Intel is on the path to irrelevance as a technology force. This is why its P/E is 17x and not, for example, Google's 55x or even Microsoft's 21x. Look for it to trend upward in the short-term, but in the longer term settle toward US Steel's 8x.
I would argue you know little of the stock market based on that apples-to-oranges comparison you just gave there. Google is a "brand-new" up-and-comer...such stocks always have exaggerated P/Es. As for Microsoft and US Steel, you're talking entirely different industries.
Microsoft stills trades at 21x P/E (after a _severe_ beating) despite the fact its industry Application Software averages about 16.
US Steel, which is more like a apples-to-battleships comparison, trades at 8x P/E because its industry Metal Fabrication averages about 12x. It also isn't in the "Technology" lumping of stocks, which in general have higher P/Es than the other sectors.
Intel on the other hand currently trades at around 17x P/E, generally in-line with its industry Semiconductor - Broad Line average of 18.
My point is: Intel won't see 8x P/E until its industry does. Trying to compare a tech stock to a commodity stock is insane. Base P/E judgements off comparison to the industry. Frankly, for the past 6 months or so, Intel has already been trading well below the industry P/E. Only recently in August is it beginning to bottom and recover, largely in part to Core 2 Duo.
the Red Mage was a mostly useless class, as it sucked at both Black and White magic.
More accurate, the Red Mage was a weaker party class, because is was basically a hybrid of two guilds, both of which did the job better.
It's a poor example anyways. For one, if you had to go the game solo, you're much better off with a Red Mage than a Black or White. That alone is a strength (which isn't realized in FF, but would be in an MMORPG). Secondly, it's a poor example of a hybrid class. Mage-Thief or Wizard-Warrior are much more prominent examples of popular and useful hybrid classes that don't simply "suck".
Scientists do not want to create a clone of an entire person - rather the idea is to clone parts
As with all things, that's a slippery slope. All things start small. At this point, I'm honestly unsure of where I stand on the cloning issue. The health benefits I'm sure would be enormous in the realm of "lives saved", but the potential risks of where that technology could lead terrify me to no end. Same goes for nanotech.
So Intel and AMD are now tied in performance, power consumption, and heat. However, the caught-up Intels are brand new CPUs, so they cost more.
Actually no.
Intel has surpassed AMD in all 3 categories.
The "brand new Intels" (Core 2 Duo) are priced very affordably.
AMD is maintaining a lower cost point on their bargain models by the briefest of margins, and are still losing in performance-per-watt/performance-per-dollar.
Whether or not AMD responds to Intel's latest chips is another story, but atm Intel is clearly leading across the board.
The vast majority of Dou Core 2 Duo Conroe Core whatever performance and efficiency gains are due to the differences between 90 and 65 nm features.
Will all due respect to a 3 digit SID...
If that were true,
Cedar Mill should be devastating Prescott, since that was the first thing Intel got out under the 65nm process. A die shrink alone does not a processor make. Nor would I claim it's the largest driving factor behind the efficiency of a chip.
Compare Prescott vs Cedar Mill or Venice vs Newcastle/Clawhammer...you'll see barely any difference. A die shrink does nothing more than give you more room to work with. In the end, it's still the architecture behind the chip that drives its efficiency.
Don't try to cheapen what Intel has achieved with Core 2 Duo. There will be no "easy fix" for AMD once it hits 65nm. Conroe wasn't simply a "leapfrog/step-up"...it was a significant gap up and an impressive architectural achievement that I haven't seen from Intel in a long long time. Also, considering the fact that AMD is strangely quiet and the best response they have is currently a mid-2007 "vapor" chip, I'm not all that confident in their forthcoming response to Conroe. Add to that the fact that by the time AMD hits 65nm, Intel will probably be shrinking the dies again themselves.
I thought the point of MMPORGs was for people to have fun, not to spend every waking hour performing menial, repetitive tasks over and over again to nudge an exp bar a few pixels. That is what WOW & EQ do.
It's weird seeing the mistakes of the past repeat themselves.
From a long-time obsessed text-mudder, I've gotta say I'm somewhat disappointed that none of these issues that plauged text-muds in their day were resolved. XP curves and "power players" have been a problem for ages in text-muds. Item hoarding and general economy screwing as well. And balance issues are always a constant problem...every new thing added is always ridiulously overpowered and then eventually goes through a nerfing phase.
*laugh* Things haven't changed.
Sad thing is...the end result is always the same. People get fed up and leave. The truly addicted die-hards are the only ones that remain in the end. No one wants a game to feel like "work"...and most muds/MMORPGs eventually do.
Personally, I believe the best solution to the "endless leveling" problem is an aging system based on active time.
"Uber-levelers" would get their higher levels much faster, but they would also rush forward to the end of their character life.
People who don't get as much time to play on the other hand would enjoy a longer life as a mid-to-high level character.
It would solve lots of problems, including the need for "high level content." That one there is an endless problem with no solution. Once you put in a area for the level 60s to actually feel challenged, you need to include a worthwhile reward, which makes them even more overpowered. Then they eventually get to level 70. It doesn't take long for balance to spiral out of control.
Some ten to fifteen posts on here are nothing more than assinine "make fun of the internet tube statement" posts.
Will you people get off the man's back?
Would you be as unforgiving had he said "pipes"?
I hear "pipes" used interchangably with "bandwidth" all the time.
Dictionary.com defines "tube" as: A hollow cylinder, especially one that conveys a fluid or functions as a passage.
Dictionary.com defines "pipe" as: A hollow cylinder or tube used to conduct a liquid, gas, or finely divided solid.
They're freakin synonyms! How is this deserving of endless mockery? The analogy made sense.
But I'm still surprised at how many +5 postings here support Colbert and what essentially was an attack on wikipedia. Face it, he instrumented a significant waste of time for many editors.
If you really wanted to, you could translate that to dollars the same way companies do after receiving website defacements. Whether or not it was satire or funny is irrelevant. If someone you didn't idolize did the same thing (even if just to make a point or a joke), you'd be burning them in effigy.
Surely, if you can invest the money in ways that exceed the interest of the debt, he could as well.
This is not always true. Special circumstances lend to greater savings. For instance, one could put a 0% balance on a credit card for 9 months and invest that money. Even in a high-yield savings account, you're looking at 5% for that entire time period. So long as you pay off the balance before the time lapse, you pay NO interest. Some cards charge a one-time fee which is normally capped fairly low which can easily be overcome.
Before the feds started raising rates again, I borrowed 20k against my 401k. I used that money to pay off my floating variable student loans. Now I have a fixed 4.5% loan rather han a 9+% variable. You can do similar things with home equity loans AND you can write the interest off your taxes.
These strategies DO work in saving money and sometimes in making money. Companies borrow money all the time...in fact, many companies are SITTING on debt, even with tons of cash in reserve. How is that not proof that debt isn't always a bad thing? It's all dollar cost averaging. Put your money where it earns you the most money (or costs you the least)
It was on dumblaws.com (I can't find the link now) and its true that here in Victoria, Australia it is illegal to leave your car unattended with the keys in the ignition.
It's illegal in the state of Maryland too. And probably other states in the US.
I went to court not too long ago on a speeding offense and one of the guys before me was in front of the judge because he left his car running and unattended outside of the convenience store he had run into. Apparently his excuse was that it was an old car and he didn't want to do through the hassle of getting it to start again. The judge would have none of it though.
The scary thing is that I didn't even realize it was illegal until I appeared in court that day. It really must be an obscure law.
Agreed, but... July 24th, the date when AMD is going to cut some CPU prices almost in half, is barely over a weekend away, and there is the question of supply and demand. Will demand be sufficient to drive the price up?
Why does everyone point this out as if it's a valid point. Intel has stated they are slashing prices the exact same day.
Do you honestly think Intel is going to release Conroe and keep their aging Pentium D line at the current prices?
Intel CPUs are likely _still_ going to be cheaper than their comparable AMD counterparts following the price slash.
2) Intel is setting up for a Big Bath in their Q2 earnings report. Their selling off of their ARM processor unit to Marvell is part of this (they'll have to recognize a huge loss on the sale).
I would argue this has already happened in the Q1 earnings report and the lead-up to Q2. Everyone is already expecting the worst (aka expectations are already wayyy low). If what you say is true, Intel would have to miss projections by ALOT on the 19th, and I just don't see that happening...they've already lowered projections once, and inventory was at abyssmal levels during the Q1 report...the price slashes pretty much guarantee a lower inventory, and AMD's warning placates the investors afraid of vanishing market share. I predict you're going to see some fairly huge buys into Intel proceeding the report. Of course alot of this hinges on the market. Chip stocks are general out of favor overall and inflation fears are rampant. Those two factors have been the main concerns in stifling the existing Intel stock rally.
Btw, why do you think that selling off a unit is a loss? On the books, that's a profit. It's a zero-sum on the balance sheet and a net gain to income (assets essentially converted to cash). In the long term they might realize a net loss in income, but as far as Q2 reporting goes, that should be a net gain.
3) All of this is obvious to AMD, so they're putting even more emphasis on Opteron sales where Intel is weakest. This results in lower total sales, as they sell in far fewer numbers than low-end CPUs, but should keep net income at a nice level since they're extremely high margin chips.
Conroe could very easily change all that. In fact, many think the reason chip sales overall are currently so stagnant is because many are waiting for the Conroe release.
5) Any advantage Intel will gain from C/M/W will be gone when AMD does their transition to 65nm in Q4.
You can't be serious...you honestly think a simple process change is going to catch AMD up in terms up performance per watt? Have you read the specs/reviews/benchmarks of Conroe? This isn't just a "one-uping" of AMD...this chip destroys everything AMD has to offer and AMD has little to no answer (the best bet for a response is Q2 2007, and that's still little more than vaporware in the present). Anyways, when AMD gets to 65 nm, Intel will be at 45 nm. I expect AMD's transition to 65 nm to be similar to their transition to AM2...essentially a small change, but nothing spectacular. AMD is going to be hurtin this year...count on it.
So.. What they are saying is Intel's latest and greatest CPU is finally gonna beat something AMD released, what, 5 or 6 months ago? Intel is STILL playing catch
Hardly.
Intel's latest and greatest CPU will not only beat AMD's current offering...it will TROUNCE it...and on top of that, AMD isn't expected to have an answer until mid-way through 2007...and even that is but gossip and rumors at the moment.
Mere AMD fanboyism won't beat the truth this time...for the first time in a LONG while, Intel has stolen the performance crown AND the performance per watt crown away from AMD. They've done it decisively with time to spare. If they can match AMD on the price point, which is highly likely, this is a very significant release.
The gap is an important thing...assuming AMD comes up with something to "catch up" to intel in mid-2007...that was a year of research Intel had to work on their current winners. It's an important turn of tide...unless AMD can pull a miracle jump in efficiency out of its 2007 vaporware chip architecture roughly equivalent to the Intel showing, AMD is now the one playing catchup.
I'm sick of hearing about power consumption and yadda yadda yadda. I buy processors based on performance, not on how many watts it eats up.
Dude, performance is heavily affected by wattage usage.
Think about it...the more efficient a chip is (the more it can do per cycle for less power), the more it will perform.
Low wattage does not simply mean "less heat." It means you are executing MUCH more code for less the cost. That makes it significantly easier to ramp up performance. Intel is a great case in point. Pre-Core Intel chips were hitting thermal limits...they could bump up the Mhz or extend the pipeline, but power consumption and thermal loss were ultimately eating away at whatever small gains were being accomplished.
The new chips can run 40% faster while using 40% less energy. Therefore, what do you think they can do if you pump more energy into them?
I'm confused about these new CPUs. I know the Core is based off the Pentium M, and the Core 2 uses a new micro-architecture, also based primarily off the Pentium M, as well as the Pentium III. My question is -- is the Core 2 a direct-line descendent from the Core? Or is the Core 2 the first to use the new micro-architecture, with the Core the last direct-line descendent of the Pentium M?
You are correct in that Core Solo/Duo is based off the Pentium M microarchiteture. However, it has nothing to do with the Core microarchitecture. Frankly, it was damn stupid of Intel to name them as such, unless they were intentionally trying to pass it off as somthing it isn't.
Core 2 Duo is of the Conroe line (Merom), the first to truly implement the Core microarchitecture, which isn't based off Pentium M at all.
After rumors of temperatures approaching 95C on the macbook pro I hope they use a Pentium M processor.
The Macbook Pro already uses a Pentium M processor. It houses a Core Duo (Yonah) chip, which is based on the Pentium M microarchitecture.
Core Duo 2 (Merom) on the other hand is based on the next generation Core architecture (Conroe)...it will be significantly cooler (at least as far as performance per watt)
It could have been worse..
(Score:5, Funny)
by Anonymous Coward on Friday April 28, @08:47AM (#15220004)
Although they'd have to name is Nintendo Shitcock for that to be true.
Heh, that TOTALLY reminded me of:
Prince John: You mean you changed it to Latrine? Latrine: Yeah, used to be Shithouse.
First of all, as someone who has recently switched from AMD to Intel investment, let me first say that this is old news.
The executives at Intel announced the market share loss way back in January, prompting a massive drop in share price. Since then they've lost a little bit more market share, but like I said...this is old news.
Secondly, Intel is far from out...their soon-to-be-released latest generation of processors are going to blow AMD's current offerings out of the water in practically all aspects, including cost per watt. And they've even bumped FORWARD the release date of the Woodcrest processors to June. On top of that, they've engaged in a major restructuring effort and a price war. Intel was caught with its pants down resting on its laurels. However, the sleeping giant has been awakened, and Intel has the tech and the fab capability to make magic happen. AMD has an "in", which is great...competition is good in any market. But they're hardly replacing Intel, nor are they even going to be superior at this point. With P4 and Netburst going the way of the dodo, Intel is looking vicious. Now all they have to do is trim the fat to get lean and mean.
As a direct reply to some posters here:
The Conroe will launch when promised. That it is a real launch with the product in stores, not just a paper launch.
Release dates have been pushed forward and Intel wouldn't dare goof this release...their stockholders are pissed enough as is.
That the performance will be as great as promised.
Plenty of benchmarks and specs and reviews have been released already. I haven't seen one that didn't decimate the existing chips. On a side note, Core Duo is an equally impressive release that is tearing up the benchmarks.
I'm just shocked at how cool Intel managed to make the new chips...Conroe's MAX will be 65 watts...that's already 30 watts below the P4's max. And the ultra low variants of the Conroe are slated to be like 40 watt max.
Intel has always had a process technology advantage over AMD. That never stopped AMD from shipping competitive products.
Process technology is not the end-all of making a respectable chip. Intel hampered themselves heavily by investing WAY too much in trying to stretch out a 6 year old architecture. Most of Intel's new architecture releases have been monsters...Pentium M, Core Duo, and the upcoming Conroe. Intel is in a fundamental generational gap. AMD has been beating the old platform. Lets see them keep up with the newer architecture. At the moment, K8L aside, I see nothing on the horizon. And frankly, as far as anyone knows at the moment, K8L is vaporware...nothing is known or even predicted about it.
Also, note that AMD's fab situation has gotten a lot better in the last year - with Fab 36 (and soon Chartered), AMD has the capacity to take on Intel in the market
While noted that AMD's fab capabilties are increasing, you go too far in claiming they can take on Intel's capacity. AMD's new fab gives them the ability to ship about 100 million units by 2008, which btw is roughly equivalent to Intel's capabilities way back in pre-2003.
AMD has always been conservative in launching new processes, and it has benifited them in the past. Intel's 90nm process turned out to be the nail in the Prescott coffin, but AMD's 90nm launch resulted in CPUs that clocked much higher, used less power, and cost less money.
But once again, AMD was competing with an aging platform, one that AMD largely always had a slight edge over. I want to see how they respond to Conroe.
While I'd agree that Conroe is looking quite good, note that Athlon 64 is not sitting still. Even a simple d
It's actually fast approaching the time to buy chips...
Due to Intel losing market share to AMD in the most recent announcements, the prevailing market opinion is that Intel is going to engage in a price war with AMD in the upcoming months. That means lower prices across the board.
Couple that with the fact that Intel's newer generation chips are beating the pants off AMD...methinks I'll be picking up a new Intel chip shortly.
Oh, the other thing to note is that Intel's inventory totals are climbing...that means they're going to be offloading the older chips at a substantial discount to clear out the building inventory. So it's win-win for the consumer, whether you want a bargain chip or a new chip. I highly suggest buying Intel chips at the current stage in the market.
Nintendo's also known for innovation in its hardware. With the Game & Watch Nintendo invented the D-pad, and introduced it to the home console with the NES/Famicom. Then they introduced the analog stick with the N64 (albeit in a bizarrey shaped controller). With the Gamecube they created the "digital click" which, though largely unused, was a very nice compromise between digital and analog shoulder buttons (for a good use of this feature see Metal Gear Solid: Twin Snakes). And now, with the DS, they've introduced all kinds of interesting possibilitied with the touchscreen (not their invention, but it's a first in consoles). There are games for the DS that simply CAN NOT be reroduced with a standard controller, such as Yoshi Touch & Go and Kirby's Canvas Curse. Then there are interesting side-notes, like the gyroscopic controls in Kirby Tilt & Tumble.
They've had a fair number of failures as well...the Power Glove, Power Mat, R.O.B., Nintendo Scope, U-Force, and even the Light Gun (how many games utilized that besides Duck Hunt?)...face it, these "function-specific" hardware peripherals just don't pan out in reality. The Power Glove came with it's own D-pad, but no one used it because it was strange, awkward, and they weren't used to it. The same could happen with this strange new Revolution controller.
Well, if broadband internet becomes a "Right", I'm sure as hell glad that I don't sell computers or internet access...
Because failure to provide these things would become "denying someone their Rights", right?
Modded insightful? That wasn't insightful at all...it was misleading. Dems aren't trying to make broadband a "Right"...they're simply acknowledging it's becoming a necessity, a staple in society...akin to energy, housing, food, and water. None of these things are "Rights" either, and I can assure you...peddlers of ALL of above are making MORE than their fair share of wealth providing these things.
Slashdot Mirror
I would argue you know little of the stock market based on that apples-to-oranges comparison you just gave there. Google is a "brand-new" up-and-comer...such stocks always have exaggerated P/Es.
As for Microsoft and US Steel, you're talking entirely different industries.
Microsoft stills trades at 21x P/E (after a _severe_ beating) despite the fact its industry Application Software averages about 16.
US Steel, which is more like a apples-to-battleships comparison, trades at 8x P/E because its industry Metal Fabrication averages about 12x. It also isn't in the "Technology" lumping of stocks, which in general have higher P/Es than the other sectors.
Intel on the other hand currently trades at around 17x P/E, generally in-line with its industry Semiconductor - Broad Line average of 18.
My point is: Intel won't see 8x P/E until its industry does. Trying to compare a tech stock to a commodity stock is insane. Base P/E judgements off comparison to the industry.
Frankly, for the past 6 months or so, Intel has already been trading well below the industry P/E. Only recently in August is it beginning to bottom and recover, largely in part to Core 2 Duo.
More accurate, the Red Mage was a weaker party class, because is was basically a hybrid of two guilds, both of which did the job better.
It's a poor example anyways.
For one, if you had to go the game solo, you're much better off with a Red Mage than a Black or White. That alone is a strength (which isn't realized in FF, but would be in an MMORPG).
Secondly, it's a poor example of a hybrid class. Mage-Thief or Wizard-Warrior are much more prominent examples of popular and useful hybrid classes that don't simply "suck".
As with all things, that's a slippery slope. All things start small. At this point, I'm honestly unsure of where I stand on the cloning issue. The health benefits I'm sure would be enormous in the realm of "lives saved", but the potential risks of where that technology could lead terrify me to no end. Same goes for nanotech.
Actually no.
Intel has surpassed AMD in all 3 categories.
The "brand new Intels" (Core 2 Duo) are priced very affordably.
AMD is maintaining a lower cost point on their bargain models by the briefest of margins, and are still losing in performance-per-watt/performance-per-dollar.
Whether or not AMD responds to Intel's latest chips is another story, but atm Intel is clearly leading across the board.
If that were true, Cedar Mill should be devastating Prescott, since that was the first thing Intel got out under the 65nm process.
A die shrink alone does not a processor make. Nor would I claim it's the largest driving factor behind the efficiency of a chip.
Compare Prescott vs Cedar Mill or Venice vs Newcastle/Clawhammer...you'll see barely any difference.
A die shrink does nothing more than give you more room to work with. In the end, it's still the architecture behind the chip that drives its efficiency.
Don't try to cheapen what Intel has achieved with Core 2 Duo. There will be no "easy fix" for AMD once it hits 65nm. Conroe wasn't simply a "leapfrog/step-up"...it was a significant gap up and an impressive architectural achievement that I haven't seen from Intel in a long long time. Also, considering the fact that AMD is strangely quiet and the best response they have is currently a mid-2007 "vapor" chip, I'm not all that confident in their forthcoming response to Conroe. Add to that the fact that by the time AMD hits 65nm, Intel will probably be shrinking the dies again themselves.
From a long-time obsessed text-mudder, I've gotta say I'm somewhat disappointed that none of these issues that plauged text-muds in their day were resolved.
XP curves and "power players" have been a problem for ages in text-muds. Item hoarding and general economy screwing as well. And balance issues are always a constant problem...every new thing added is always ridiulously overpowered and then eventually goes through a nerfing phase.
*laugh* Things haven't changed.
Sad thing is...the end result is always the same. People get fed up and leave. The truly addicted die-hards are the only ones that remain in the end. No one wants a game to feel like "work"...and most muds/MMORPGs eventually do.
Personally, I believe the best solution to the "endless leveling" problem is an aging system based on active time.
"Uber-levelers" would get their higher levels much faster, but they would also rush forward to the end of their character life.
People who don't get as much time to play on the other hand would enjoy a longer life as a mid-to-high level character.
It would solve lots of problems, including the need for "high level content." That one there is an endless problem with no solution. Once you put in a area for the level 60s to actually feel challenged, you need to include a worthwhile reward, which makes them even more overpowered. Then they eventually get to level 70. It doesn't take long for balance to spiral out of control.
Will you people get off the man's back?
Would you be as unforgiving had he said "pipes"?
I hear "pipes" used interchangably with "bandwidth" all the time.
Dictionary.com defines "tube" as: A hollow cylinder, especially one that conveys a fluid or functions as a passage.
Dictionary.com defines "pipe" as: A hollow cylinder or tube used to conduct a liquid, gas, or finely divided solid.
They're freakin synonyms! How is this deserving of endless mockery? The analogy made sense.
But I'm still surprised at how many +5 postings here support Colbert and what essentially was an attack on wikipedia. Face it, he instrumented a significant waste of time for many editors. If you really wanted to, you could translate that to dollars the same way companies do after receiving website defacements.
Whether or not it was satire or funny is irrelevant. If someone you didn't idolize did the same thing (even if just to make a point or a joke), you'd be burning them in effigy.
Before the feds started raising rates again, I borrowed 20k against my 401k. I used that money to pay off my floating variable student loans. Now I have a fixed 4.5% loan rather han a 9+% variable. You can do similar things with home equity loans AND you can write the interest off your taxes.
These strategies DO work in saving money and sometimes in making money. Companies borrow money all the time...in fact, many companies are SITTING on debt, even with tons of cash in reserve. How is that not proof that debt isn't always a bad thing? It's all dollar cost averaging. Put your money where it earns you the most money (or costs you the least)
I went to court not too long ago on a speeding offense and one of the guys before me was in front of the judge because he left his car running and unattended outside of the convenience store he had run into. Apparently his excuse was that it was an old car and he didn't want to do through the hassle of getting it to start again. The judge would have none of it though.
The scary thing is that I didn't even realize it was illegal until I appeared in court that day. It really must be an obscure law.
Why does everyone point this out as if it's a valid point. Intel has stated they are slashing prices the exact same day.
Do you honestly think Intel is going to release Conroe and keep their aging Pentium D line at the current prices?
Intel CPUs are likely _still_ going to be cheaper than their comparable AMD counterparts following the price slash.
Heh, if I recall correctly from her Eurotrip appearance, she has only grown vertically
I stand by my statement. Tika is buxom
Thank god...for a second there, I was wondering how Michelle Tratchenburg was going to "fit the role" (in a manner of speaking) for Tika.
I would argue this has already happened in the Q1 earnings report and the lead-up to Q2. Everyone is already expecting the worst (aka expectations are already wayyy low). If what you say is true, Intel would have to miss projections by ALOT on the 19th, and I just don't see that happening...they've already lowered projections once, and inventory was at abyssmal levels during the Q1 report...the price slashes pretty much guarantee a lower inventory, and AMD's warning placates the investors afraid of vanishing market share. I predict you're going to see some fairly huge buys into Intel proceeding the report. Of course alot of this hinges on the market. Chip stocks are general out of favor overall and inflation fears are rampant. Those two factors have been the main concerns in stifling the existing Intel stock rally.
Btw, why do you think that selling off a unit is a loss? On the books, that's a profit. It's a zero-sum on the balance sheet and a net gain to income (assets essentially converted to cash). In the long term they might realize a net loss in income, but as far as Q2 reporting goes, that should be a net gain.
3) All of this is obvious to AMD, so they're putting even more emphasis on Opteron sales where Intel is weakest. This results in lower total sales, as they sell in far fewer numbers than low-end CPUs, but should keep net income at a nice level since they're extremely high margin chips.
Conroe could very easily change all that. In fact, many think the reason chip sales overall are currently so stagnant is because many are waiting for the Conroe release.
5) Any advantage Intel will gain from C/M/W will be gone when AMD does their transition to 65nm in Q4.
You can't be serious...you honestly think a simple process change is going to catch AMD up in terms up performance per watt? Have you read the specs/reviews/benchmarks of Conroe? This isn't just a "one-uping" of AMD...this chip destroys everything AMD has to offer and AMD has little to no answer (the best bet for a response is Q2 2007, and that's still little more than vaporware in the present). Anyways, when AMD gets to 65 nm, Intel will be at 45 nm. I expect AMD's transition to 65 nm to be similar to their transition to AM2...essentially a small change, but nothing spectacular. AMD is going to be hurtin this year...count on it.
Yes, and Intel is re-slashing 30-50% to match. When the X2 3800+ is in the vicinity of $170, Pentium D should be in the vicinity of $80-$90
Hardly.
Intel's latest and greatest CPU will not only beat AMD's current offering...it will TROUNCE it...and on top of that, AMD isn't expected to have an answer until mid-way through 2007...and even that is but gossip and rumors at the moment.
Mere AMD fanboyism won't beat the truth this time...for the first time in a LONG while, Intel has stolen the performance crown AND the performance per watt crown away from AMD. They've done it decisively with time to spare. If they can match AMD on the price point, which is highly likely, this is a very significant release.
The gap is an important thing...assuming AMD comes up with something to "catch up" to intel in mid-2007...that was a year of research Intel had to work on their current winners. It's an important turn of tide...unless AMD can pull a miracle jump in efficiency out of its 2007 vaporware chip architecture roughly equivalent to the Intel showing, AMD is now the one playing catchup.
Dude, performance is heavily affected by wattage usage.
Think about it...the more efficient a chip is (the more it can do per cycle for less power), the more it will perform.
Low wattage does not simply mean "less heat." It means you are executing MUCH more code for less the cost. That makes it significantly easier to ramp up performance. Intel is a great case in point. Pre-Core Intel chips were hitting thermal limits...they could bump up the Mhz or extend the pipeline, but power consumption and thermal loss were ultimately eating away at whatever small gains were being accomplished.
The new chips can run 40% faster while using 40% less energy. Therefore, what do you think they can do if you pump more energy into them?
You are correct in that Core Solo/Duo is based off the Pentium M microarchiteture. However, it has nothing to do with the Core microarchitecture. Frankly, it was damn stupid of Intel to name them as such, unless they were intentionally trying to pass it off as somthing it isn't.
Core 2 Duo is of the Conroe line (Merom), the first to truly implement the Core microarchitecture, which isn't based off Pentium M at all.
The Macbook Pro already uses a Pentium M processor. It houses a Core Duo (Yonah) chip, which is based on the Pentium M microarchitecture.
Core Duo 2 (Merom) on the other hand is based on the next generation Core architecture (Conroe)...it will be significantly cooler (at least as far as performance per watt)
(Score:5, Funny)
by Anonymous Coward on Friday April 28, @08:47AM (#15220004)
Although they'd have to name is Nintendo Shitcock for that to be true.
Heh, that TOTALLY reminded me of:
Prince John: You mean you changed it to Latrine?
Latrine: Yeah, used to be Shithouse.
The executives at Intel announced the market share loss way back in January, prompting a massive drop in share price. Since then they've lost a little bit more market share, but like I said...this is old news.
Secondly, Intel is far from out...their soon-to-be-released latest generation of processors are going to blow AMD's current offerings out of the water in practically all aspects, including cost per watt. And they've even bumped FORWARD the release date of the Woodcrest processors to June. On top of that, they've engaged in a major restructuring effort and a price war. Intel was caught with its pants down resting on its laurels. However, the sleeping giant has been awakened, and Intel has the tech and the fab capability to make magic happen. AMD has an "in", which is great...competition is good in any market. But they're hardly replacing Intel, nor are they even going to be superior at this point. With P4 and Netburst going the way of the dodo, Intel is looking vicious. Now all they have to do is trim the fat to get lean and mean.
As a direct reply to some posters here:
The Conroe will launch when promised.
That it is a real launch with the product in stores, not just a paper launch.
Release dates have been pushed forward and Intel wouldn't dare goof this release...their stockholders are pissed enough as is.
That the performance will be as great as promised.
Plenty of benchmarks and specs and reviews have been released already. I haven't seen one that didn't decimate the existing chips. On a side note, Core Duo is an equally impressive release that is tearing up the benchmarks.
I'm just shocked at how cool Intel managed to make the new chips...Conroe's MAX will be 65 watts...that's already 30 watts below the P4's max. And the ultra low variants of the Conroe are slated to be like 40 watt max.
Intel has always had a process technology advantage over AMD. That never stopped AMD from shipping competitive products.
Process technology is not the end-all of making a respectable chip. Intel hampered themselves heavily by investing WAY too much in trying to stretch out a 6 year old architecture. Most of Intel's new architecture releases have been monsters...Pentium M, Core Duo, and the upcoming Conroe. Intel is in a fundamental generational gap. AMD has been beating the old platform. Lets see them keep up with the newer architecture. At the moment, K8L aside, I see nothing on the horizon. And frankly, as far as anyone knows at the moment, K8L is vaporware...nothing is known or even predicted about it.
Also, note that AMD's fab situation has gotten a lot better in the last year - with Fab 36 (and soon Chartered), AMD has the capacity to take on Intel in the market
While noted that AMD's fab capabilties are increasing, you go too far in claiming they can take on Intel's capacity. AMD's new fab gives them the ability to ship about 100 million units by 2008, which btw is roughly equivalent to Intel's capabilities way back in pre-2003.
AMD has always been conservative in launching new processes, and it has benifited them in the past. Intel's 90nm process turned out to be the nail in the Prescott coffin, but AMD's 90nm launch resulted in CPUs that clocked much higher, used less power, and cost less money.
But once again, AMD was competing with an aging platform, one that AMD largely always had a slight edge over. I want to see how they respond to Conroe.
While I'd agree that Conroe is looking quite good, note that Athlon 64 is not sitting still. Even a simple d
It's actually fast approaching the time to buy chips...
Due to Intel losing market share to AMD in the most recent announcements, the prevailing market opinion is that Intel is going to engage in a price war with AMD in the upcoming months. That means lower prices across the board.
Couple that with the fact that Intel's newer generation chips are beating the pants off AMD...methinks I'll be picking up a new Intel chip shortly.
Oh, the other thing to note is that Intel's inventory totals are climbing...that means they're going to be offloading the older chips at a substantial discount to clear out the building inventory. So it's win-win for the consumer, whether you want a bargain chip or a new chip. I highly suggest buying Intel chips at the current stage in the market.
They've had a fair number of failures as well...the Power Glove, Power Mat, R.O.B., Nintendo Scope, U-Force, and even the Light Gun (how many games utilized that besides Duck Hunt?)...face it, these "function-specific" hardware peripherals just don't pan out in reality. The Power Glove came with it's own D-pad, but no one used it because it was strange, awkward, and they weren't used to it. The same could happen with this strange new Revolution controller.
Because failure to provide these things would become "denying someone their Rights", right?
Modded insightful? That wasn't insightful at all...it was misleading. Dems aren't trying to make broadband a "Right"...they're simply acknowledging it's becoming a necessity, a staple in society...akin to energy, housing, food, and water. None of these things are "Rights" either, and I can assure you...peddlers of ALL of above are making MORE than their fair share of wealth providing these things.