Indeed, the two companies will be long remembered for one of the great rivalries in the business world, a battle between a dominant giant and a scrappy underdog. Think Ali vs. Frazier or Bjorn Borg vs. Vitas Gerulaitis. Although given their almost symbiotic bond, some would probably compare them more to Laurel and Hardy or Felix and Oscar.
Historically, he said, Intel and AMD have demonstrated different sets of strengths, and AMD has had always had a tougher bar to clear than Intel.
Intel's advantage is its manufacturing muscle which makes up for "some of its architecturally less elegant designs." On the other hand, while AMD has won praise for the quality of its chips, it has struggled with production and has been repeatedly criticized for missing roll-out targets.
"AMD has to be precise in both," he said. "They have to have better architecture and manufacturing. They have to be right on two counts. ... Intel has the luxury of having more cash and they can survive a two-year downturn" better than AMD.
For the full article, please go to Marketwatch.com
For, in a strange way, Intel, the world's No. 1 chipmaker, seems to need the smaller AMD as a foil on the tech stage, and AMD needs Intel in order to play the role of the little guy battling the big gorilla.
Analyst Roger Kay of Endpoint Technologies Inc. said each of the two rivals "is pursuing its own imperatives, and any action it takes can be seen as a straightforward reaction to its capabilities, circumstances and character."
But he noted, "Intel would likely face greater antitrust scrutiny if AMD went out of business, and AMD has gotten so used to operating in a climate dominated by Intel that its character has been formed around the obstacle."
No comments:
Post a Comment