http://www.fabtech.org/content/view/2482/

What I really concern is the following text:

It seems that AMD is short on cash. :?

It seems that AMD is short on cash. :?

Don't worry I'm buying and AMD/ATI PC next moth

Putting dual-cores on the street for $100 may not be the brilliant business move some people thought, huh? 8O

Putting dual-cores on the street for $100 may not be the brilliant business move some people thought, huh? 8O

I don't think AMD has alternatives except cutting prices.
E4300 will be sold at $113 in April. I think AMD is still trying to flood the market with low-price chips. Whether the capacity * price can help or destroy AMD is remained to be seen. But what I concern is if AMD cannot finish Fab 38 this year, it will have a difficult time even K8L rocks.

Putting dual-cores on the street for $100 may not be the brilliant business move some people thought, huh? 8O

Why not? do you think they cost more than 100$ to make?

Putting dual-cores on the street for $100 may not be the brilliant business move some people thought, huh? 8O

Why not? do you think they cost more than 100$ to make?

I think the current prices for x2s are approaching the 90nm production costs already.

That's intriguing. I take it you mean total lifetime all costs. But your post makes me wonder if you have a handle on the marginal cost now. How much does it cost to make an extra 1000 right now?

That's intriguing. I take it you mean total lifetime all costs. But your post makes me wonder if you have a handle on the marginal cost now. How much does it cost to make an extra 1000 right now?

No. I am just guessing from the ASPs of the CPU and the profit margin.

Average profit margin before price cut: 36%
The prices of x2s had been cut by more than 20% already. An easy calculation can give my spectulation.

Some people here are doctors, teachers, social security workers and probably lots are "technical fellows". So if you would be kind enough to explain what you mean with that question about marginal costs and stuff I personally would be very grateful . Thank you.

Some people here are doctors, teachers, social security workers and probably lots are "technical fellows". So if you would be kind enough to explain what you mean with that question about marginal costs and stuff I personally would be very grateful . Thank you.

I am just a final-year university student

That's intriguing. I take it you mean total lifetime all costs. But your post makes me wonder if you have a handle on the marginal cost now. How much does it cost to make an extra 1000 right now?

No. I am just guessing from the ASPs of the CPU and the profit margin.

Average profit margin before price cut: 36%
The prices of x2s had been cut by more than 20% already. An easy calculation can give my spectulation.

perhaps you should give an example, because I'm thinking I need to know more than only the ASP and the net profit margin.

Some people here are doctors, teachers, social security workers and probably lots are "technical fellows". So if you would be kind enough to explain what you mean with that question about marginal costs and stuff I personally would be very grateful . Thank you.

just that given AMD has already paid for the 90nm equipment and plant, and is not going to lay off those employees, we can ignore the development costs, and the capex costs, and just ask about the current extra cost to produce an extra 1000 processors there. It would be ongoing labor, materials, electricity, and overhead for the fab divided by the production rate.

Suppose the ASP for AMD's CPUs is $100. A 36% profit margin means that AMD earned $36 from $100. Now the price of the CPU is dropped from $100 to $75, now AMD can only earn $11 from $75 (15% profit margin).

In reality, the average price reduction of CPUs from AMD is slightly more than 25%. I would say that AMD will be losing money now.

I don't have access to that type of data, but I'm sure somebody hanging around here does. It would be very interesting to come up with a fairly close net figure for CPU manufacturing costs.

It would be very difficult to calculate..... as we do not know the actual prices that AMD / Intel sell the processors.

Hmm... It could be determined within some reasonable measure of accuracy by analysing past year reports and correlating them to the total number of CPUs processed that year, etc. etc. etc.

That's too much for my defective brain. I still have to take off my shoes to count to more than 10.

Just don't tell us how you get to 21...

ZZZZZZZZZZIP...

Oh, you said to not tell ya. Sorry!

Suppose the ASP for AMD's CPUs is $100. A 36% profit margin means that AMD earned $36 from $100. Now the price of the CPU is dropped from $100 to $75, now AMD can only earn $11 from $75 (15% profit margin).

In reality, the average price reduction of CPUs from AMD is slightly more than 25%. I would say that AMD will be losing money now.

So you really think that a piece of glass with a thin layer of copper wires, and smaller than the size of a fingernail costs more than 60$? (I know CPU's are more than a pile of sand, but I really like to think of them like that on some occasions... )

AMD is ramping 65 nm which will almost double their capacity which also means it will almost half the costs. So in fact by ramping to 65nm and dropping prices by 25% they could actually make more money if the transition would be complete, but I'm guessing it's not and they make somewhat the same. But that's just my guess.

I am just doing an averaged calculation. In fact the ASP of AMD was about $70 in 06Q4.
http://www.ibtimes.com/articles/20 [...] pments.htm

Theoretically the transition to 65nm can relieve the problem. But there are some deviations in the reality:
1. The initial yield of 65nm fabrication is lower than 90nm one.
2. The capacity of the fabricatin plants is increased by only about 30% since the die size decrease is not high (31% of ~120mm from ~170mm).