XLNX as a way to invest in AMD...

[Rick C]

AMD is buying Xilinx as a stock trade, 1.7234 to 1. Both stocks (and much of the market) are a bit depressed at the moment. Xilinx is about 13% below the amount it would be worth in AMD stock. The spread has been as high as 20%. Buying XLNX now can be a great way to invest in AMD.

I\'ve done pretty well predicting AMD stock opportunities over the years. When they were 6 months behind Intel in process technology they would leapfrog ahead in processing performance every time they released a new architecture. The market would not respond until the actual release and the increased revenues started coming in. That happened three times.

I went sour on AMD when they fell more than a year behind in process technology and I realized they would not be able to make it up. They realized the same thing and started selling off their fabs. I was right about that, but they won a $2 billion anti-competitive practices case in the EU (or was it $4 billion?). lol Didn\'t see that coming.

Meanwhile it turns out that once they were fully divested of the fabs they stopped using those and started working with the Taiwanese fab houses. With Intel recently falling behind the Taiwanese in process technology, the tables have turned entirely.

I bought Xilinx a year ago and have doubled my investment. I\'m mostly waiting for the deal to complete to get the spread as well as the stock price increase. They are waiting for the Chinese to approve the deal now that the US and EU have done so. It\'s possible it won\'t be approved, but it\'s hard to see why that might happen.

I haven\'t used a Xilinx part in ages, but I\'m happy to make money with Xilinx in other ways.

They also have some parts in smaller BGAs that won\'t break the bank, I think they have a Spartan 7 in a BGA-196 with 1 mm ball pitch, so easy to route..

--

Rick C.

- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

 

[Flyguy]

On Monday, December 6, 2021 at 5:01:28 PM UTC-8, gnuarm.del...@gmail.com wrote:

AMD is buying Xilinx as a stock trade, 1.7234 to 1. Both stocks (and much of the market) are a bit depressed at the moment. Xilinx is about 13% below the amount it would be worth in AMD stock. The spread has been as high as 20%. Buying XLNX now can be a great way to invest in AMD.

I\'ve done pretty well predicting AMD stock opportunities over the years. When they were 6 months behind Intel in process technology they would leapfrog ahead in processing performance every time they released a new architecture. The market would not respond until the actual release and the increased revenues started coming in. That happened three times.

I went sour on AMD when they fell more than a year behind in process technology and I realized they would not be able to make it up. They realized the same thing and started selling off their fabs. I was right about that, but they won a $2 billion anti-competitive practices case in the EU (or was it $4 billion?). lol Didn\'t see that coming.

Meanwhile it turns out that once they were fully divested of the fabs they stopped using those and started working with the Taiwanese fab houses. With Intel recently falling behind the Taiwanese in process technology, the tables have turned entirely.

I bought Xilinx a year ago and have doubled my investment. I\'m mostly waiting for the deal to complete to get the spread as well as the stock price increase. They are waiting for the Chinese to approve the deal now that the US and EU have done so. It\'s possible it won\'t be approved, but it\'s hard to see why that might happen.

I haven\'t used a Xilinx part in ages, but I\'m happy to make money with Xilinx in other ways.

They also have some parts in smaller BGAs that won\'t break the bank, I think they have a Spartan 7 in a BGA-196 with 1 mm ball pitch, so easy to route.

--

Rick C.

- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

The ship has sailed on XLNX; it has peaked and is on its way down. While you made a good profit on it, I would sell it now and buy INTC with the proceeds, definitely DON\'T buy XLNX now.

 

[Rick C]

On Saturday, December 11, 2021 at 9:33:04 AM UTC-5, Ed Lee wrote:

On Saturday, December 11, 2021 at 1:57:02 AM UTC-8, gnuarm.del...@gmail.com wrote:

XLNX has dropped less than AMD in the last few weeks, so the spread has closed a bit. It\'s now about 10%. So if you did buy XLNX stock now when the deal closes you would make 10% from it. But the reality is for a while AMD will be eating Intel\'s lunch, leaving them with the dirty dishes to clean up and there\'s nothing Intel can do about it in the short term. Intel didn\'t stumble with the new processing node, they fell flat on their face. Now AMD has the processing lead and Intel gets AMD crumbs.
In that case, it might be better to buy TSMC, but only if the USA expands military protections in the independent nation of Taiwan. It\'s time for us to recognize that Taiwan is as independent as Japan.

The entire tech sector is too expensive, even for my decades old holding on AMD. I could only afford AMD CPUs and stocks before. AMD is currently near all time high of $170B. It\'s cheaper than Tesla, but still expensive. AMD is 1/6 TSLA, INTC is 1/3 TSLA and TSMC is 1/2 TSLA.

I would rotate out of the tech sector and into energy. With up coming rise in electricity rate (Nat Gas from $2.5 to $5 to $4), it might pressure the tech products. Some of the gas producers are cash straped short term, due to hedging loss. But for long term, $4 NG is good for them. Many of the energy stocks are still very cheap.

You might think INTC was cheap at P/E of under 10. The trouble is they have been rather stagnant for years as they lost momentum. It will be hard for them to turn it around, especially now that they are a processing node behind. I don\'t see any comparison with TSLA with a P/E of over 300. I had people try to explain to me how the price is simply reflecting the future trend, but even with their highly optimistic goal of 50% growth per year, it would take 7 years to reach parity if treated as a normal auto company which is what they are ultimately. But there is a aura surrounding Tesla which is not justified. Any investment in TSLA is an investment in that aura. I wonder how little it will take to tarnish that aura and bring the stock way down. There was a report of a government investigation regarding the safety of allowing games to be played on the console while the car is in motion. I dunno about that, but you don\'t have to worry about anyone using the browser since it crashes every time it is opened. Then there is the fact that Musk is selling off billions of dollars of stock. Of course, while that sounds like a lot to us, it\'s still only a small fraction of his holdings.

--

Rick C.

-- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
-- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

 

[Rick C]

On Wednesday, December 15, 2021 at 1:01:10 AM UTC-5, Flyguy wrote:
> AMD and XLNX are very over-valued while INTC is not. The market will figure that out sooner or later, and it looks like it will be sooner.

Wow! Someone really needs to explain to the market what you said. Now that the market fears of Omicron are subsiding, XLNX and AMD are really rebounding day after day. Meanwhile INTC can\'t seem to even keep up with the Nasdaq. Every period I check over the last three years shows the Nasdaq outperforming INTC.

I suppose now that they are behind in process technology they will start rising in the market. Maybe Samsung or TSMC will be kind to them and let them share in the 3 nm node?

--

Rick C.

++++ Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
++++ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

 

[Flyguy]

On Monday, December 27, 2021 at 1:59:59 PM UTC-8, gnuarm.del...@gmail.com wrote:

On Wednesday, December 15, 2021 at 1:01:10 AM UTC-5, Flyguy wrote:
AMD and XLNX are very over-valued while INTC is not. The market will figure that out sooner or later, and it looks like it will be sooner.
Wow! Someone really needs to explain to the market what you said. Now that the market fears of Omicron are subsiding, XLNX and AMD are really rebounding day after day. Meanwhile INTC can\'t seem to even keep up with the Nasdaq. Every period I check over the last three years shows the Nasdaq outperforming INTC.

I suppose now that they are behind in process technology they will start rising in the market. Maybe Samsung or TSMC will be kind to them and let them share in the 3 nm node?

--

Rick C.

++++ Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
++++ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

AMD was down over 3% today, but daily ups and downs ARE NOT what investors look at. AMD is clearly above its peer group and is ripe for a correction, also known as reversion to the mean. AMD is in the same business as INTC, so WHAT differentiates AMD from INTC to justify its VERY RICH PE?

 

[Anthony William Sloman]

On Thursday, December 30, 2021 at 12:25:31 PM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote:

On Monday, December 27, 2021 at 1:59:59 PM UTC-8, gnuarm.del...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wednesday, December 15, 2021 at 1:01:10 AM UTC-5, Flyguy wrote:
AMD and XLNX are very over-valued while INTC is not. The market will figure that out sooner or later, and it looks like it will be sooner.
Wow! Someone really needs to explain to the market what you said. Now that the market fears of Omicron are subsiding, XLNX and AMD are really rebounding day after day. Meanwhile INTC can\'t seem to even keep up with the Nasdaq. Every period I check over the last three years shows the Nasdaq outperforming INTC.

I suppose now that they are behind in process technology they will start rising in the market. Maybe Samsung or TSMC will be kind to them and let them share in the 3 nm node?

AMD was down over 3% today, but daily ups and downs ARE NOT what investors look at. AMD is clearly above its peer group and is ripe for a correction, also known as reversion to the mean. AMD is in the same business as INTC, so WHAT differentiates AMD from INTC to justify its VERY RICH PE?

Flyguy will never know. Most of the people who buy shares in that sort of high tech company don\'t either. As Daniel Kahneman points out, we have ways of thinking that work well enough - most of the time - to let us get by with relatively sketchy information.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thinking,_Fast_and_Slow

When semiconductor manufacturing companies depend both on having access to very high resolution lithography and very clever system designs it becomes difficult to work out which one has the competitive edge at the moment, and how long they are going to hang onto it.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

 

[Rick C]

On Wednesday, December 29, 2021 at 8:25:31 PM UTC-5, Flyguy wrote:

On Monday, December 27, 2021 at 1:59:59 PM UTC-8, gnuarm.del...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wednesday, December 15, 2021 at 1:01:10 AM UTC-5, Flyguy wrote:
AMD and XLNX are very over-valued while INTC is not. The market will figure that out sooner or later, and it looks like it will be sooner.
Wow! Someone really needs to explain to the market what you said. Now that the market fears of Omicron are subsiding, XLNX and AMD are really rebounding day after day. Meanwhile INTC can\'t seem to even keep up with the Nasdaq. Every period I check over the last three years shows the Nasdaq outperforming INTC.

I suppose now that they are behind in process technology they will start rising in the market. Maybe Samsung or TSMC will be kind to them and let them share in the 3 nm node?

--

Rick C.

++++ Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
++++ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209
AMD was down over 3% today, but daily ups and downs ARE NOT what investors look at.

Exactly. That\'s why I referred to the week, month and every other time period up to three years! It has been a long time since INTC has even beat the Nasdaq and there\'s no reason to think that is going to change given the semiconductor landscape. Investors consider not where the stock is, but where it is headed.


> AMD is clearly above its peer group and is ripe for a correction, also known as reversion to the mean. AMD is in the same business as INTC, so WHAT differentiates AMD from INTC to justify its VERY RICH PE?

Not many investors look only at the PE ratio. A good PE depends on many factors which I have already espoused. You seem to be either ignorant of these or simply don\'t understand the concept that PE is an indicator with limited context. There are many indicators, but the most important one is anticipated events. AMD is merging with Xilinx. At that point the Xilinx stock will see a 20% jump due to the price spread. Meanwhile, I\'ve already seen a gain of 86% on Xilinx with another 20% when the merger happens.

What differentiates AMD from INTC is the forward expectation. INTC has little working for it. They are in the position AMD was in five or 10 years ago where INTC was ahead by 6 months to a year in processing technology. Intel stumbled when they blew the transition to their latest node and are now a year or more behind. They have no choice but to begin using OPF (Other People\'s Fabs) at a time when fabs are simply not available. So they will continue to make chips using obsolete technology. While they may not lose money on every chip they sell, they will not make as much profit because of the higher costs as well as the lower speeds. Potentially this can even turn into losses if demand for slow parts decreases.

I think I\'ve mentioned this before, but 15 years ago, AMD was maybe 6 months behind in process technology. When they design a new generation of CPUs they produced the fastest chips on the market with an ASP to match, putting them in the black. Then Intel would catch up and AMD would bleed red ink for another year or two. I saw this cycle and told my friends to invest in AMD three different times. Only one did and tripled his investment in less than a year. When AMD fell behind by more than a year, I didn\'t expect them to be able to make that up, so told everyone to sell AMD. That was good advice other than for one period when AMD received a $2 billion settlement from Intel in an EU anti-competitive trade law suit. Even so, I expected AMD to die. However, selling off the fabs was actually a brilliant move enabling them to use OPFs and the latest and greatest fab tech. So I blew that one, having not bought stock at $5 that is now $150.

Still, I\'m happy doubling my money in a year. I like the 1.7234 number.

--

Rick C.

-+ Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
-+ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

 

[Flyguy]

On Wednesday, December 29, 2021 at 5:52:21 PM UTC-8, bill....@ieee.org wrote:

On Thursday, December 30, 2021 at 12:25:31 PM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote:
On Monday, December 27, 2021 at 1:59:59 PM UTC-8, gnuarm.del...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wednesday, December 15, 2021 at 1:01:10 AM UTC-5, Flyguy wrote:
AMD and XLNX are very over-valued while INTC is not. The market will figure that out sooner or later, and it looks like it will be sooner.
Wow! Someone really needs to explain to the market what you said. Now that the market fears of Omicron are subsiding, XLNX and AMD are really rebounding day after day. Meanwhile INTC can\'t seem to even keep up with the Nasdaq. Every period I check over the last three years shows the Nasdaq outperforming INTC.

I suppose now that they are behind in process technology they will start rising in the market. Maybe Samsung or TSMC will be kind to them and let them share in the 3 nm node?

AMD was down over 3% today, but daily ups and downs ARE NOT what investors look at. AMD is clearly above its peer group and is ripe for a correction, also known as reversion to the mean. AMD is in the same business as INTC, so WHAT differentiates AMD from INTC to justify its VERY RICH PE?
Flyguy will never know. Most of the people who buy shares in that sort of high tech company don\'t either. As Daniel Kahneman points out, we have ways of thinking that work well enough - most of the time - to let us get by with relatively sketchy information.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thinking,_Fast_and_Slow

When semiconductor manufacturing companies depend both on having access to very high resolution lithography and very clever system designs it becomes difficult to work out which one has the competitive edge at the moment, and how long they are going to hang onto it.

--
SNIPPERMAN, Sydney

And neither will YOU, SNIPPERMAN! People will overpay for stocks for multiple reasons (think Tesla), but, eventually, they come back down to Earth. Take Zoom, for example. AMD has absolutely NO technological edge on INTC. Neither produces the lithography: AMAT, LRCX, and KLAC do. In fact, AMD produces clones of INTC processors, not the other way around. Someone who describes themselves as smarter than everyone else, as you DO, should know this.

 

[Flyguy]

On Thursday, December 30, 2021 at 6:33:34 AM UTC-8, gnuarm.del...@gmail.com wrote:

On Wednesday, December 29, 2021 at 8:25:31 PM UTC-5, Flyguy wrote:
On Monday, December 27, 2021 at 1:59:59 PM UTC-8, gnuarm.del...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wednesday, December 15, 2021 at 1:01:10 AM UTC-5, Flyguy wrote:
AMD and XLNX are very over-valued while INTC is not. The market will figure that out sooner or later, and it looks like it will be sooner.
Wow! Someone really needs to explain to the market what you said. Now that the market fears of Omicron are subsiding, XLNX and AMD are really rebounding day after day. Meanwhile INTC can\'t seem to even keep up with the Nasdaq. Every period I check over the last three years shows the Nasdaq outperforming INTC.

I suppose now that they are behind in process technology they will start rising in the market. Maybe Samsung or TSMC will be kind to them and let them share in the 3 nm node?

--

Rick C.

++++ Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
++++ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209
AMD was down over 3% today, but daily ups and downs ARE NOT what investors look at.
Exactly. That\'s why I referred to the week, month and every other time period up to three years! It has been a long time since INTC has even beat the Nasdaq and there\'s no reason to think that is going to change given the semiconductor landscape. Investors consider not where the stock is, but where it is headed.
AMD is clearly above its peer group and is ripe for a correction, also known as reversion to the mean. AMD is in the same business as INTC, so WHAT differentiates AMD from INTC to justify its VERY RICH PE?
Not many investors look only at the PE ratio. A good PE depends on many factors which I have already espoused. You seem to be either ignorant of these or simply don\'t understand the concept that PE is an indicator with limited context. There are many indicators, but the most important one is anticipated events. AMD is merging with Xilinx. At that point the Xilinx stock will see a 20% jump due to the price spread. Meanwhile, I\'ve already seen a gain of 86% on Xilinx with another 20% when the merger happens.

What differentiates AMD from INTC is the forward expectation. INTC has little working for it. They are in the position AMD was in five or 10 years ago where INTC was ahead by 6 months to a year in processing technology. Intel stumbled when they blew the transition to their latest node and are now a year or more behind. They have no choice but to begin using OPF (Other People\'s Fabs) at a time when fabs are simply not available. So they will continue to make chips using obsolete technology. While they may not lose money on every chip they sell, they will not make as much profit because of the higher costs as well as the lower speeds. Potentially this can even turn into losses if demand for slow parts decreases.

I think I\'ve mentioned this before, but 15 years ago, AMD was maybe 6 months behind in process technology. When they design a new generation of CPUs they produced the fastest chips on the market with an ASP to match, putting them in the black. Then Intel would catch up and AMD would bleed red ink for another year or two. I saw this cycle and told my friends to invest in AMD three different times. Only one did and tripled his investment in less than a year. When AMD fell behind by more than a year, I didn\'t expect them to be able to make that up, so told everyone to sell AMD. That was good advice other than for one period when AMD received a $2 billion settlement from Intel in an EU anti-competitive trade law suit. Even so, I expected AMD to die. However, selling off the fabs was actually a brilliant move enabling them to use OPFs and the latest and greatest fab tech. So I blew that one, having not bought stock at $5 that is now $150.

Still, I\'m happy doubling my money in a year. I like the 1.7234 number.

--

Rick C.

-+ Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
-+ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

Not many DUMB investors pay attention to the PE ratio, is what you mean. And that is true. Ultimately, you invest in companies for the profit they produce; if they don\'t have any profits you are investing in their prospects to produce substantial profits in the future. Investors will give those companies a distinct time period to do that - if they don\'t the investors bail. This has happened to numerous companies that ran up faster than the market due to issues surrounding COVID. Zoom is a good example of that. A whole list of them can be seen in the ARKK ETF.

There are differences between AMD and INTC processors, but it isn\'t necessarily in AMD\'s favor (https://www.tomshardware.com/features/amd-vs-intel-cpus):

\"Pricing is the most important consideration for almost everyone, and AMD has generally been hard to beat in the value department. The company offers a plethora of advantages, like full overclockability on most models, not to mention complimentary software that includes the innovative Precision Boost Overdrive auto-overclocking feature. The company\'s Ryzen 5000 series processors mark an across-the-board $50 price hike, but the faster chips earned their higher price tags. That calculus has changed now that Intel\'s Alder Lake chips have retaken the performance crown and have brutally competitive pricing — AMD will need to reduce its Ryzen 5000 pricing to remain competitive.\"

The bottom line is there just isn\'t any tangible factor that justifies AMD\'s 5X price over INTC.

 

[Rick C]

On Thursday, December 30, 2021 at 4:58:15 PM UTC-5, Flyguy wrote:

On Thursday, December 30, 2021 at 6:33:34 AM UTC-8, gnuarm.del...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wednesday, December 29, 2021 at 8:25:31 PM UTC-5, Flyguy wrote:
On Monday, December 27, 2021 at 1:59:59 PM UTC-8, gnuarm.del...@gmail..com wrote:
On Wednesday, December 15, 2021 at 1:01:10 AM UTC-5, Flyguy wrote:
AMD and XLNX are very over-valued while INTC is not. The market will figure that out sooner or later, and it looks like it will be sooner.
Wow! Someone really needs to explain to the market what you said. Now that the market fears of Omicron are subsiding, XLNX and AMD are really rebounding day after day. Meanwhile INTC can\'t seem to even keep up with the Nasdaq. Every period I check over the last three years shows the Nasdaq outperforming INTC.

I suppose now that they are behind in process technology they will start rising in the market. Maybe Samsung or TSMC will be kind to them and let them share in the 3 nm node?

--

Rick C.

++++ Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
++++ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209
AMD was down over 3% today, but daily ups and downs ARE NOT what investors look at.
Exactly. That\'s why I referred to the week, month and every other time period up to three years! It has been a long time since INTC has even beat the Nasdaq and there\'s no reason to think that is going to change given the semiconductor landscape. Investors consider not where the stock is, but where it is headed.
AMD is clearly above its peer group and is ripe for a correction, also known as reversion to the mean. AMD is in the same business as INTC, so WHAT differentiates AMD from INTC to justify its VERY RICH PE?
Not many investors look only at the PE ratio. A good PE depends on many factors which I have already espoused. You seem to be either ignorant of these or simply don\'t understand the concept that PE is an indicator with limited context. There are many indicators, but the most important one is anticipated events. AMD is merging with Xilinx. At that point the Xilinx stock will see a 20% jump due to the price spread. Meanwhile, I\'ve already seen a gain of 86% on Xilinx with another 20% when the merger happens.

What differentiates AMD from INTC is the forward expectation. INTC has little working for it. They are in the position AMD was in five or 10 years ago where INTC was ahead by 6 months to a year in processing technology. Intel stumbled when they blew the transition to their latest node and are now a year or more behind. They have no choice but to begin using OPF (Other People\'s Fabs) at a time when fabs are simply not available. So they will continue to make chips using obsolete technology. While they may not lose money on every chip they sell, they will not make as much profit because of the higher costs as well as the lower speeds. Potentially this can even turn into losses if demand for slow parts decreases.

I think I\'ve mentioned this before, but 15 years ago, AMD was maybe 6 months behind in process technology. When they design a new generation of CPUs they produced the fastest chips on the market with an ASP to match, putting them in the black. Then Intel would catch up and AMD would bleed red ink for another year or two. I saw this cycle and told my friends to invest in AMD three different times. Only one did and tripled his investment in less than a year. When AMD fell behind by more than a year, I didn\'t expect them to be able to make that up, so told everyone to sell AMD. That was good advice other than for one period when AMD received a $2 billion settlement from Intel in an EU anti-competitive trade law suit. Even so, I expected AMD to die. However, selling off the fabs was actually a brilliant move enabling them to use OPFs and the latest and greatest fab tech. So I blew that one, having not bought stock at $5 that is now $150.

Still, I\'m happy doubling my money in a year. I like the 1.7234 number.

--

Rick C.

-+ Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
-+ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209
Not many DUMB investors pay attention to the PE ratio, is what you mean. And that is true. Ultimately, you invest in companies for the profit they produce; if they don\'t have any profits you are investing in their prospects to produce substantial profits in the future. Investors will give those companies a distinct time period to do that - if they don\'t the investors bail. This has happened to numerous companies that ran up faster than the market due to issues surrounding COVID. Zoom is a good example of that. A whole list of them can be seen in the ARKK ETF.

There are differences between AMD and INTC processors, but it isn\'t necessarily in AMD\'s favor (https://www.tomshardware.com/features/amd-vs-intel-cpus):

\"Pricing is the most important consideration for almost everyone, and AMD has generally been hard to beat in the value department. The company offers a plethora of advantages, like full overclockability on most models, not to mention complimentary software that includes the innovative Precision Boost Overdrive auto-overclocking feature. The company\'s Ryzen 5000 series processors mark an across-the-board $50 price hike, but the faster chips earned their higher price tags. That calculus has changed now that Intel\'s Alder Lake chips have retaken the performance crown and have brutally competitive pricing — AMD will need to reduce its Ryzen 5000 pricing to remain competitive.\"

The bottom line is there just isn\'t any tangible factor that justifies AMD\'s 5X price over INTC.

And yet Intel continues to drop while AMD is still gaining.

Here\'s from your article.

Power Consumption - Winner: AMD. In judging AMD vs Intel CPU performance per watt, It\'s impossible to overstate the importance of having the densest process node paired with an efficient microarchitecture, and TSMC\'s 7nm and AMD\'s Zen 3 are the winning combinations.

Process Node - Winner: AMD (TSMC). Intel has been stuck on 14nm for desktop processors for six years.

Architecture - Winner: AMD. In judging AMD vs Intel CPU architecture, it\'s clear that one brand is moving faster.

CPU Security - Winner: AMD. The gap in AMD vs Intel CPU security is just too large to ignore.

Most of the other issues are not really so important to customers. Really it comes down to what CPUs are put in computers since that is how most are sold. Power consumption is very high on the list since most PCs are laptops and they often run on batteries. Lower power consumption lets the laptop makers cite longer run times.

Security is very important as well and there would appear to be a monstrous difference.

The issue with the process node is that Intel seems to have been tripped up trying to keep up with Moore\'s law while AMD is riding on the wave of TSMC\'s 7 nm process. It will be years before Intel catches up in this regard. Meanwhile AMD is gobbling up market share and Intel knows it.

--

Rick C.

+- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
+- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

 

[Anthony William Sloman]

On Friday, December 31, 2021 at 8:23:22 AM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote:

On Wednesday, December 29, 2021 at 5:52:21 PM UTC-8, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
On Thursday, December 30, 2021 at 12:25:31 PM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote:
On Monday, December 27, 2021 at 1:59:59 PM UTC-8, gnuarm.del...@gmail..com wrote:
On Wednesday, December 15, 2021 at 1:01:10 AM UTC-5, Flyguy wrote:
AMD and XLNX are very over-valued while INTC is not. The market will figure that out sooner or later, and it looks like it will be sooner.
Wow! Someone really needs to explain to the market what you said. Now that the market fears of Omicron are subsiding, XLNX and AMD are really rebounding day after day. Meanwhile INTC can\'t seem to even keep up with the Nasdaq. Every period I check over the last three years shows the Nasdaq outperforming INTC.

I suppose now that they are behind in process technology they will start rising in the market. Maybe Samsung or TSMC will be kind to them and let them share in the 3 nm node?

AMD was down over 3% today, but daily ups and downs ARE NOT what investors look at. AMD is clearly above its peer group and is ripe for a correction, also known as reversion to the mean. AMD is in the same business as INTC, so WHAT differentiates AMD from INTC to justify its VERY RICH PE?
Flyguy will never know. Most of the people who buy shares in that sort of high tech company don\'t either. As Daniel Kahneman points out, we have ways of thinking that work well enough - most of the time - to let us get by with relatively sketchy information.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thinking,_Fast_and_Slow

When semiconductor manufacturing companies depend both on having access to very high resolution lithography and very clever system designs it becomes difficult to work out which one has the competitive edge at the moment, and how long they are going to hang onto it.

And neither will YOU, SNIPPERMAN! People will overpay for stocks for multiple reasons (think Tesla), but, eventually, they come back down to Earth. Take Zoom, for example. AMD has absolutely NO technological edge on INTC.

None that you could understand.

> Neither produces the lithography: AMAT, LRCX, and KLAC do. In fact, AMD produces clones of INTC processors, not the other way around.

It\'s one of the things they do. INTC doesn\'t produce clones of AMD processors despite the fact that there is a market for them. If you could think you might thinks about why.

> Someone who describes themselves as smarter than everyone else, as you DO, should know this.

I don\'t describe myself as smarter than anybody else - merely smarter than you, as pretty much everybody else who posts here can claim. You resent this and try generalise it in a thoroughly unrealistic way, as somebody as dim as you could be expected to do.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

 

[Flyguy]

On Thursday, December 30, 2021 at 5:20:11 PM UTC-8, gnuarm.del...@gmail.com wrote:

On Thursday, December 30, 2021 at 4:58:15 PM UTC-5, Flyguy wrote:
On Thursday, December 30, 2021 at 6:33:34 AM UTC-8, gnuarm.del...@gmail..com wrote:
On Wednesday, December 29, 2021 at 8:25:31 PM UTC-5, Flyguy wrote:
On Monday, December 27, 2021 at 1:59:59 PM UTC-8, gnuarm.del...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wednesday, December 15, 2021 at 1:01:10 AM UTC-5, Flyguy wrote:
AMD and XLNX are very over-valued while INTC is not. The market will figure that out sooner or later, and it looks like it will be sooner.
Wow! Someone really needs to explain to the market what you said. Now that the market fears of Omicron are subsiding, XLNX and AMD are really rebounding day after day. Meanwhile INTC can\'t seem to even keep up with the Nasdaq. Every period I check over the last three years shows the Nasdaq outperforming INTC.

I suppose now that they are behind in process technology they will start rising in the market. Maybe Samsung or TSMC will be kind to them and let them share in the 3 nm node?

--

Rick C.

++++ Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
++++ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209
AMD was down over 3% today, but daily ups and downs ARE NOT what investors look at.
Exactly. That\'s why I referred to the week, month and every other time period up to three years! It has been a long time since INTC has even beat the Nasdaq and there\'s no reason to think that is going to change given the semiconductor landscape. Investors consider not where the stock is, but where it is headed.
AMD is clearly above its peer group and is ripe for a correction, also known as reversion to the mean. AMD is in the same business as INTC, so WHAT differentiates AMD from INTC to justify its VERY RICH PE?
Not many investors look only at the PE ratio. A good PE depends on many factors which I have already espoused. You seem to be either ignorant of these or simply don\'t understand the concept that PE is an indicator with limited context. There are many indicators, but the most important one is anticipated events. AMD is merging with Xilinx. At that point the Xilinx stock will see a 20% jump due to the price spread. Meanwhile, I\'ve already seen a gain of 86% on Xilinx with another 20% when the merger happens.

What differentiates AMD from INTC is the forward expectation. INTC has little working for it. They are in the position AMD was in five or 10 years ago where INTC was ahead by 6 months to a year in processing technology. Intel stumbled when they blew the transition to their latest node and are now a year or more behind. They have no choice but to begin using OPF (Other People\'s Fabs) at a time when fabs are simply not available. So they will continue to make chips using obsolete technology. While they may not lose money on every chip they sell, they will not make as much profit because of the higher costs as well as the lower speeds. Potentially this can even turn into losses if demand for slow parts decreases.

I think I\'ve mentioned this before, but 15 years ago, AMD was maybe 6 months behind in process technology. When they design a new generation of CPUs they produced the fastest chips on the market with an ASP to match, putting them in the black. Then Intel would catch up and AMD would bleed red ink for another year or two. I saw this cycle and told my friends to invest in AMD three different times. Only one did and tripled his investment in less than a year. When AMD fell behind by more than a year, I didn\'t expect them to be able to make that up, so told everyone to sell AMD. That was good advice other than for one period when AMD received a $2 billion settlement from Intel in an EU anti-competitive trade law suit. Even so, I expected AMD to die. However, selling off the fabs was actually a brilliant move enabling them to use OPFs and the latest and greatest fab tech. So I blew that one, having not bought stock at $5 that is now $150.

Still, I\'m happy doubling my money in a year. I like the 1.7234 number.

--

Rick C.

-+ Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
-+ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209
Not many DUMB investors pay attention to the PE ratio, is what you mean.. And that is true. Ultimately, you invest in companies for the profit they produce; if they don\'t have any profits you are investing in their prospects to produce substantial profits in the future. Investors will give those companies a distinct time period to do that - if they don\'t the investors bail. This has happened to numerous companies that ran up faster than the market due to issues surrounding COVID. Zoom is a good example of that. A whole list of them can be seen in the ARKK ETF.

There are differences between AMD and INTC processors, but it isn\'t necessarily in AMD\'s favor (https://www.tomshardware.com/features/amd-vs-intel-cpus):

\"Pricing is the most important consideration for almost everyone, and AMD has generally been hard to beat in the value department. The company offers a plethora of advantages, like full overclockability on most models, not to mention complimentary software that includes the innovative Precision Boost Overdrive auto-overclocking feature. The company\'s Ryzen 5000 series processors mark an across-the-board $50 price hike, but the faster chips earned their higher price tags. That calculus has changed now that Intel\'s Alder Lake chips have retaken the performance crown and have brutally competitive pricing — AMD will need to reduce its Ryzen 5000 pricing to remain competitive.\"

The bottom line is there just isn\'t any tangible factor that justifies AMD\'s 5X price over INTC.
And yet Intel continues to drop while AMD is still gaining.

Here\'s from your article.

Power Consumption - Winner: AMD. In judging AMD vs Intel CPU performance per watt, It\'s impossible to overstate the importance of having the densest process node paired with an efficient microarchitecture, and TSMC\'s 7nm and AMD\'s Zen 3 are the winning combinations.

Process Node - Winner: AMD (TSMC). Intel has been stuck on 14nm for desktop processors for six years.

Architecture - Winner: AMD. In judging AMD vs Intel CPU architecture, it\'s clear that one brand is moving faster.

CPU Security - Winner: AMD. The gap in AMD vs Intel CPU security is just too large to ignore.

Most of the other issues are not really so important to customers. Really it comes down to what CPUs are put in computers since that is how most are sold. Power consumption is very high on the list since most PCs are laptops and they often run on batteries. Lower power consumption lets the laptop makers cite longer run times.

Security is very important as well and there would appear to be a monstrous difference.

The issue with the process node is that Intel seems to have been tripped up trying to keep up with Moore\'s law while AMD is riding on the wave of TSMC\'s 7 nm process. It will be years before Intel catches up in this regard. Meanwhile AMD is gobbling up market share and Intel knows it.

--

Rick C.

+- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
+- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

You conveniently skipped the bottom line:
Winner: Intel - Total
And Intel didn\'t even have to win to be the better investment. Also, Intel owns 61% of the processor share vs AMD\'s 39%.
https://www.statista.com/statistics/735904/worldwide-x86-intel-amd-market-share/
There just isn\'t much growth prospect for AMD to justify its 5X PE ratio. And the Intel Alder Lake processors will kick AMD\'s butt. AMD will have to cut prices to compete with Intel, further eroding an already pricy PE ratio. If I were you I would sell AMD and use the proceeds to buy INTC.

 

[Flyguy]

On Thursday, December 30, 2021 at 7:50:15 PM UTC-8, bill....@ieee.org wrote:

On Friday, December 31, 2021 at 8:23:22 AM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote:
On Wednesday, December 29, 2021 at 5:52:21 PM UTC-8, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
On Thursday, December 30, 2021 at 12:25:31 PM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote:
On Monday, December 27, 2021 at 1:59:59 PM UTC-8, gnuarm.del...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wednesday, December 15, 2021 at 1:01:10 AM UTC-5, Flyguy wrote:
AMD and XLNX are very over-valued while INTC is not. The market will figure that out sooner or later, and it looks like it will be sooner.
Wow! Someone really needs to explain to the market what you said. Now that the market fears of Omicron are subsiding, XLNX and AMD are really rebounding day after day. Meanwhile INTC can\'t seem to even keep up with the Nasdaq. Every period I check over the last three years shows the Nasdaq outperforming INTC.

I suppose now that they are behind in process technology they will start rising in the market. Maybe Samsung or TSMC will be kind to them and let them share in the 3 nm node?

AMD was down over 3% today, but daily ups and downs ARE NOT what investors look at. AMD is clearly above its peer group and is ripe for a correction, also known as reversion to the mean. AMD is in the same business as INTC, so WHAT differentiates AMD from INTC to justify its VERY RICH PE?
Flyguy will never know. Most of the people who buy shares in that sort of high tech company don\'t either. As Daniel Kahneman points out, we have ways of thinking that work well enough - most of the time - to let us get by with relatively sketchy information.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thinking,_Fast_and_Slow

When semiconductor manufacturing companies depend both on having access to very high resolution lithography and very clever system designs it becomes difficult to work out which one has the competitive edge at the moment, and how long they are going to hang onto it.

And neither will YOU, SNIPPERMAN! People will overpay for stocks for multiple reasons (think Tesla), but, eventually, they come back down to Earth.. Take Zoom, for example. AMD has absolutely NO technological edge on INTC.
None that you could understand.
Neither produces the lithography: AMAT, LRCX, and KLAC do. In fact, AMD produces clones of INTC processors, not the other way around.
It\'s one of the things they do.

No, SNIPPERMAN, INTC DOES NOT produce lithography machines.

INTC doesn\'t produce clones of AMD processors despite the fact that there is a market for them.

Hey Einstein, it\'s the other way around

If you could think you might thinks about why.

Someone who describes themselves as smarter than everyone else, as you DO, should know this.
I don\'t describe myself as smarter than anybody else - merely smarter than you, as pretty much everybody else who posts here can claim. You resent this and try generalise it in a thoroughly unrealistic way, as somebody as dim as you could be expected to do.

No, you are DUMBER, A LOT DUMBER, than I am. You advocate NUKING YOUR OWN FUCKING COUNTRY!! Need I say more, SNIPPERMAN?

 

[Anthony William Sloman]

On Friday, December 31, 2021 at 4:07:46 PM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote:

On Thursday, December 30, 2021 at 7:50:15 PM UTC-8, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
On Friday, December 31, 2021 at 8:23:22 AM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote:
On Wednesday, December 29, 2021 at 5:52:21 PM UTC-8, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
On Thursday, December 30, 2021 at 12:25:31 PM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote:
On Monday, December 27, 2021 at 1:59:59 PM UTC-8, gnuarm.del...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wednesday, December 15, 2021 at 1:01:10 AM UTC-5, Flyguy wrote:

<snip>

Neither produces the lithography: AMAT, LRCX, and KLAC do. In fact, AMD produces clones of INTC processors, not the other way around. It\'s one of the things they do.

No, SNIPPERMAN, INTC DOES NOT produce lithography machines.

Nobody said that they did. ASML in the Netherlands is about the only company that does, these days.

INTC doesn\'t produce clones of AMD processors despite the fact that there is a market for them.

Hey Einstein, it\'s the other way around.

I wonder what Flyguy thought that he was saying there.

If you could think you might think about why.

Someone who describes themselves as smarter than everyone else, as you DO, should know this.

I don\'t describe myself as smarter than anybody else - merely smarter than you, as pretty much everybody else who posts here can claim. You resent this and try generalise it in a thoroughly unrealistic way, as somebody as dim as you could be expected to do.

No, you are DUMBER, A LOT DUMBER, than I am. You advocate NUKING YOUR OWN FUCKING COUNTRY!! Need I say more?

That\'s not really what I advocated, and if you weren\'t quite a dumb as you are you wouldn\'t make the claim the way you do.

Nuclear tests sites in Australia and the US illustrate the fact that nuking remote bits of your own country was perfectly acceptable a few years ago, and nobody sane labels the politicians that okayed it as dumb. You implicitly do, but you aren\'t exactly sane.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

 

[Flyguy]

On Thursday, December 30, 2021 at 9:46:26 PM UTC-8, bill....@ieee.org wrote:

On Friday, December 31, 2021 at 4:07:46 PM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote:
On Thursday, December 30, 2021 at 7:50:15 PM UTC-8, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
On Friday, December 31, 2021 at 8:23:22 AM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote:
On Wednesday, December 29, 2021 at 5:52:21 PM UTC-8, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
On Thursday, December 30, 2021 at 12:25:31 PM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote:
On Monday, December 27, 2021 at 1:59:59 PM UTC-8, gnuarm.del...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wednesday, December 15, 2021 at 1:01:10 AM UTC-5, Flyguy wrote:
snip
Neither produces the lithography: AMAT, LRCX, and KLAC do. In fact, AMD produces clones of INTC processors, not the other way around. It\'s one of the things they do.

No, SNIPPERMAN, INTC DOES NOT produce lithography machines.
Nobody said that they did. ASML in the Netherlands is about the only company that does, these days.
INTC doesn\'t produce clones of AMD processors despite the fact that there is a market for them.

Hey Einstein, it\'s the other way around.

I wonder what Flyguy thought that he was saying there.

If you could think you might think about why.

Someone who describes themselves as smarter than everyone else, as you DO, should know this.

I don\'t describe myself as smarter than anybody else - merely smarter than you, as pretty much everybody else who posts here can claim. You resent this and try generalise it in a thoroughly unrealistic way, as somebody as dim as you could be expected to do.

No, you are DUMBER, A LOT DUMBER, than I am. You advocate NUKING YOUR OWN FUCKING COUNTRY!! Need I say more?

That\'s not really what I advocated, and if you weren\'t quite a dumb as you are you wouldn\'t make the claim the way you do.

Nuclear tests sites in Australia and the US illustrate the fact that nuking remote bits of your own country was perfectly acceptable a few years ago, and nobody sane labels the politicians that okayed it as dumb. You implicitly do, but you aren\'t exactly sane.

--
SNIPPERMAN, Sydney

I\'ve got to hand it to you, SNIPPERMAN, you don\'t back down in the face of your OVERWHELMINGLY OBVIOUS STUPIDITY. Above-ground nuke tests were BANNED years ago for good reason: they KILL PEOPLE:
https://www.americanscientist.org/article/fallout-from-nuclear-weapons-tests-and-cancer-risks

 

[Anthony William Sloman]

On Friday, December 31, 2021 at 6:33:10 PM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote:

On Thursday, December 30, 2021 at 9:46:26 PM UTC-8, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
On Friday, December 31, 2021 at 4:07:46 PM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote:
On Thursday, December 30, 2021 at 7:50:15 PM UTC-8, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
On Friday, December 31, 2021 at 8:23:22 AM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote:
On Wednesday, December 29, 2021 at 5:52:21 PM UTC-8, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
On Thursday, December 30, 2021 at 12:25:31 PM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote:
On Monday, December 27, 2021 at 1:59:59 PM UTC-8, gnuarm.del....@gmail.com wrote:
On Wednesday, December 15, 2021 at 1:01:10 AM UTC-5, Flyguy wrote:
snip
Neither produces the lithography: AMAT, LRCX, and KLAC do. In fact, AMD produces clones of INTC processors, not the other way around. It\'s one of the things they do.

No, SNIPPERMAN, INTC DOES NOT produce lithography machines.
Nobody said that they did. ASML in the Netherlands is about the only company that does, these days.
INTC doesn\'t produce clones of AMD processors despite the fact that there is a market for them.

Hey Einstein, it\'s the other way around.

I wonder what Flyguy thought that he was saying there.

If you could think you might think about why.

Someone who describes themselves as smarter than everyone else, as you DO, should know this.

I don\'t describe myself as smarter than anybody else - merely smarter than you, as pretty much everybody else who posts here can claim. You resent this and try generalise it in a thoroughly unrealistic way, as somebody as dim as you could be expected to do.

No, you are DUMBER, A LOT DUMBER, than I am. You advocate NUKING YOUR OWN FUCKING COUNTRY!! Need I say more?

That\'s not really what I advocated, and if you weren\'t quite a dumb as you are you wouldn\'t make the claim the way you do.

Nuclear tests sites in Australia and the US illustrate the fact that nuking remote bits of your own country was perfectly acceptable a few years ago, and nobody sane labels the politicians that okayed it as dumb. You implicitly do, but you aren\'t exactly sane.

I\'ve got to hand it to you, Sloman, you don\'t back down in the face of your OVERWHELMINGLY OBVIOUS STUPIDITY.

Happily, the stupidity is all yours.. and you do make it overwhelmingly obvious.

Above-ground nuke tests were BANNED years ago for good reason: they KILL PEOPLE:
https://www.americanscientist.org/article/fallout-from-nuclear-weapons-tests-and-cancer-risks

So does a lot of other stuff. Climate change is doing better already. Your habit of carrying around a concealed carry weapon reflects a stupidity that has killed a lot more people than nuclear tests ever did.

Your article witters on at great length about radiation exposure from the fall-out from nuclear tests.

Not a peep about potassium-40, which is the largest source of natural radioactivity in animals including humans. One banana a day would supply about 1% of your natural radiation dose. Nuclear tests never added much (unless you were unlucky enough to be directly down-wind of a very recent test). Chernobyl was nasty, but it wasn\'t any kind of intentional nuclear test.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Potassium-40

As usual, your link doesn\'t say what you seem to think it says, mainly because you lack the wit to process what it was telling you.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

 

[Rick C]

On Friday, December 31, 2021 at 12:03:46 AM UTC-5, Flyguy wrote:

On Thursday, December 30, 2021 at 5:20:11 PM UTC-8, gnuarm.del...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thursday, December 30, 2021 at 4:58:15 PM UTC-5, Flyguy wrote:
Not many DUMB investors pay attention to the PE ratio, is what you mean. And that is true. Ultimately, you invest in companies for the profit they produce; if they don\'t have any profits you are investing in their prospects to produce substantial profits in the future. Investors will give those companies a distinct time period to do that - if they don\'t the investors bail. This has happened to numerous companies that ran up faster than the market due to issues surrounding COVID. Zoom is a good example of that. A whole list of them can be seen in the ARKK ETF.

There are differences between AMD and INTC processors, but it isn\'t necessarily in AMD\'s favor (https://www.tomshardware.com/features/amd-vs-intel-cpus):

\"Pricing is the most important consideration for almost everyone, and AMD has generally been hard to beat in the value department. The company offers a plethora of advantages, like full overclockability on most models, not to mention complimentary software that includes the innovative Precision Boost Overdrive auto-overclocking feature. The company\'s Ryzen 5000 series processors mark an across-the-board $50 price hike, but the faster chips earned their higher price tags. That calculus has changed now that Intel\'s Alder Lake chips have retaken the performance crown and have brutally competitive pricing — AMD will need to reduce its Ryzen 5000 pricing to remain competitive.\"

The bottom line is there just isn\'t any tangible factor that justifies AMD\'s 5X price over INTC.
And yet Intel continues to drop while AMD is still gaining.

Here\'s from your article.

Power Consumption - Winner: AMD. In judging AMD vs Intel CPU performance per watt, It\'s impossible to overstate the importance of having the densest process node paired with an efficient microarchitecture, and TSMC\'s 7nm and AMD\'s Zen 3 are the winning combinations.

Process Node - Winner: AMD (TSMC). Intel has been stuck on 14nm for desktop processors for six years.

Architecture - Winner: AMD. In judging AMD vs Intel CPU architecture, it\'s clear that one brand is moving faster.

CPU Security - Winner: AMD. The gap in AMD vs Intel CPU security is just too large to ignore.

Most of the other issues are not really so important to customers. Really it comes down to what CPUs are put in computers since that is how most are sold. Power consumption is very high on the list since most PCs are laptops and they often run on batteries. Lower power consumption lets the laptop makers cite longer run times.

Security is very important as well and there would appear to be a monstrous difference.

The issue with the process node is that Intel seems to have been tripped up trying to keep up with Moore\'s law while AMD is riding on the wave of TSMC\'s 7 nm process. It will be years before Intel catches up in this regard. Meanwhile AMD is gobbling up market share and Intel knows it.

--

Rick C.

+- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
+- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209
You conveniently skipped the bottom line:
Winner: Intel - Total

Yes, from the reviewer\'s perspective. The problem is many of the items listed are not at all important to making profit on selling CPUs. That\'s why I didn\'t list them.

And Intel didn\'t even have to win to be the better investment. Also, Intel owns 61% of the processor share vs AMD\'s 39%.
https://www.statista.com/statistics/735904/worldwide-x86-intel-amd-market-share/

That\'s funny, it was more like 70/30 in 2018 and 80/20 before that. See the pattern??? BTW, your link is behind a paywall. Try this one.

https://www.techspot.com/news/87436-amd-chipping-away-intel-cpu-market-share.html


> There just isn\'t much growth prospect for AMD to justify its 5X PE ratio. And the Intel Alder Lake processors will kick AMD\'s butt. AMD will have to cut prices to compete with Intel, further eroding an already pricy PE ratio. If I were you I would sell AMD and use the proceeds to buy INTC.

If you insist on ignoring the facts: AMD has the process tech advantage making faster, lower power and cheaper chips, AMD has always had architecture advantages, AMD has many fewer security bugs. These issues will matter to PC makers and allow AMD to continue to grab market share from Intel. There is literally no way for Intel to overcome these AMD advantages in the short term. Maybe revisit Intel in a couple of years.

BTW, I don\'t own AMD, I bought Xilinx which will be bought by AMD at a 1.7234 ratio. At this point buying INTC is like leaning into a right hook. Be my guest.

--

Rick C.

++ Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
++ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

 

[Flyguy]

On Friday, December 31, 2021 at 5:37:41 AM UTC-8, bill....@ieee.org wrote:

On Friday, December 31, 2021 at 6:33:10 PM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote:
On Thursday, December 30, 2021 at 9:46:26 PM UTC-8, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
On Friday, December 31, 2021 at 4:07:46 PM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote:
On Thursday, December 30, 2021 at 7:50:15 PM UTC-8, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
On Friday, December 31, 2021 at 8:23:22 AM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote:
On Wednesday, December 29, 2021 at 5:52:21 PM UTC-8, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
On Thursday, December 30, 2021 at 12:25:31 PM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote:
On Monday, December 27, 2021 at 1:59:59 PM UTC-8, gnuarm.del...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wednesday, December 15, 2021 at 1:01:10 AM UTC-5, Flyguy wrote:
snip
Neither produces the lithography: AMAT, LRCX, and KLAC do. In fact, AMD produces clones of INTC processors, not the other way around. It\'s one of the things they do.

No, SNIPPERMAN, INTC DOES NOT produce lithography machines.
Nobody said that they did. ASML in the Netherlands is about the only company that does, these days.
INTC doesn\'t produce clones of AMD processors despite the fact that there is a market for them.

Hey Einstein, it\'s the other way around.

I wonder what Flyguy thought that he was saying there.

If you could think you might think about why.

Someone who describes themselves as smarter than everyone else, as you DO, should know this.

I don\'t describe myself as smarter than anybody else - merely smarter than you, as pretty much everybody else who posts here can claim. You resent this and try generalise it in a thoroughly unrealistic way, as somebody as dim as you could be expected to do.

No, you are DUMBER, A LOT DUMBER, than I am. You advocate NUKING YOUR OWN FUCKING COUNTRY!! Need I say more?

That\'s not really what I advocated, and if you weren\'t quite a dumb as you are you wouldn\'t make the claim the way you do.

Nuclear tests sites in Australia and the US illustrate the fact that nuking remote bits of your own country was perfectly acceptable a few years ago, and nobody sane labels the politicians that okayed it as dumb. You implicitly do, but you aren\'t exactly sane.

I\'ve got to hand it to you, Sloman, you don\'t back down in the face of your OVERWHELMINGLY OBVIOUS STUPIDITY.

Happily, the stupidity is all yours.. and you do make it overwhelmingly obvious.
Above-ground nuke tests were BANNED years ago for good reason: they KILL PEOPLE:
https://www.americanscientist.org/article/fallout-from-nuclear-weapons-tests-and-cancer-risks
So does a lot of other stuff. Climate change is doing better already. Your habit of carrying around a concealed carry weapon reflects a stupidity that has killed a lot more people than nuclear tests ever did.

Your article witters on at great length about radiation exposure from the fall-out from nuclear tests.

Not a peep about potassium-40, which is the largest source of natural radioactivity in animals including humans. One banana a day would supply about 1% of your natural radiation dose. Nuclear tests never added much (unless you were unlucky enough to be directly down-wind of a very recent test). Chernobyl was nasty, but it wasn\'t any kind of intentional nuclear test.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Potassium-40

As usual, your link doesn\'t say what you seem to think it says, mainly because you lack the wit to process what it was telling you.

--
SNIPPERMAN, Sydney

Hey SNIPPERMAN, you are about the ONLY IDIOT ON EARTH trying to defend atmospheric detonation of nuclear weapons - doesn\'t that make you the LEAST BIT uncomfortable? It SHOULD!

 

[Flyguy]

On Friday, December 31, 2021 at 9:30:58 AM UTC-8, gnuarm.del...@gmail.com wrote:

On Friday, December 31, 2021 at 12:03:46 AM UTC-5, Flyguy wrote:
On Thursday, December 30, 2021 at 5:20:11 PM UTC-8, gnuarm.del...@gmail..com wrote:
On Thursday, December 30, 2021 at 4:58:15 PM UTC-5, Flyguy wrote:
Not many DUMB investors pay attention to the PE ratio, is what you mean. And that is true. Ultimately, you invest in companies for the profit they produce; if they don\'t have any profits you are investing in their prospects to produce substantial profits in the future. Investors will give those companies a distinct time period to do that - if they don\'t the investors bail. This has happened to numerous companies that ran up faster than the market due to issues surrounding COVID. Zoom is a good example of that. A whole list of them can be seen in the ARKK ETF.

There are differences between AMD and INTC processors, but it isn\'t necessarily in AMD\'s favor (https://www.tomshardware.com/features/amd-vs-intel-cpus):

\"Pricing is the most important consideration for almost everyone, and AMD has generally been hard to beat in the value department. The company offers a plethora of advantages, like full overclockability on most models, not to mention complimentary software that includes the innovative Precision Boost Overdrive auto-overclocking feature. The company\'s Ryzen 5000 series processors mark an across-the-board $50 price hike, but the faster chips earned their higher price tags. That calculus has changed now that Intel\'s Alder Lake chips have retaken the performance crown and have brutally competitive pricing — AMD will need to reduce its Ryzen 5000 pricing to remain competitive.\"

The bottom line is there just isn\'t any tangible factor that justifies AMD\'s 5X price over INTC.
And yet Intel continues to drop while AMD is still gaining.

Here\'s from your article.

Power Consumption - Winner: AMD. In judging AMD vs Intel CPU performance per watt, It\'s impossible to overstate the importance of having the densest process node paired with an efficient microarchitecture, and TSMC\'s 7nm and AMD\'s Zen 3 are the winning combinations.

Process Node - Winner: AMD (TSMC). Intel has been stuck on 14nm for desktop processors for six years.

Architecture - Winner: AMD. In judging AMD vs Intel CPU architecture, it\'s clear that one brand is moving faster.

CPU Security - Winner: AMD. The gap in AMD vs Intel CPU security is just too large to ignore.

Most of the other issues are not really so important to customers. Really it comes down to what CPUs are put in computers since that is how most are sold. Power consumption is very high on the list since most PCs are laptops and they often run on batteries. Lower power consumption lets the laptop makers cite longer run times.

Security is very important as well and there would appear to be a monstrous difference.

The issue with the process node is that Intel seems to have been tripped up trying to keep up with Moore\'s law while AMD is riding on the wave of TSMC\'s 7 nm process. It will be years before Intel catches up in this regard. Meanwhile AMD is gobbling up market share and Intel knows it.

--

Rick C.

+- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
+- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209
You conveniently skipped the bottom line:
Winner: Intel - Total
Yes, from the reviewer\'s perspective. The problem is many of the items listed are not at all important to making profit on selling CPUs. That\'s why I didn\'t list them.
And Intel didn\'t even have to win to be the better investment. Also, Intel owns 61% of the processor share vs AMD\'s 39%.
https://www.statista.com/statistics/735904/worldwide-x86-intel-amd-market-share/
That\'s funny, it was more like 70/30 in 2018 and 80/20 before that. See the pattern??? BTW, your link is behind a paywall. Try this one.

https://www.techspot.com/news/87436-amd-chipping-away-intel-cpu-market-share.html
There just isn\'t much growth prospect for AMD to justify its 5X PE ratio. And the Intel Alder Lake processors will kick AMD\'s butt. AMD will have to cut prices to compete with Intel, further eroding an already pricy PE ratio. If I were you I would sell AMD and use the proceeds to buy INTC.
If you insist on ignoring the facts: AMD has the process tech advantage making faster, lower power and cheaper chips, AMD has always had architecture advantages, AMD has many fewer security bugs. These issues will matter to PC makers and allow AMD to continue to grab market share from Intel. There is literally no way for Intel to overcome these AMD advantages in the short term. Maybe revisit Intel in a couple of years.

BTW, I don\'t own AMD, I bought Xilinx which will be bought by AMD at a 1.7234 ratio. At this point buying INTC is like leaning into a right hook. Be my guest.

--

Rick C.
++ Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
++ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

AMD doesn\'t have to \"snip away\" at Intel\'s market share - they have to take it over wholesale. And as YOU said, owning XLNX is just a proxy for owning AMD.

 

[amdx]

On 1/1/2022 8:07 PM, Flyguy wrote:

On Friday, December 31, 2021 at 9:30:58 AM UTC-8, gnuarm.del...@gmail.com wrote:
On Friday, December 31, 2021 at 12:03:46 AM UTC-5, Flyguy wrote:
On Thursday, December 30, 2021 at 5:20:11 PM UTC-8, gnuarm.del...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thursday, December 30, 2021 at 4:58:15 PM UTC-5, Flyguy wrote:
Not many DUMB investors pay attention to the PE ratio, is what you mean. And that is true. Ultimately, you invest in companies for the profit they produce; if they don\'t have any profits you are investing in their prospects to produce substantial profits in the future. Investors will give those companies a distinct time period to do that - if they don\'t the investors bail. This has happened to numerous companies that ran up faster than the market due to issues surrounding COVID. Zoom is a good example of that. A whole list of them can be seen in the ARKK ETF.

There are differences between AMD and INTC processors, but it isn\'t necessarily in AMD\'s favor (https://www.tomshardware.com/features/amd-vs-intel-cpus):

\"Pricing is the most important consideration for almost everyone, and AMD has generally been hard to beat in the value department. The company offers a plethora of advantages, like full overclockability on most models, not to mention complimentary software that includes the innovative Precision Boost Overdrive auto-overclocking feature. The company\'s Ryzen 5000 series processors mark an across-the-board $50 price hike, but the faster chips earned their higher price tags. That calculus has changed now that Intel\'s Alder Lake chips have retaken the performance crown and have brutally competitive pricing — AMD will need to reduce its Ryzen 5000 pricing to remain competitive.\"

The bottom line is there just isn\'t any tangible factor that justifies AMD\'s 5X price over INTC.
And yet Intel continues to drop while AMD is still gaining.

Here\'s from your article.

Power Consumption - Winner: AMD. In judging AMD vs Intel CPU performance per watt, It\'s impossible to overstate the importance of having the densest process node paired with an efficient microarchitecture, and TSMC\'s 7nm and AMD\'s Zen 3 are the winning combinations.

Process Node - Winner: AMD (TSMC). Intel has been stuck on 14nm for desktop processors for six years.

Architecture - Winner: AMD. In judging AMD vs Intel CPU architecture, it\'s clear that one brand is moving faster.

CPU Security - Winner: AMD. The gap in AMD vs Intel CPU security is just too large to ignore.

Most of the other issues are not really so important to customers. Really it comes down to what CPUs are put in computers since that is how most are sold. Power consumption is very high on the list since most PCs are laptops and they often run on batteries. Lower power consumption lets the laptop makers cite longer run times.

Security is very important as well and there would appear to be a monstrous difference.

The issue with the process node is that Intel seems to have been tripped up trying to keep up with Moore\'s law while AMD is riding on the wave of TSMC\'s 7 nm process. It will be years before Intel catches up in this regard. Meanwhile AMD is gobbling up market share and Intel knows it.

--

Rick C.

+- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
+- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209
You conveniently skipped the bottom line:
Winner: Intel - Total
Yes, from the reviewer\'s perspective. The problem is many of the items listed are not at all important to making profit on selling CPUs. That\'s why I didn\'t list them.
And Intel didn\'t even have to win to be the better investment. Also, Intel owns 61% of the processor share vs AMD\'s 39%.
https://www.statista.com/statistics/735904/worldwide-x86-intel-amd-market-share/
That\'s funny, it was more like 70/30 in 2018 and 80/20 before that. See the pattern??? BTW, your link is behind a paywall. Try this one.

https://www.techspot.com/news/87436-amd-chipping-away-intel-cpu-market-share.html
There just isn\'t much growth prospect for AMD to justify its 5X PE ratio. And the Intel Alder Lake processors will kick AMD\'s butt. AMD will have to cut prices to compete with Intel, further eroding an already pricy PE ratio. If I were you I would sell AMD and use the proceeds to buy INTC.
If you insist on ignoring the facts: AMD has the process tech advantage making faster, lower power and cheaper chips, AMD has always had architecture advantages, AMD has many fewer security bugs. These issues will matter to PC makers and allow AMD to continue to grab market share from Intel. There is literally no way for Intel to overcome these AMD advantages in the short term. Maybe revisit Intel in a couple of years.

BTW, I don\'t own AMD, I bought Xilinx which will be bought by AMD at a 1.7234 ratio. At this point buying INTC is like leaning into a right hook. Be my guest.

--

Rick C.
++ Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
++ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209
AMD doesn\'t have to \"snip away\" at Intel\'s market share - they have to take it over wholesale. And as YOU said, owning XLNX is just a proxy for owning AMD.

Since this all started, XLNX is down, INTC is up 1% and my Total Stock
Market Mutual fund is up 3%. Carry on.

                                           Mikek


--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus