Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Make do with Dresden

Last response: in CPUs
Share
March 22, 2007 6:57:45 PM

I could not agree with the author of this article more.

http://www.overclockers.com/tips01125/

Either AMD could have focused on CPUs and built the New York fab and gone toe to toe with Intel on pricing with the view of getting to the 30% mark, or it could have bought ATI and put its focus on Fusion and GPUs, or if it was going to do both it needed fix it's balance sheet and replace the 5 billion it shelled out for ATI pronto.

Instead Hector tried to have his cake and eat it too, now hes faced with pulling a quick about face in terms of strategy or going to a now very hostile capital market hat in hand. The results are likely to be ugly, particularly after AMD's next earnings announcement.

More about : make dresden

March 22, 2007 7:25:57 PM

StrollinHo is a jerk. He always has the bleakest outlook for AMD no matter what.

In my mind the only "mistake" Hector made was this price war. X2 should not be at $99. Buying ATi was actually a good move as they at least have a somewhat greater "income" and the ability to get into diverse new markets. It is said that mobile will eventually overtake desktop and numbers and already has in growth so Fusion will definitely garner wins this year.

AMD may post a loss this Q1 but by theend of Q2 it will pick p nicely as K10 shoul dbe totally "exposed" which shoul dgive them a boost as they will no longer be behind Intel.

I can agree though that the whole problem is Intel's continuing behavior which keeps AMD makng a lt less even though they have been - and still are in my opinion - in the technical lead with a mmuch better platform and much better plans for "chipset/socket compatibility."
March 22, 2007 7:35:17 PM

I don't think AMD had any choice but to purchase ATI. In order for AMD to grow, they needed to be a major player in the integrated GPU market at the very least. Being able to offer an all-in-one solutions to OEM's is huge, and has been Intel's bread and butter.

Not to mention it also gives AMD an in into new markets including ultra slim mobile, set top, home theater etc. The purchase price AMD payed for ATI was a bargain IMO when you consider the technology that ATI brings to the table. The only question left is how well AMD/ATI execute. The decision Hector made was sound and vital IMO.

BTW Ed is an idiot that takes every opportunity to take a swipe at AMD.
Related resources
March 22, 2007 7:38:33 PM

I dunno. I actually think AMD should have made the move on ATI like last year before they announced AM2. They had money, and intel was suckin, so that would have been a good time. I think its good they got ATI though, and would not have worlked out if they had done it later.

And yes, it IS INTEL's fault partially, because of the price war.
March 22, 2007 7:52:20 PM

I think most true AMD supporters will appreciate although I am a micro consumer of resale cpu's, i am usually a perceptive buyer. what does that mean?

For some reason I am usually in tune with a trend before i even know its a trend, as a true intel fan boy why have I been buying more and more amd processors as the prices fall?


For some reason amd chips seem so cheap i am compelled to use them - a 4200+ for $110 or e4300 - i choose the 4200 this week.

2nd - once the r600 comes out i think alot of ati users will come to amd's rescue. iI just sold my personal pair of x1950's on ebay yesterday, in anticipation of the r600. I have no idea why (well i do it was 20 cents listing day)- i do trade up my cards every few months - subconsciously i am concluding the r600 is coming out to rule.




Conclusion its going to be good news for amd soon!
March 22, 2007 7:53:41 PM

Quote:
I don't think AMD had any choice but to purchase ATI. In order for AMD to grow, they needed to be a major player in the integrated GPU market at the very least. Being able to offer an all-in-one solutions to OEM's is huge, and has been Intel's bread and butter.

Not to mention it also gives AMD an in into new markets including ultra slim mobile, set top, home theater etc. The purchase price AMD payed for ATI was a bargain IMO when you consider the technology that ATI brings to the table.


If integrated solutions were/are so important to their futures, then the transaction could have been done as a stock-swap merger, or AMD could have purchased ATI with stock instead of cash, or Hector could have gone and raised cash immediatly after (if not before) the transaction.

Hector did none of these things, and the facts are there for all to see. Facts in terms of stock price, facts in terms of the ugly balance sheet, facts in terms of AMD is losing money instead of making it, facts in terms of there not being enough cash to fund their announced cap ex plans, facts in terms of Hector is going to have make some very unhappy decisions soon to address some of these things, and screaming "fanboi" at the messenger is not going to address any of these facts. The longer the reckoning is delayed, the longer AMD puts its fingers in its ears and yells lalalala, the harder it will be for AMD to ever recover, and that is not good for anyone particularly AMD.
March 22, 2007 8:01:12 PM

Quote:
I could not agree with the author of this article more.

http://www.overclockers.com/tips01125/

Either AMD could have focused on CPUs and built the New York fab and gone toe to toe with Intel on pricing with the view of getting to the 30% mark, or it could have bought ATI and put its focus on Fusion and GPUs, or if it was going to do both it needed fix it's balance sheet and replace the 5 billion it shelled out for ATI pronto.

Instead Hector tried to have his cake and eat it too, now hes faced with pulling a quick about face in terms of strategy or going to a now very hostile capital market hat in hand. The results are likely to be ugly, particularly after AMD's next earnings announcement.



AMD's problem is not Intel nor lack of money, AMD's problems stem from poor business decisions and inferior process technology. AMD has alwasys had to buy process technology from IBM to cmpete below 0.13 um nodes. I said it 6 months ago that the NY fab will not happen for now and that AMD will not record a profit for the next 3 years, that means end of 2009. AMD has been known to make very stupid decisions, Jerry Sanders is an idiot, Hector actually was the one to put AMD on the right track, I am afraid though he has now been assimilated by Jerry's culture. On the other hand, the only idiot Intel had was Craig Barrett and he is no longer at the helm. I expect AMD to rely more and more on foundries to make their silicon. If Barcelona flops, AMD will certainly go fabless and develop their process with IBM to farm out to the foundries.
March 22, 2007 8:11:34 PM

Quote:
I don't think AMD had any choice but to purchase ATI. In order for AMD to grow, they needed to be a major player in the integrated GPU market at the very least. Being able to offer an all-in-one solutions to OEM's is huge, and has been Intel's bread and butter.

Not to mention it also gives AMD an in into new markets including ultra slim mobile, set top, home theater etc. The purchase price AMD payed for ATI was a bargain IMO when you consider the technology that ATI brings to the table.


If integrated solutions were/are so important to their futures, then the transaction could have been done as a stock-swap merger, or AMD could have purchased ATI with stock instead of cash, or Hector could have gone and raised cash immediatly after (if not before) the transaction.

Hector did none of these things, and the facts are there for all to see. Facts in terms of stock price, facts in terms of the ugly balance sheet, facts in terms of AMD is losing money instead of making it, facts in terms of there not being enough cash to fund their announced cap ex plans, facts in terms of Hector is going to have make some very unhappy decisions soon to address some of these things, and screaming "fanboi" at the messenger is not going to address any of these facts. The longer the reckoning is delayed, the longer AMD puts its fingers in its ears and yells lalalala, the harder it will be for AMD to ever recover, and that is not good for anyone particularly AMD.

u come across like an intelliot
March 22, 2007 8:17:31 PM

all I know is that when I purchase my next laptop or desktop(far future) it will have AMD/ATI integrated gpu in it.
March 22, 2007 8:21:07 PM

Quote:
I don't think AMD had any choice but to purchase ATI. In order for AMD to grow, they needed to be a major player in the integrated GPU market at the very least. Being able to offer an all-in-one solutions to OEM's is huge, and has been Intel's bread and butter.

Not to mention it also gives AMD an in into new markets including ultra slim mobile, set top, home theater etc. The purchase price AMD payed for ATI was a bargain IMO when you consider the technology that ATI brings to the table.


If integrated solutions were/are so important to their futures, then the transaction could have been done as a stock-swap merger, or AMD could have purchased ATI with stock instead of cash, or Hector could have gone and raised cash immediatly after (if not before) the transaction.

Hector did none of these things, and the facts are there for all to see. Facts in terms of stock price, facts in terms of the ugly balance sheet, facts in terms of AMD is losing money instead of making it, facts in terms of there not being enough cash to fund their announced cap ex plans, facts in terms of Hector is going to have make some very unhappy decisions soon to address some of these things, and screaming "fanboi" at the messenger is not going to address any of these facts. The longer the reckoning is delayed, the longer AMD puts its fingers in its ears and yells lalalala, the harder it will be for AMD to ever recover, and that is not good for anyone particularly AMD.

But that's what the deal was. $2.5B in stock and $2.5B in cash. The stock is doing bad because of the doom and gloom analysts who wuldn't know a good thing if it slapped them in the head... with a shovel.

AMD lost money for years in the 90s and early 00s. They finally got profitable after Opteron and I hope that they do the right thing with K10 prices.
RUiz said hat Barcelna will be intro'd at the original Dual Core Opten prices. I hope the same goes for Agena and that Kuma slots between X2 and Agena price wise, it definitely will per wise.
The real challenge is to make more Turions and get a new mobile chip out so they can charge a premium (if t's K10) to buoy the desktop prices.
March 22, 2007 8:30:43 PM

AMD's in a pinch. Now does anyone have a clear solution to get them out of it besides being bought out?
March 22, 2007 8:37:32 PM

Quote:
AMD's in a pinch. Now does anyone have a clear solution to get them out of it besides being bought out?


Just get everyone to go buy AMD processers and stock, they will gain their money back if EVERYONE does it 8)
March 22, 2007 9:15:57 PM

Quote:


u come across like an intelliot


Is there something you are disuputing, or are you just engaged in name calling? I'll be happy to debate financials. If you want to engage namecalling contest you'll have to play alone.
March 22, 2007 10:55:59 PM

Quote:
AMD's in a pinch. Now does anyone have a clear solution to get them out of it besides being bought out?


Time, time, time.
March 23, 2007 3:31:13 AM

Quote:


But that's what the deal was. $2.5B in stock and $2.5B in cash. The stock is doing bad because of the doom and gloom analysts who wuldn't know a good thing if it slapped them in the head... with a shovel.


Readers should note that once again The Baron casts blame not at the source of the problem, but rather at anyplace else that he can. In this case the problem (falling stock prices) is not AMDs fault for being caught with its pants down, failing to supply the channel (due to binning/manufacturing problems or mobile targeting) or releasing an underperforming overpriced, environmentally hostile product, but rather, some one elses, specifically stock analysts. :roll:
March 23, 2007 3:46:19 AM

Quote:


But that's what the deal was. $2.5B in stock and $2.5B in cash. The stock is doing bad because of the doom and gloom analysts who wuldn't know a good thing if it slapped them in the head... with a shovel.


Readers should note that once again The Baron casts blame not at the source of the problem, but rather at anyplace else that he can. In this case the problem (falling stock prices) is not AMDs fault for being caught with its pants down, failing to supply the channel (due to binning/manufacturing problems or mobile targeting) or releasing an underperforming overpriced, environmentally hostile product, but rather, some one elses, specifically stock analysts. :roll:

You noticed that too..... we should bookmark this post, and remember it for future reference.

Jack

Already done :wink:
Its in my 'links of Baron errors' list. I started it while looking for his 'paper launch' comments. Still looking for that. I know its in there. He made direct and indirect insinuations, but I want the actual words. Interestingly, I found lots of quotes from other folks in response to him calling the launch paper, but I havent found the words yet. I will...they are there some where.
March 23, 2007 3:49:13 AM

Quote:


But that's what the deal was. $2.5B in stock and $2.5B in cash. The stock is doing bad because of the doom and gloom analysts who wuldn't know a good thing if it slapped them in the head... with a shovel.


Readers should note that once again The Baron casts blame not at the source of the problem, but rather at anyplace else that he can. In this case the problem (falling stock prices) is not AMDs fault for being caught with its pants down, failing to supply the channel (due to binning/manufacturing problems or mobile targeting) or releasing an underperforming overpriced, environmentally hostile product, but rather, some one elses, specifically stock analysts. :roll:

You noticed that too..... we should bookmark this post, and remember it for future reference.

Jack

Already done :wink:
Its in my 'links of Baron errors' list. I started it while looking for his 'paper launch' comments. Still looking for that. I know its in there. He made direct and indirect insinuations, but I want the actual words. Interestingly, I found lots of quotes from other folks in response to him calling the launch paper, but I havent found the words yet. I will...they are there some where.

8O . o O (gawd, I'd hate to see the bookmark list, it must run off the screen)
March 23, 2007 4:25:32 AM

Quote:

AMD may post a loss this Q1 but by theend of Q2 it will pick p nicely as K10 shoul dbe totally "exposed" which shoul dgive them a boost as they will no longer be behind Intel.


Are you suggesting that Q2 will be profitable for AMD? How about Q3?


Quote:
I can agree though that the whole problem is Intel's continuing behavior which keeps AMD makng a lt less even though they have been - and still are in my opinion - in the technical lead with a mmuch better platform and much better plans for "chipset/socket compatibility."


But he did not say the whole problem was with Intel (and he did not mean Intel was being mean, just pricing for market share). He also said AMD was dropping the ball.... which is true, should we go through a list?

Finally, I am happy you said in your opinion, could you elaborate what formulated your opinion that their technical lead with a much better platform? What exactly about the platform is allowing them to hold a performance advantage? Hmmmmm, last I checked the last time they were in the performance lead was July 13th, 2006.

Oh yeah, the private equity rumors are getting stronger:
Jim Cramer (the funny mad man) has said he hear rumors of it, WSJ financial bloggers are also talking about it.... Hector may be gone before the end of the summer. Wouldn't that suck.... right at the time Barcelona launches, the company is in upheaval.


Jack


Perhaps he should write a letter to Intel

'Dear Intel,

Please stop being mean. Please raise your prices so AMD can raise its prices. Please dont release anymore products for a few years so AMD can catch up and exceed you in performance. Please direct your consumers to buy AMD products so they can claim 50% of the overall market (DT/Server/Mobile).

In short, please stop being a commercial enterprice and put the good of AMDs stockholders above the good of yours, because caring about your stockholders makes you really mean.

Thanks'


Much as I like my AMDs, and as much as I dread the thought of Intel with out the competition AMD has provided, I cant help but feeling that any problems AMD is suffering are by their own hand. Some people chose to start a business. They knew what they were getting itno: A commercial environment - competition. If they cant keep up, its their fault, no one elses. AMDs made a lot of blunders this past year and they are suffering for it.
March 23, 2007 5:01:19 AM

Quote:
AMD's in a pinch. Now does anyone have a clear solution to get them out of it besides being bought out?


Time, time, time.

is running out, out, out.

Like a duck on a Junebug!
March 23, 2007 12:55:33 PM

Quote:


But that's what the deal was. $2.5B in stock and $2.5B in cash. The stock is doing bad because of the doom and gloom analysts who wuldn't know a good thing if it slapped them in the head... with a shovel.


Readers should note that once again The Baron casts blame not at the source of the problem, but rather at anyplace else that he can. In this case the problem (falling stock prices) is not AMDs fault for being caught with its pants down, failing to supply the channel (due to binning/manufacturing problems or mobile targeting) or releasing an underperforming overpriced, environmentally hostile product, but rather, some one elses, specifically stock analysts. :roll:

You mean like NetBurst, the huge chipset shortage and the Via debacle? I'm not placing blame on them. When an analyst says something bad it's OK if it's AMD.

Companies don't get caught with their pants down (you can't just pop a new arch out of your a s s - though some of you pop even more "creative" things out of yours).

Yes, they underestimated growth of mobile but if no one could get any why are we now saying there's excess inventory? Companies that were seling 10s and 100s of thousands of AMD cips have an infrastructure that demands they keep it up so its not like all of a sudden ASUS will start puttng it's mobos in white unmarked boxes again.

Stop saying underperforming. It sounds stupid when there are plenty of Intel dual systems pumping like that (can you say Tulsa?).
And QFX DOESN'T underperform what it's replacing in the environments it was designed for.

Doom and gloom. Doom and gloom.
March 23, 2007 1:06:20 PM

Quote:
I think AMD has bottomed,the stock will slowly catch up to where the lack of corporate heads has brought it.

This is the last of the darkness for amd.Still looking for 11 and we may see it with vista not holding amd up much we could see the 9 i was shooting off about,but I dont think we will.

Amd came clean and admitted err;I believe it was sincere.I also believe Intel is incapable of bieng that noble.

my vote is on AMD still but they sure havent made it easy.I hope the overprice the first few k10's a bit.

Were at the last little bit of yuckiness here.It would do many well to see that.


Vern, How can you say we've hit bottom when the bloodiest is yet to come for AMD. The additional price drop for Q2 is going to crank up the red ink and burn through the remaining cash at even higher rates. If the cash situation isn't resolved by the end of the month the stock will drop severely after the quarterly report and if not resolved before they run out of cash AMD could quite literally implode overnight. Dilution will only work if there is a market for the stock and continued poor financials without proof that Barcelona is the real deal isn't going to impress anyone.
March 23, 2007 1:30:09 PM

Quote:
I think AMD has bottomed,the stock will slowly catch up to where the lack of corporate heads has brought it.


While you think it's bottomed, you're still gonna short it, eh :?: :roll:


Somebody mentioned AMD going fabless. Not a bad idea. If Intel were smart, they would contract their fabs to produce AMD's stuff. :twisted:
March 23, 2007 1:32:12 PM

Quote:
Oh yeah, the private equity rumors are getting stronger: Jim Cramer (the funny mad man) has said he hear rumors of it, WSJ financial bloggers are also talking about it.... Hector may be gone before the end of the summer. Wouldn't that suck.... right at the time Barcelona launches, the company is in upheaval.


Cramer's just trying to help out his own stock position.
March 23, 2007 1:34:49 PM

Quote:

AMD may post a loss this Q1 but by theend of Q2 it will pick p nicely as K10 shoul dbe totally "exposed" which shoul dgive them a boost as they will no longer be behind Intel.


Are you suggesting that Q2 will be profitable for AMD? How about Q3?


Quote:
I can agree though that the whole problem is Intel's continuing behavior which keeps AMD makng a lt less even though they have been - and still are in my opinion - in the technical lead with a mmuch better platform and much better plans for "chipset/socket compatibility."


But he did not say the whole problem was with Intel (and he did not mean Intel was being mean, just pricing for market share). He also said AMD was dropping the ball.... which is true, should we go through a list?

Finally, I am happy you said in your opinion, could you elaborate what formulated your opinion that their technical lead with a much better platform? What exactly about the platform is allowing them to hold a performance advantage? Hmmmmm, last I checked the last time they were in the performance lead was July 13th, 2006.

Oh yeah, the private equity rumors are getting stronger:
Jim Cramer (the funny mad man) has said he hear rumors of it, WSJ financial bloggers are also talking about it.... Hector may be gone before the end of the summer. Wouldn't that suck.... right at the time Barcelona launches, the company is in upheaval.


Jack


Perhaps he should write a letter to Intel

'Dear Intel,

Please stop being mean. Please raise your prices so AMD can raise its prices. Please dont release anymore products for a few years so AMD can catch up and exceed you in performance. Please direct your consumers to buy AMD products so they can claim 50% of the overall market (DT/Server/Mobile).

In short, please stop being a commercial enterprice and put the good of AMDs stockholders above the good of yours, because caring about your stockholders makes you really mean.

Thanks'


Much as I like my AMDs, and as much as I dread the thought of Intel with out the competition AMD has provided, I cant help but feeling that any problems AMD is suffering are by their own hand. Some people chose to start a business. They knew what they were getting itno: A commercial environment - competition. If they cant keep up, its their fault, no one elses. AMDs made a lot of blunders this past year and they are suffering for it.

You should go and be a spin doctor. I say nothing of the kind. AMD made no "blunders." Intel is just a 10x larger company with no IMC and the inability to make a good inter-connect.
If their profits were more evenly matched no one would say anything. AMD made the choice to drop prices to crazy levels but right now Dell is shipping to China in volume so at least marketshare shouldn't change much.

Whether or not someone buys them out is irrelevant to its existence. Hector doesn't own AMD, the stockholders - of whom he is one - do. I think he and Dirk have done a great job pulling AMD to respectability and shouldn't be blamed for having to HAVE TO BE in a tooth and nail fight with a bully.

Depending on how things go in the channel, they may be in the black by th end of Q2. You have to remeber tha teir cost structur is adjusting greatly as Fab 30 goes to 300mm and Chartered goes to 65nm.

The additional volume will save them at least 20%. And with R600 going 65nm that is an additional cost savings and should provide a boost because of Torrenza and DX10 games which should trickle out as R600 ramps.

If the shrink atually got to 50% that means around a 30% cost savngs and twice as many chips.

It's always darkest before the dawn.
March 23, 2007 6:49:12 PM

Quote:
I think AMD has bottomed,the stock will slowly catch up to where the lack of corporate heads has brought it.

This is the last of the darkness for amd.Still looking for 11 and we may see it with vista not holding amd up much we could see the 9 i was shooting off about,but I dont think we will.

Amd came clean and admitted err;I believe it was sincere.I also believe Intel is incapable of bieng that noble.

my vote is on AMD still but they sure havent made it easy.I hope the overprice the first few k10's a bit.

Were at the last little bit of yuckiness here.It would do many well to see that.


Vern, How can you say we've hit bottom when the bloodiest is yet to come for AMD. The additional price drop for Q2 is going to crank up the red ink and burn through the remaining cash at even higher rates. If the cash situation isn't resolved by the end of the month the stock will drop severely after the quarterly report and if not resolved before they run out of cash AMD could quite literally implode overnight. Dilution will only work if there is a market for the stock and continued poor financials without proof that Barcelona is the real deal isn't going to impress anyone.


5% of a 140Million CPU industry is a lot. Of course, it is nearly impossible to gain that much share in 1 or 2 Qs but you get the point.
March 23, 2007 6:56:47 PM

Quote:
What I mean by that is that the stock is catching up with the poor planning and its all said and done regarding that.Stock will reflect the poor planning as it sinks,so really all thats left is for the market to catch up with the sinking planning by hitting 11 on AMD stocks.

Well as far as barcelona and stars are concerned ,AMD is TOO silent for such a near term release 3months from launch youd think at least their would be something floating about; But at the same time whats done is done and for people to act as it AMD doesnt make decent chips at all is pretty vicious.

The poor planning is done its over with,all we are waiting for now is the stock to drop and show how bad the planning was.Its still a great product and company and people were just as savage with INTEL just prior to the c2d release.

I really dont think that its that big of a deal now we are too close to new products to continue whining and pointing fingers.K10 will outperform k8 like the latter steppings of PD outperformed its pedecessors and quite likely as c2d outperformed PD and core mobile.

AMD can easilly level the performance field to flatten comparatives to nothing.They planned poorly,it doesnt mean they are as stupid as zorundo's reply to me..chances weigh heavilly that they are anything but stupid.

The difference between me and the latecomers to the AMD bashing is that i was trying to keep a moving car from going over the cliff; All the late comers are doing is pushing it over the damn cliff.





I'm not sure how you're defining poor planning by AMD. They couldn't just whip up a new arch in 6 months so they chose to invest in lucrative new markets. They are already getting wins in the handheld and phone spaces with the new vector graphics chip.

Most if not all HPC people are committed to FireStream. They have set it up so that WHEN K10 lives up to the hype Intel will be relegated to the low end along with their prices while K10 will buoy AMDs flagging margins WHEN they deliver Kuma/Agena in volume.

AMD has confirmed that they will charge the same price as the original Opteron dual (You Tube interview with Hector).

That's a ballsy plan. Execution will place them in a much better position. I guess if all of the Radeons do release together at 65nm in April, then we will see the first fruits (second if you look at 690G) of the acquisition.
March 23, 2007 8:01:27 PM

On the surface it appears that AMD should have been busy Building Fabs when they were on top against the P4s. Capacity was the only thing holding them back at that point.
BUT
It is almost like they knew they had a one hit wonder on their hands and that by the time the fabs would have been online Intel would be releasing the Core Arch and they wouldn't have an answer for it.

Considering it took about 4 years from conception to market, this could have been the case? Or maybe they believed the P4 would scale to 10ghz?

Look at what they are doing now. Doesn't seem very forward thinking or confident, seems more like a company that knows the writing is on the wall for their CPU bussiness and are looking to create a new nitch for themselves with low end integrated GPU/CPU products for mobility and developing countries.

They have no real R&D department (except ATI's now) and rely on outside sources for technology developement in CPU technology. This alone should make it hard for them to invest in the future vary far in advance, they are relying on other companies to keep them competitive in CPU technology.
March 23, 2007 8:12:15 PM

Quote:
They have no real R&D department (except ATI's now) and rely on outside sources for technology developement in CPU technology. This alone should make it hard for them to invest in the future vary far in advance, they are relying on other companies to keep them competitive in CPU technology.


wtf you smoking? No real R&D? They were spending over $1B a year on R&D before ATI. stfu noob
March 23, 2007 8:40:59 PM

Quote:
They have no real R&D department (except ATI's now) and rely on outside sources for technology developement in CPU technology. This alone should make it hard for them to invest in the future vary far in advance, they are relying on other companies to keep them competitive in CPU technology.


wtf you smoking? No real R&D? They were spending over $1B a year on R&D before ATI. stfu noob

kids play compared to Intel. While the major and I have had our differences,he is making good points;you subject yourself to the meaning rather than view the relative terminology objectively.

do you feel as though the world is out to get you as well? chill out ,,,pretty please :roll:

Isn't most of that $1B paid to IBM for technology development anyway which was the major's point.
March 23, 2007 10:37:09 PM

AMD actually spends a higher percentage of revenue on R&D than Intel.

Quote:
In 2006, the company said it was eliminating 10,500 positions in a massive restructuring. But it still spent $5.9 billion on R&D - about 17 percent of overall revenue - up from $5.1 billion in fiscal 2005.

By comparison, AMD plowed $1.2 billion - more than 21 percent of its revenue - into R&D last year.


http://www.physorg.com/news92681209.html
March 23, 2007 10:42:42 PM

Quote:
Stop placating the ordeal with sympathies ,for gods sake baron they admitted they got distracted.



Companies don't get distracted. What they said was they underestimated the demand for mobile and got the mix of product wrong.
March 24, 2007 4:43:20 AM

Quote:
This is not considered a good thing....

what isn't?
March 24, 2007 5:06:18 AM

Quote:
If R&D is to large a percentage of your revenue.... it means you are not getting a good return on your investment.

FAIL.

R&D is the lifeblood. Plus AMD has only a small fraction of the R&D budget of Intel, so they have no choice but to allocate as much as possible into research.

But naturally you won't agree, because you must be correct regardless of the facts.
March 24, 2007 5:15:30 AM

Quote:
If R&D is to large a percentage of your revenue.... it means you are not getting a good return on your investment.

FAIL.

R&D is the lifeblood. Plus AMD has only a small fraction of the R&D budget of Intel, so they have no choice but to allocate as much as possible into research.

But naturally you won't agree, because you must be correct regardless of the facts.That's what "Big Brother" (IBM) is there for. :D 
March 24, 2007 7:22:15 AM

I invite readers to note the following behaviors

Quote:


You mean like Netburst, the huge chipset shortage and the Via debacle? I'm not placing blame on them. When an analyst says something bad it's OK if it's AMD.


In the above statement, the Baron attempts to canonize AMD by directing attention to Intel’s errors while completely disregarding the issues at hand: To wit AMD’s errors.

As he has done many times in the past, the Baron digs into history to compare an old, superseded product against current releases. He does this as current releases from both companies perform very well, but to compare current releases puts AMD at a disadvantage as its products are now well behind Intel’s the performance curve. By raising the specter of Netburst, he attempts to divert attention away from C2D as it compares to X2. As anyone who has the most basic inkling of recent CPU history knows, Netburst was an egregious error on Intel’s part, yet the Baron attempts to justify his earlier remarks that stock analysts are to blame for AMD’s falling values by comparing the Netburst scenario to AMD’s current situation.

In doing so, he deliberately disregards the fact that Netburst was a completely different situation, and therefore in no way comparable. At the time of Netburst, Intel was a hugely successful enterprise with the vast majority of the total CPU market. Netburst, while horrible, performed its task adequately (yet another of the Barons traits, while he will often use the 'toss a coin' phrase to minimize the difference between C2D and X2, he will not admit the same philosophy could easily be applied to Netburst vs. K8 as it would defeat his perpetual attempts to diminish Intel) and provided a cheap upgrade alternative relative to total system replacement. Intel was financially healthy and showing strong profits with no significant debt. AMD on the other hand has a strong product, but is consistently "in the red" (with the occasional and to date only temporary breakout) and suffers from an extensive amount of debt. Additionally, Intel had financial and manufacturing resources far advanced of AMD's. In fact, the situations of Netburst era Intel and AMD of today could not be more different, however, by his perception for the purposes of his theory, he strives to imply the scenarios are equivalent, and by that logic, AMD is not to blame for its own difficulties, because Intel’s stock did not fall off during the long past Netburst era.

Quote:

Companies don't get caught with their pants down (you can't just pop a new arch out of your a s s - though some of you pop even more "creative" things out of yours).


Again, the Baron attempts to direct fault away from AMD for their current situation by posting a blanket denial that companies don’t get caught unaware by unforeseen situations. :roll:


Quote:

Yes, they underestimated growth of mobile but if no one could get any why are we now saying there's excess inventory? Companies that were seling 10s and 100s of thousands of AMD cips have an infrastructure that demands they keep it up so its not like all of a sudden ASUS will start puttng it's mobos in white unmarked boxes again.



Note that the Baron seems to bite whole heartedly on AMD’s given reason for shorting the channel: To wit, according to AMD, they devoted significant portions of their manufacturing capacity to mobile thus denying product to the channel. This provides a convenient excuse to ignore the probabilities that AMD experienced both manufacturing problems as well as binning "thinning" of their higher end DT/Server products. In doing so, this relieves AMD of responsibility for not producing within the DT market.


Quote:

Stop saying underperforming. It sounds stupid when there are plenty of Intel dual systems pumping like that (can you say Tulsa?).
And QFX DOESN'T underperform what it's replacing in the environments it was designed for.



Here the Baron again stives to deny that AMDs attempt to provide a 4 core DTPC solution, (QFX) failed miserably. Even though the vast majority of tests and benchmarks, including tests under Vista64 with NUMA (previous panaceas the Baron claimed would significantly boost QFX's ailing performance) have demonstrated conclusively that QFX underperforms the competition by no small margin, yet consumes ridiculous amounts of power to achieve this trailing performance. And again, he attempts to divert attention away from the issue at hand, that QFX is an underperforming power-whore by directing attention at Intel’s superseded products.


As he has in so many of his previous posts, in this post the Baron demonstrates he will go to whatever lengths necessary to avoid assigning responsibility to AMD. Whatever AMD’s woes, it is not their fault. With the Baron, the blame for AMD’s difficulties always lies elsewhere.
March 24, 2007 7:42:58 AM

Quote:


You should go and be a spin doctor. I say nothing of the kind. AMD made no "blunders." Intel is just a 10x larger company with no IMC and the inability to make a good inter-connect.
If their profits were more evenly matched no one would say anything. AMD made the choice to drop prices to crazy levels but right now Dell is shipping to China in volume so at least marketshare shouldn't change much.

Whether or not someone buys them out is irrelevant to its existence. Hector doesn't own AMD, the stockholders - of whom he is one - do. I think he and Dirk have done a great job pulling AMD to respectability and shouldn't be blamed for having to HAVE TO BE in a tooth and nail fight with a bully.

Depending on how things go in the channel, they may be in the black by th end of Q2. You have to remeber tha teir cost structur is adjusting greatly as Fab 30 goes to 300mm and Chartered goes to 65nm.

The additional volume will save them at least 20%. And with R600 going 65nm that is an additional cost savings and should provide a boost because of Torrenza and DX10 games which should trickle out as R600 ramps.

If the shrink atually got to 50% that means around a 30% cost savngs and twice as many chips.

It's always darkest before the dawn.


You contiunue to funtion from the misconception that I want to see AMD perform poorly. I do not, but again, the concept that "If you dont agree with me, youre anti-AMD" previals. AMD has blundered, AMD is doing poorly, and while they are not going to go out of business, their future is hanging by a thread....a thread called K10. You say I should be a spin doctor, yet I am not the one grasping at straws to make AMD appear more stable than they are, nor am I the one blaming AMDs woes on everyone else except AMD.


CPU manufacturing is a commercial enterprise. Its just that simple. It is not the special olympics. Everyone cannot be a winner. If a company is going to compete, then they must be determined to compete, and compete by the rules of the playing field, not some nonsensical notions of commercial sharing, fairplay, subsidization or consumer loyalty. If they dont produce a better product, or a competative product for less, then they are not competaive. CPUs are not a novelty market. They are a commodity. A tool for perfroming tasks. There is only a small handfull of people who view CPUs as something other than tools, and that handfull is not enough to support a failing competitor. If AMD cant compete, that is their own fault, and they should lie in the bed they are making for themselves. While that would be horrible for us, warping facts, diverting attention from problems and wishing really hard doesnt stop the cash hemorage. The first step to fixing a problem is admiting the problem exists. It also always the hardest step. If AMD cant do that, they may as well just close their doors, because they have more than one problem, and they created the problems themselves.
March 24, 2007 7:52:10 AM

i am way to lazy to read everyone's post right now, so if someone said this already im sorry, but in my opinion.. amd is not the company to lay down and take it. lol.. i have been a loyal intel fan.. even thru the pentium 4 netburst ugliness..

but im sure amd has an answer that they are perfecting... if not.. then they are worse than anyone ever thought and their demise is on the horizon.
March 24, 2007 7:55:04 AM

Quote:
i am way to lazy to read everyone's post right now, so if someone said this already im sorry, but in my opinion.. amd is not the company to lay down and take it. lol.. i have been a loyal intel fan.. even thru the pentium 4 netburst ugliness..

but im sure amd has an answer that they are perfecting... if not.. then they are worse than anyone ever thought and their demise is on the horizon.


Thats what we're all waiting to see. They have something, but will it be worth while? K10 looks really great on paper, but then, so did Netburst. Everyone knows how well Netburst turned out. We wont know what K10 really is until it gets here.
March 24, 2007 8:02:53 AM

yeah.. honestly.. anyone who cares about computers and tech all that much will grab there stuff and take the loss of 200$ or whatever... if amd comes out with the new hot proc in a few months, then whatever, buy it or not.... and real enthusiast will be rolling with whats hot and what gives them the doom3 fps.. lol doom3 was just an awful example.
.

which in the technology market varies per month, sometimes week.
March 24, 2007 1:26:47 PM

Quote:


You should go and be a spin doctor. I say nothing of the kind. AMD made no "blunders." Intel is just a 10x larger company with no IMC and the inability to make a good inter-connect.
If their profits were more evenly matched no one would say anything. AMD made the choice to drop prices to crazy levels but right now Dell is shipping to China in volume so at least marketshare shouldn't change much.

Whether or not someone buys them out is irrelevant to its existence. Hector doesn't own AMD, the stockholders - of whom he is one - do. I think he and Dirk have done a great job pulling AMD to respectability and shouldn't be blamed for having to HAVE TO BE in a tooth and nail fight with a bully.

Depending on how things go in the channel, they may be in the black by th end of Q2. You have to remeber tha teir cost structur is adjusting greatly as Fab 30 goes to 300mm and Chartered goes to 65nm.

The additional volume will save them at least 20%. And with R600 going 65nm that is an additional cost savings and should provide a boost because of Torrenza and DX10 games which should trickle out as R600 ramps.

If the shrink atually got to 50% that means around a 30% cost savngs and twice as many chips.

It's always darkest before the dawn.


You contiunue to funtion from the misconception that I want to see AMD perform poorly. I do not, but again, the concept that "If you dont agree with me, youre anti-AMD" previals. AMD has blundered, AMD is doing poorly, and while they are not going to go out of business, their future is hanging by a thread....a thread called K10. You say I should be a spin doctor, yet I am not the one grasping at straws to make AMD appear more stable than they are, nor am I the one blaming AMDs woes on everyone else except AMD.


CPU manufacturing is a commercial enterprise. Its just that simple. It is not the special olympics. Everyone cannot be a winner. If a company is going to compete, then they must be determined to compete, and compete by the rules of the playing field, not some nonsensical notions of commercial sharing, fairplay, subsidization or consumer loyalty. If they dont produce a better product, or a competative product for less, then they are not competaive. CPUs are not a novelty market. They are a commodity. A tool for perfroming tasks. There is only a small handfull of people who view CPUs as something other than tools, and that handfull is not enough to support a failing competitor. If AMD cant compete, that is their own fault, and they should lie in the bed they are making for themselves. While that would be horrible for us, warping facts, diverting attention from problems and wishing really hard doesnt stop the cash hemorage. The first step to fixing a problem is admiting the problem exists. It also always the hardest step. If AMD cant do that, they may as well just close their doors, because they have more than one problem, and they created the problems themselves.


So basically you guys have to take turns annoying me because I pay no attention?

They can compete. They are competing. They will compete tomorrow, but like I always say, places like this with 2% of PC buyers think a CPU is a phallic device for vicarious worship.

The other 98% of people wouldn't know how to run FRAPS or even care what SuperPi does. To them AMD is running all of their SW well and is even cheaper than Intel.

AMDs problem is people like you and I guess there are a lot of you so they have multiple problems. They are doing a great job with EXTREMELY limited resources compared to the competition. I'll be glad for Barcelona to come out so you guys can be mad at AMD for something else.

I guess then it'll be but Penryn this, Penryn that.
March 24, 2007 1:31:39 PM

Quote:


You should go and be a spin doctor. I say nothing of the kind. AMD made no "blunders." Intel is just a 10x larger company with no IMC and the inability to make a good inter-connect.
If their profits were more evenly matched no one would say anything. AMD made the choice to drop prices to crazy levels but right now Dell is shipping to China in volume so at least marketshare shouldn't change much.

Whether or not someone buys them out is irrelevant to its existence. Hector doesn't own AMD, the stockholders - of whom he is one - do. I think he and Dirk have done a great job pulling AMD to respectability and shouldn't be blamed for having to HAVE TO BE in a tooth and nail fight with a bully.

Depending on how things go in the channel, they may be in the black by th end of Q2. You have to remeber tha teir cost structur is adjusting greatly as Fab 30 goes to 300mm and Chartered goes to 65nm.

The additional volume will save them at least 20%. And with R600 going 65nm that is an additional cost savings and should provide a boost because of Torrenza and DX10 games which should trickle out as R600 ramps.

If the shrink atually got to 50% that means around a 30% cost savngs and twice as many chips.

It's always darkest before the dawn.


You contiunue to funtion from the misconception that I want to see AMD perform poorly. I do not, but again, the concept that "If you dont agree with me, youre anti-AMD" previals. AMD has blundered, AMD is doing poorly, and while they are not going to go out of business, their future is hanging by a thread....a thread called K10. You say I should be a spin doctor, yet I am not the one grasping at straws to make AMD appear more stable than they are, nor am I the one blaming AMDs woes on everyone else except AMD.


CPU manufacturing is a commercial enterprise. Its just that simple. It is not the special olympics. Everyone cannot be a winner. If a company is going to compete, then they must be determined to compete, and compete by the rules of the playing field, not some nonsensical notions of commercial sharing, fairplay, subsidization or consumer loyalty. If they dont produce a better product, or a competative product for less, then they are not competaive. CPUs are not a novelty market. They are a commodity. A tool for perfroming tasks. There is only a small handfull of people who view CPUs as something other than tools, and that handfull is not enough to support a failing competitor. If AMD cant compete, that is their own fault, and they should lie in the bed they are making for themselves. While that would be horrible for us, warping facts, diverting attention from problems and wishing really hard doesnt stop the cash hemorage. The first step to fixing a problem is admiting the problem exists. It also always the hardest step. If AMD cant do that, they may as well just close their doors, because they have more than one problem, and they created the problems themselves.


So basically you guys have to take turns annoying me because I pay no attention?

They can compete. They are competing. They will compete tomorrow, but like I always say, places like this with 2% of PC buyers think a CPU is a phallic device for vicarious worship.

The other 98% of people wouldn't know how to run FRAPS or even care what SuperPi does. To them AMD is running all of their SW well and is even cheaper than Intel.

AMDs problem is people like you and I guess there are a lot of you so they have multiple problems. They are doing a great job with EXTREMELY limited resources compared to the competition. I'll be glad for Barcelona to come out so you guys can be mad at AMD for something else.

I guess then it'll be but Penryn this, Penryn that.You're right....

Check this:

All i want for christmas is my Penryn.

Sounds stupid....doesn't it, chump? :roll:
March 24, 2007 1:35:38 PM

Quote:
As he has in so many of his previous posts, in this post the Baron demonstrates he will go to whatever lengths necessary to avoid assigning responsibility to AMD. Whatever AMD’s woes, it is not their fault. With the Baron, the blame for AMD’s difficulties always lies elsewhere.



I love how you are just trying to get Brood recruits and not make a point by not saying you but referring to "Baron" as if you are talking to others.

QFX uses a lot of power. It's only faster than C2Q at some things. It's faster than FX62 in multithreaded apps. For people who were already using SLI, 6 HDDs, 2 DVDs, an XFi, etc they will have an upgrade path from FX62before Agena or they can wait. Judging by it's selling out and the mobo prices dropping it's a sign that the same amount of people are buying it as bought FX62.

If AMD had not created X2, AMD64, HTX,ccHT, etc I would think everything was their fault. But they have and they ruled gaming enough that now you get those same incredible frame rates for half the price.

Your problem is that you think even at 22nm CPUs should still have lots of room to grow. My idea is that we should stop this stupid race and just get wider CPUs with AMD and Intel sharing, not "competing" tooth and nail, while totally undervaluing the market they have to use to grow.
March 24, 2007 1:40:19 PM

Quote:
As he has in so many of his previous posts, in this post the Baron demonstrates he will go to whatever lengths necessary to avoid assigning responsibility to AMD. Whatever AMD’s woes, it is not their fault. With the Baron, the blame for AMD’s difficulties always lies elsewhere.



I love how you are just trying to get Brood recruits and not make a point by not saying you but referring to "Baron" as if you are talking to others.

QFX uses a lot of power. It's only faster than C2Q at some things. It's faster than FX62 in multithreaded apps. For people who were already using SLI, 6 HDDs, 2 DVDs, an XFi, etc they will have an upgrade path from FX62before Agena or they can wait. Judging by it's selling out and the mobo prices dropping it's a sign that the same amount of people are buying it as bought FX62.

If AMD had not created X2, AMD64, HTX,ccHT, etc I would think everything was their fault. But they have and they ruled gaming enough that now you get those same incredible frame rates for half the price.

Your problem is that you think even at 22nm CPUs should still have lots of room to grow. My idea is that we should stop this stupid race and just get wider CPUs with AMD and Intel sharing, not "competing" tooth and nail, while totally undervaluing the market they have to use to grow.You're right again..... as usual, and Microsoft and Apple should join forces too. :roll: You really are lame.....BRO.
March 24, 2007 1:53:09 PM

Quote:
Quote:
Quote:



AMDs problem is people like you and I guess there are a lot of you so they have multiple problems. They are doing a great job with EXTREMELY limited resources compared to the competition. I'll be glad for Barcelona to come out so you guys can be mad at AMD for something else.

I guess then it'll be but Penryn this, Penryn that.


AH this is just classic :D  :D  :D 
March 24, 2007 2:53:32 PM

Quote:

Judging by it's selling out and the mobo prices dropping it's a sign that the same amount of people are buying it as bought FX62.

Just where is it selling out?? You have sales numbers?? Perhaps there is a yield problem.... perhpas you are wrong, I see stock on all FX processors.... or perhaps they are not selling at all and retailers are dropping the product. Prehaps the drop in MBs are just to clear out inventory as they kill the product??

Your judgement (speculation) probably is not based in actualities.


Quote:

Your problem is that you think even at 22nm CPUs should still have lots of room to grow. My idea is that we should stop this stupid race and just get wider CPUs with AMD and Intel sharing, not "competing" tooth and nail, while totally undervaluing the market they have to use to grow.


Baron --- there is a limit to the level of parallelism you can accomplish at the intstruction level, Amdahl's Law specifies limits in parallelism.

Finally, to make a core wider costs transistor budget, trasnsistors, even as small as they are now, takes up space. More space means larger die, larger die means less yield, less yield means higher costs..... hence, making the CPU wider (if you even understand what that means) and benefits from going smaller.

You should refrain from making commments on topics you do not understand.....


Newegg.

80 core chip
March 24, 2007 3:25:23 PM

Quote:

Newegg.



I can tell you that just because Newegg doesn't have it in stock does NOT mean it's sold out. I've seen them list products just to see if there's any interest by the number of email requests they get....

If they're not in stock anymore they probably sold the few they had (so technically yes sold out but if you only bought 10 of something to begin with and it took three months to sell those 10 I'd call that testing the waters) And I'd bet that they're more than likely not stocking it anymore...
March 24, 2007 7:15:48 PM

Quote:
They have no real R&D department (except ATI's now) and rely on outside sources for technology developement in CPU technology. This alone should make it hard for them to invest in the future vary far in advance, they are relying on other companies to keep them competitive in CPU technology.


wtf you smoking? No real R&D? They were spending over $1B a year on R&D before ATI. stfu noob

IBM doesn't give them technology for free, or do they?

You tell me 'cuz I'm just a noob and shouldn't be speaking. :wink:

As for my point that you missed, AMD has much less confidence in being competitive 4-6 years in the future because buying IBM's technology is all that keeps them competitive.

It typically takes 3-4 years to get a product out the door if it involves new Arch and new technology.

Intel builds it's stuff from start to finish. If Intel sees some success in the lab with any technology it feels will make them money they can throw money at it and get it to market. They can also research it for various products, uses, combine it with other research/processes, branch other research off of it, and maximize INTEL's benifit from it.

AMD doesn't tell IBM " Hey you guys need to develop a fiber optic interconnect for our 27nm process because we found that their is a heat problem with an electrical interface to IMC on stackable die " or " Hey you guys need to spend more on HK/MG technology because it is key to both our CPU and Flash memory roadmaps and that will benifit us most. "

This is what makes it hard for AMD to invest to heavily in their future. This is also why AMD is not making processors for Mac/PS3/WII/Xbox and why Dell was willing to take exclusive rebates from Intel vs diversifying its product line with AMD (of course this bit dell in the arse due to Netburst ).
March 24, 2007 9:24:18 PM

Quote:

Newegg.



I can tell you that just because Newegg doesn't have it in stock does NOT mean it's sold out. I've seen them list products just to see if there's any interest by the number of email requests they get....

If they're not in stock anymore they probably sold the few they had (so technically yes sold out but if you only bought 10 of something to begin with and it took three months to sell those 10 I'd call that testing the waters) And I'd bet that they're more than likely not stocking it anymore...


And people say I offer excuses. I monitored Newegg for the first month or so and saw it sell out along with the chips. It is still listed and has dropped $60 in price.

Linkage!

This usually doesn't happen for something that isn't selling.
March 25, 2007 12:24:51 PM

Quote:



And people say I offer excuses. I monitored Newegg for the first month or so and saw it sell out along with the chips. It is still listed and has dropped $60 in price.

Linkage!

This usually doesn't happen for something that isn't selling.


You mean you monitored Newegg after launch for a month and found no parts available and assumed they sold out....

Others call this a paper launch. AMD launched the 4x4 on Nov. 30th, but MBs and CPUs were not available until after Christmas.

TechReport did an article on it.
http://techreport.com/onearticle.x/11378

Actually, retail processors began appearing at online sites mid-January or thereabouts, the Inq (your major source of information), did an article on it too when they discovered they broke up the 'pair'.
http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=37045 (dated Jan. 18)



FX70 and the mobo were at Newegg in Dec. in time for XMas.

If someone says saw it sell out it means they had some.
!