gif

First of all, I think AMD will surpass their own estimated earnings per share. In fact, the smartest thing for the company to do (IMHO) is to set high goals, then pass them by a significant (though not huge) amount.

AMD must execute flawlessly throughout the coming year in order to have any long-term chance at seizing the CPU market. Despite their recent success, AMD has far less money and credibility then Intel, who has a proven record of being a profitable investment.

AMD, therefore, must EXCEED expectations consistently, not merely meet them. Their products must be faster, better, and easier to get than people already expect them to be.

On the technical side of things, I've noticed that many of the 1 ghz Athlon CPU's are hitting 1.1 ghz, while the 1.1 ghz CPU's are hitting 1.2 ghz.

Here's my big theory: I think AMD is aggressively ramping technology but releasing at a slower, more controlled pace for the purpose of going head to head against the Pentium IV in terms of sheer speed.

If Intel rolls the Pentium IV Nov. 20th, as is now predicted, they'll roll it at 1.5 Ghz. There's no point to AMD rolling out their own 1.5 Ghz chip that fast unless necessary--so if Intel holds their own chip back, AMD will continue to release at a relatively sedate pace.

If, on the other hand, the P-IV does roll at that speed on Nov 20th, it would be a tremendous blow for AMD to roll the 1.5 Ghz Athlon--unexpectedly--Nov. 19th.

Given that AMD has a history of releasing cores at slower-than-rated speeds, coupled with great T-bird
yields, I'm predicting that for every speed grade they release (1.0, 1.1, 1.2 ghz) they've actually got the 1.3 and 1.4 in production.

Just my thoughts. Take 'em or leave 'em.

[embalmerd]

You might be right with the cpu predictions, but stock in these companies is falling.

[Dputiger]

Stocks are falling for several reasons:

1) First of all, AMD has always historically been tied to Intel. Intel stock has taken a hammering lately, which has helped drag down AMD, though there are signs that analysts are beginning to decouple Intel from AMD.

2) Secondly, the tech market in general has been taking a beating lately. This isn't going to help any tech stock.

[doctj]

I think consumers are realising faster is not necessarily better for their needs.It's like everyone would want to own a porsche but not everyone can either afford one or get a child seat to fit in one. It's come to a point where you buy what you need; I for example bought a k6 233 system over 2 yrs ago. Someone who bought a PII-400 which was top of the line then is in as much need of an upgrade as I am. A lot of stores have realised this and are now dividng their merchandise into soho, gaming, high end multimedia etc
AMD will move into the stratosphere if they're succesfull in the flash memory business which is what a lot of the handhelds use. As for cpus, sales are going to slow inevitably.
thats my 2 cents worth.

[Dputiger]

CPU sales WILL slow, yes, but not for several years yet.

Consider cars. Cars cost FAR more than a computer and last a great deal longer. In addition, a car made in 1990 if well-maintained and cared for, is still a viable vehicle in the year 2000. A 1990 computer no matter how well-maintained, isn't. http://sysopt.earthweb.com/forum/smile.gif

Yet there is still a huge car market in the US. The car industry here, as an aggregrate, is not growing tremendously, but it is doing well. The CPU industry will eventually mature but not for quite some time. Even once it does, domestic opportunity will remain high.

[doctj]

Technologically a 1990 Pc is equivalent to a car of the 1920's. Would you drive that to work everyday? The point I'm trying to make is that Intel hit that sweet spot of rapid market expansion in the early nineties. Any pc of the windows 95 era would be able to do word processing, surfing, etc if that's all thats required of it just like a car of 1990 would take you to work but you wouldn't use it to travel across the USA for example.
I'm not an Intel supporter by any means and I love the fact that AMD is putting them under huge pressure but I think that huge virgin market for cpu's just isn't there any more.

[Dputiger]

<shrugs> It's a more mature market now than it was in 1990, sure. No argument there.

But even in the US, a majority of adults do NOT own a computer. Across the world the number's even lower.

Forget US growth--how'd you like to be the first major manufacturer shipping in serious volume to CHINESE customers? http://sysopt.earthweb.com/forum/smile.gif

[Solidus]

What i think is happening is that the digital revolution is slowing down. For the past few years, everyone rushed to buy computers and get hooked up to the net, but now that most people have computers, they don't need to buy more. Even a computer from 5 years ago (my old p133 w/48 mb ram) could still run word processors, non - 3d games (and a few older 3d games) and surf the internet. What people want now are portable computers, and i don't mean laptops. Palm devices are the top selling items of most electronic and computer websites now. Eventually, a computer will just be a hand held device that you can carry around, then come home and plug it into your monitor to get a bigger display.