Toshiba to use AMD

Somebody became shrewd at business?

If Intel is using "predatory pricing", how is it that they can save 10% by using AMD proc's? It seems strange to me.

Oh right ... yeah.

Pretty pointless posting here at TG though, because they look like they have gone out of business ... nothing updated on the front page for a week now.

Did the new owners of Toms Hardare fire all of the staff??

The old staff were not permitted to report positively on AMD products ... something to do with the deal on the cheap rental costs in the Intel building they were located in.

Might have changed though.

Toshiba going in with AMD looks they see the value of Griffin tho ... clever move.

I never once had time to join the forums over the years due to the abundant wealth of information I found on Tom's.

I have to admit, I hate what it has become. I only frequent the page now to see what the forum members have dug up around the net.

This is ridiculous. I don't care about automobile technology and whatever Toyota might release. Eff the automobile industry...where did my news go?!?!

I apologize to the op, this is informative but tid bits like this use to be part of THG's perogative to post.

Another link. :wink:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20070529/tc_nm/toshiba_amd_d...;_ylt=AtD_ltTJ7xiDgpxJ5fI4PLQjtBAF

http://news.yahoo.com/s/infoworld/20070529/tc_infoworld...;_ylt=AtGRMSxUYjk1z9HjHE3XfvIjtBAF

http://www.vr-zone.com/?i=4980
http://www.amd.com/us-en/Corporate/VirtualPressRoom/0,,...

Core carries a hefty premium for being mobile while Turion not so much. Will change soon.

Look at the price difference between Tseries mobile and Eseries desktop. Intel squeezed the desktop to drop AMDs major supply line, while maintaining higher mobile prices.

Also, because OEMs can use two different chipsets and multiple wireless, total cost can be lower.

It's not like AMD wasn't "forced" to drop prices. This extra 20% of Toshiba should help profits for the rest of the year. There are a couple of other deals that are to be announced soon.

AMD may well end up wih 30% of the market this year. P4 proved you don't have to be the fastest to sell.

The comment in the news article on Yahoo was important...



It's a good point. In this environment, 30% MSS wouldn't be amazing for AMD, it would pathetic and irresponsible if they couldn't get it. This idea has been talked to death, but really, what new great features are CPUs coming with? Is there any reason at this point to want something faster? Why is Intel focusing on emerging markets? Because the US is super saturated and there's no need to upgrade.

If there's nothing exclusive from either company, then they really should split the MSS about 50-50.

It's a good point. In this environment, 30% MSS wouldn't be amazing for AMD, it would pathetic and irresponsible if they couldn't get it. This idea has been talked to death, but really, what new great features are CPUs coming with? Is there any reason at this point to want something faster? Why is Intel focusing on emerging markets? Because the US is super saturated and there's no need to upgrade.

If there's nothing exclusive from either company, then they really should split the MSS about 50-50.


The point I alwasy try to make. How fast does Excel really have to work? Can anything be faster than instantly?
I don't perhaps agree with the comoditization of the PC but then it's inevitable I guess. Servers will stay high-margin and lucrative and desktop is plenty fast enough now.

As I said the two companies shoul dstop racing each otherand adopt each other's best ideas and REMARK ON IT. Rather than his silly back and forth, my chip can beat your chip or, my bus can beat up your bus.

Only people with no life really care about all of that. They just want a PC.

I used to tell people I look at benchmarks to se what the cheapest setup I can get will be while allowing me to do what I want.

They said that's crazy. I said I NEVER buy the fastest. They said I was only saying that because Intel is faster now, but when they weren't I bought a 4400+ not a 4800+ or FX60.

Anyway, rant's over.

ALL HAIL THE DUOPOLY!!!

It's a good point. In this environment, 30% MSS wouldn't be amazing for AMD, it would pathetic and irresponsible if they couldn't get it. This idea has been talked to death, but really, what new great features are CPUs coming with? Is there any reason at this point to want something faster? Why is Intel focusing on emerging markets? Because the US is super saturated and there's no need to upgrade.

If there's nothing exclusive from either company, then they really should split the MSS about 50-50.


The point I alwasy try to make. How fast does Excel really have to work? Can anything be faster than instantly?
I don't perhaps agree with the comoditization of the PC but then it's inevitable I guess. Servers will stay high-margin and lucrative and desktop is plenty fast enough now.

As I said the two companies shoul dstop racing each otherand adopt each other's best ideas and REMARK ON IT. Rather than his silly back and forth, my chip can beat your chip or, my bus can beat up your bus.

Only people with no life really care about all of that. They just want a PC.

I used to tell people I look at benchmarks to se what the cheapest setup I can get will be while allowing me to do what I want.

They said that's crazy. I said I NEVER buy the fastest. They said I was only saying that because Intel is faster now, but when they weren't I bought a 4400+ not a 4800+ or FX60.

Anyway, rant's over.

ALL HAIL THE DUOPOLY!!!Somehow, i don't think you'd be saying that if AMD had ~74% MS and Intel had ~24%. :roll:

God, you're sickening. Is your ADHD actng up again? It must be as that is totally off-topic.

Besides,
ALL HAIL THE DUOPOLY

is not the saying of a biased person. I would be scolding AMD as not being responsible as market leader.

BTW, you haven't gotten a new girlfriend for your avatar yet.

Well, everyone at Intel doesn't want commoditization to happen. They really can't gain much MSS at this point. If they do every trick in the book to get ahead, they can only capture ~15% more of the market before they have 100%. AMD has a much larger potential to grab and would be pleased with 50% less profits for 200% more revenue  . Of course...right now, they have negative profits...so maybe not