Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Subsidies for Jobs

Last response: in CPUs
Share
December 7, 2007 10:58:10 AM

Since its acquisition of ATI, AMD has developed into a platform vendor. In addition to CPUs, the company also offers chipsets and graphics processors. Phenom, the company's first quad-core CPU for the desktop segment, was finally released after many delays only recently.

http://www.tomshardware.com/2007/12/07/subsidies_for_jobs/

More about : subsidies jobs

December 7, 2007 12:01:11 PM

I really have no idea what that was about.
December 7, 2007 12:08:07 PM

Hmm I don't see they mention anything about the title!
Related resources
December 7, 2007 12:22:56 PM

I finally agree with BM :>

I'm not sure what that whole article was about :>
December 7, 2007 12:38:25 PM

Lead story on Tom's home page. Saxony gov't in Germany gave AMD 262 million euros to help preserve the jobs in their fab there. It's a boring interview, to boot...
December 7, 2007 12:43:43 PM

I thought the title fit. They started by stating how Germany was subsidizing AMD to keep jobs in Germany. That begs the question, if Germany feels a need give AMD that much money to keep them in buisness, then is AMD doing worse than we think they are?
But I liked the fact that the interview wasn't just some emailed questions that got answered like they usually are. I thought it was an upfront interview that really revealed that AMD management felt they are where they expect to be. Polster seemed to be upfront and didn't use as much political speech as you usually get.
December 7, 2007 12:55:06 PM

Since Dr. Tom left, Tom's Hardware has become a shill for AMD. First there was the very misleading article on the Phenom launch with bogus benchmarks and then the "Paper Tiger" article on Intel's chips, claiming that they were incompatilbe with existing motherboards. I'm not a fanboy of either company (they both overprice their chips), but this is getting out of hand.
December 7, 2007 1:05:54 PM

I think they just flubbed on the title. I think the fact that Germany gave them 262M shows you that AMD might get help when they need it. Just like some of the airlines after 911. The US gov gave them some cash. Im sure it would hurt the world economy if AMD went under, so if they fall further, maybe more help will come.

I just hope they can put out some highend stuff sooner than later.
December 7, 2007 1:12:58 PM

The fact that Germany gave AMD any amount of money is not really relevent.

That is common place.

Governments (Usually State or Local in the US), frequently give companies money, directly or inderectly through tax breaks, to build/operate in their borders so as to generate indirect revenue.

This is not really a handout, since Germany most likely feels they will wind up with more money in their pocket than if AMD had decided to build their factory elsewhere, such as say Austria.
December 7, 2007 1:45:03 PM

This part was hilarious:

"To my knowledge, the competition [Intel] does not offer graphics chips."

Apparently, this guy is confused at who is #1 in sales for the graphics chip market.

"Yes, Phenom is very well received. We are continuing our strategy of being a little more affordable than the competition. With the Phenom CPU, we are offering products at a very attractive price."

I wonder if he gets dizzy from spinning so violently.
a b à CPUs
December 7, 2007 1:49:16 PM

zenmaster said:
The fact that Germany gave AMD any amount of money is not really relevent.

That is common place.

Governments (Usually State or Local in the US), frequently give companies money, directly or inderectly through tax breaks, to build/operate in their borders so as to generate indirect revenue.

This is not really a handout, since Germany most likely feels they will wind up with more money in their pocket than if AMD had decided to build their factory elsewhere, such as say Austria.


Ain't that the truth...AMD is just another name in a long list like the airlines, telephone, gas & electric companies, Hyundai, Samsung, General Motors, and now the banks to bail out all those dumb f**kers who took out interest only and subprime loans for their McMansions!

And, oh yeah, I agree, I don't get the point of that article either...
December 7, 2007 2:11:23 PM

wolverinero79 said:
This part was hilarious:

"Yes, Phenom is very well received. We are continuing our strategy of being a little more affordable than the competition. With the Phenom CPU, we are offering products at a very attractive price."

I wonder if he gets dizzy from spinning so violently.


I'm not sure if he's dizzy, but I really wonder what he might be smoking, or otherwise using. Phenom's been a hard sell, it doesn't perform decently, its more expensive then Intel's 6600 which is a faster chip, and its been recalled.

Who is it that's receiving it well? :pt1cable:  Anybody on these forums buy one?
December 7, 2007 2:46:15 PM

This article was just a PR move. It had no reason to be the lead article on this site. Slow news day I guess.
December 7, 2007 2:51:23 PM

I think the purpose was to dispell some of the misinformation about AMDs current situation. Some of the folks in the forum make up stuff and try to sell it as fact.

For example, im willing to be that AMD knows more about its own sales figures than Sailer does. (Sorry Sailer)
December 7, 2007 3:41:48 PM

rallyimprezive said:
For example, im willing to be that AMD knows more about its own sales figures than Sailer does. (Sorry Sailer)


I'm sure AMD knows that exact figures better than I do. But I know several computer outlets and their owners and they haven't sold a single one. They have sold many AM2 powered systems, but no Phenoms. I don't doubt that some have sold, just no great numbers of then. Besides, my reference to "well received" didn't have so much to do with the numbers as to the reaction to the errata bug and the fix that slows the chip down. And if you look at the AMD stock prices, the prices has been dropping steadily, rather than making gains that a good selling product would reflect.
December 7, 2007 4:06:28 PM

zenmaster said:
The fact that Germany gave AMD any amount of money is not really relevent.

That is common place.

Governments (Usually State or Local in the US), frequently give companies money, directly or inderectly through tax breaks, to build/operate in their borders so as to generate indirect revenue.

I find it hugely relevant that Germany gave AMD money as: 1) Germany is hypocritical as it is the first nation to whine to the WTO about unfair U.S. trade practices and to use lawsuits to gain advantage (MS, farm subsidies, aviation companies etc), and 2) it does beg the question of AMDs financial stability.

Quote:
This is not really a handout, since Germany most likely feels they will wind up with more money in their pocket than if AMD had decided to build their factory elsewhere, such as say Austria.

Of course it is a handout. Germany is a socialist country - handouts and central planning are the norm. Fine by me; in 10-15 years their economy is going to collapse under the weight of too few workers to support their welfare economy; but I guarantee that if South Carolina were to give the same deal to AMD or Intel: Germany would be leading the charge with lawsuits and denouncing the "unfair trade practices". Screw them.
December 7, 2007 4:14:09 PM

That was a joke of an interview... I loved how the guy answered the question about Phenom's performance. Maybe there is a language barrier that is preventing me from understanding exactly what is benig said in the first sentence or two.

------------

Toms's: Were you surprised by the performance figures of the new Phenom processor?

J. Polster: No. I was surprised by its mainstream performance. We offer a strong and solid platform, which we have been able to realize as a result of our acquisition of ATI. I will admit that we're currently not quite at the top in the high-end market.
December 7, 2007 4:34:06 PM

wolverinero79 said:
This part was hilarious:

"To my knowledge, the competition [Intel] does not offer graphics chips."

Apparently, this guy is confused at who is #1 in sales for the graphics chip market.


Yeah, cos we see a lot of intel chips on their own PCI-Express board outperforming ATI & Nvidia offerings... Oh, hang on a sec...

Integrated graphics was obviously not what he was talking about, but discrete graphics. True, Intel is starting up their own line as we speak, but it's not gonna be mature for a couple of years.

wolverinero79 said:
"Yes, Phenom is very well received. We are continuing our strategy of being a little more affordable than the competition. With the Phenom CPU, we are offering products at a very attractive price."

I wonder if he gets dizzy from spinning so violently.


Well, if you disregard the bit about being well received (lets be honest, no one can really recommend a phenom at the moment with all the issues they're having) ... AMD themselves are offering their products to retailers at very attractive prices which would make them slightly (fractions of %) better price/performance than Intel's offerings (If the chips didn't have the errata issues...) It's just that retailers are putting their own markup on the chips (as they should) which then make it so they don't quite fit in the price/performance scale ^^
December 7, 2007 5:33:26 PM

Hey guys wait a min, we all need to support AMD at this point. I remember the days of Cyrix vs intel and there chip monopoly. Good old 386-486 days and I dont want to be in that position again. I still remember the close to a grand price of the P60 'with a bug" that I needed to play quake and haveing 4 children there was no way, so I played with the turtle icon on the screen "Remember?" most likely you dont. Thank God AMD released the K5 chip that had a performance rating of p90 !!! yes for under $ 200.00 and I have been buying AMD ever since. As a system builder I have build thousand of AMD system, I got a bit upset with AMD a few years ago cause there 64 64x2 chips where priced a bit to high and it started to remind me of the good old Intel monopoly days.
I will always buy AMD cpu's and never want to see Intel monopoly again and neither do you! The way it looks these days is that intel is giving you the performance almost free just to hurt AMD and there doing a good job dont you think?
a c 172 à CPUs
December 7, 2007 5:36:15 PM

"Toms's: Were you surprised by the performance figures of the new Phenom processor?

J. Polster: No. I was surprised by its mainstream performance. We offer a strong and solid platform, which we have been able to realize as a result of our acquisition of ATI. I will admit that we're currently not quite at the top in the high-end market."

Translation: "It's a two horse race, and we're 'not quite' winning."

"Toms's: Why are the new CPUs shipping at such comparatively low clock speeds?

J. Polster: As I said before, that is directly related to the market segments we are addressing. The mainstream segment is where the bulk of the quad-core CPUs are sold. There, we are ideally positioned with the Phenom models currently in the market. Of course we will still be releasing versions of the Phenom running at higher clock speeds."

Translation: " The mainstream market segment will be just as happy with our cheap, slow processors as it will with our competitor's cheap, fast procesors. And we hope to release faster Phenom CPU's before our competitor gets too far ahead."
December 7, 2007 5:39:11 PM

Guy Ferrante said:
Hey guys wait a min, we all need to support AMD at this point. I remember the days of Cyrix vs intel and there chip monopoly. Good old 386-486 days and I dont want to be in that position again. I still remember the close to a grand price of the P60 'with a bug" that I needed to play quake and haveing 4 children there was no way, so I played with the turtle icon on the screen "Remember?" most likely you dont. Thank God AMD released the K5 chip that had a performance rating of p90 !!! yes for under $ 200.00 and I have been buying AMD ever since. As a system builder I have build thousand of AMD system, I got a bit upset with AMD a few years ago cause there 64 64x2 chips where priced a bit to high and it started to remind me of the good old Intel monopoly days.
I will always buy AMD cpu's and never want to see Intel monopoly again and neither do you! The way it looks these days is that intel is giving you the performance almost free just to hurt AMD and there doing a good job dont you think?


So, your upset because Intel's performance is at a price point where AMD's was back in the day? Or are you upset because AMD is not as competitive as it once was?

To hurt AMD? Who started the pricing war? Not Intel. Who made claims about upcoming processors vs. the competition? Not Intel. Who delayed product launches? Not Intel. So, who is hurting who?
December 7, 2007 6:07:32 PM

To say that the Phemon can't be recommended because of all teh problems ti is having is rediculous. The bug ony effects certain applications. If they can still be sold to IMB for a super computer because it won't be doing virtualization, i think the average home uer has no worries with using the chip. The only reason to not recommend it would be a price/performance issue or because you are for the intel camp. Personally i woudl recommend it to someone looking for a quad core simply because i know it's platform has a future that will last a long time. Right now it doens't look as good for intel with the x38 and x48 coming out so close together and what appears to be a support drop with the forced fsb1600. Right now you can get a bord for AMD that will be compatable with everything that they produce for the next few years. You can't say the same for intel... currently (they could change things with the chipsets to chaneg this).

As for being an AMD shill: do you know how far back you have to go to find out any information on boards for AMD lines before phenom? Summer of 06. After that point there is nothing but intel, intel intel. And there are also veryfew AMD CPU reviews. if anything this site is now bias towards intel.
December 7, 2007 6:10:36 PM

NMDante said:
So, your upset because Intel's performance is at a price point where AMD's was back in the day? Or are you upset because AMD is not as competitive as it once was?

To hurt AMD? Who started the pricing war? Not Intel. Who made claims about upcoming processors vs. the competition? Not Intel. Who delayed product launches? Not Intel. So, who is hurting who?


Like Guy Ferrante, I remember the days of the 386-486 when Intel ruled, and also some of the dirty tricks that Intel did. That was what pushed me over to AMD. Unlike Guy, I'm realistic and when I see Intel cleaning up its act and AMD becoming the lying, delaying, whiner, I say enough is enough, its time for an Intel chip in my computer.

You're correct, AMD has only been hurting itself for the past year and a half, what with AM2 not providing a good performance increase over 939, QFX being presented as the answer to C2D (it wasn't), and now the Barcelona/Phenom disaster. Can AMD simply admit its defeat and fall on its sword with honor, or will it stay in its fairytail lane where no one believes what it says?

Actually, I don't mind that it tried and failed so much as the continued rose-colered glasses lying. If some AMD exec would simply stand up and say "We tried a new design and it didn't work. Have patience while we go back to the drawing board and try again", then I would admire their honesty and be patient.
December 7, 2007 6:23:27 PM

ThePooBurner said:
To say that the Phemon can't be recommended because of all teh problems ti is having is rediculous. The bug ony effects certain applications. If they can still be sold to IMB for a super computer because it won't be doing virtualization, i think the average home uer has no worries with using the chip. The only reason to not recommend it would be a price/performance issue or because you are for the intel camp. Personally i woudl recommend it to someone looking for a quad core simply because i know it's platform has a future that will last a long time. Right now it doens't look as good for intel with the x38 and x48 coming out so close together and what appears to be a support drop with the forced fsb1600. Right now you can get a bord for AMD that will be compatable with everything that they produce for the next few years. You can't say the same for intel... currently (they could change things with the chipsets to chaneg this).

As for being an AMD shill: do you know how far back you have to go to find out any information on boards for AMD lines before phenom? Summer of 06. After that point there is nothing but intel, intel intel. And there are also veryfew AMD CPU reviews. if anything this site is now bias towards intel.


AMD is the one who stopped selling their own chips.

Anyone who thinks Phenom is still a good chip to buy when they are in the Midst of a Recall, has a form of logic which is beyond me. :pt1cable: 

AMD "says" it's a minor issue that only happens in rare circumstances.
However, their actions say otherwise.

1) Even on Release Day, they would not give processors to reviewers.

2) The days leading up to release, they invited reviewers to come test under their controlled conditions and would not let anyone run tests on OC'd CPUs. The one System you could OC, you were not allowed to run software on.

3) AMD knowingly gave reviewers significantly different CPUs than what was released into the wild. The "ES" samples used just a couple days before actual launch had a NB 10% faster than the chips they had already released to resellers. This was nothing short of a SHAM which AMD was caught in.

4) AMD has issued a Cease and Desist order on shipping new processors except in very limited cases and even those folks are getting them very cheap. These are most likely done to avoid lawsuits based upon contractual obligations and the purchases is getting a steal since AMD needs to cut them such a break due to all of the problems.

5) Almost everyone looking to buy an AMD system on this site has posts asking about X2 systems, not Phenom. If these people want AMD, why do they not want Phenom?

6) Why did AMD reverse course and announce new X2 processors after saying multiple times in the past they were not going to release new X2 processors. Now they are planning on releasing many many more. There were Dual-Core Phenoms scheduled, so that is where AMD would go if they could easily. This shows even more that AMD realizes the problems. Marketing just cant come out and say it directly.
December 7, 2007 6:29:49 PM

Quote:
To hurt AMD? Who started the pricing war? Not Intel. Who made claims about upcoming processors vs. the competition? Not Intel. Who delayed product launches? Not Intel. So, who is hurting who?

Intel started the "price war," but AMD is to blame for allowing that to happen.

This was not a situation of two very similar products. Intel released a product something like 80% faster than their previous generation but did not change the pricing model (mainstream at $200-300). It's slippery trying to blame them for that. But it did cause AMD's prices to drop sharply in reaction to the suddenly new market.
December 7, 2007 6:40:07 PM

without amd, we would be spending like 2-3 thousand dollars on a CPU that would otherwise cost 300-400
December 7, 2007 6:42:46 PM

In today's world, you are never going to get a straight answer from an officer of a company that is struggling. All executives do is spin things to positives in order to keep investors from freaking out.

A real sense of things would have to come from an employee who does not speak in BS.

AKA the Mac vs PC commercial where PC has the public address chick.
December 7, 2007 6:47:36 PM


Intel processors have never cost thousands of dollars!!!!

Microsoft is the only real PC OS maker. Do they charge $2000 for Windows?

Get real. Demand more than anything drives prices.
December 7, 2007 7:01:43 PM

BSMonitor said:
Intel processors have never cost thousands of dollars!!!!

Microsoft is the only real PC OS maker. Do they charge $2000 for Windows?

Get real. Demand more than anything drives prices.


They just charge $ 400.00 Vista ultimate and its outrageous!
December 7, 2007 7:08:36 PM

BSMonitor said:

Microsoft is the only real PC OS maker. Do they charge $2000 for Windows?


No, but they do charge quite a bit for the OS that runs worse than most versions of linux i've seen.
Then you take that and add on microsoft office, required for pretty much anyone.

There, you have a good $500-700 bill (depending of versions and pricing, etc).
Then add on the fact that you can only use that piece of software once.
I can make two simple or one midrange computer with that.

As far as AMD and Intel go, yes, AMD is doing pretty bad, and truthfully, their processors just suck. Intel has cleaned up it's act from the old days and is using its resources and carrying a big stick.
However. AMD must survive, for all of our sakes.
Whether they will or not is up to them. They beat Intel before; they reset the precedent. Now they have to do it again.

a b à CPUs
December 7, 2007 7:44:23 PM

Total BS
December 7, 2007 7:48:05 PM

I dont think Mister Polster was introduced very well. Is he the lunch boy for the AMD office girls, or does he hold a better position than that?

I dont read every interview, and I dont keep track of major companies payrolls, so not only was it a vague interview with little information, it means less to me now that some Mister Polster said it.

Sorry, Mister Jochen Polster, MD/GM, AMD Germany. Frank was a bit tired when writing this, methinks.
December 7, 2007 8:34:27 PM

Isn't he the new AMD CEO?

I think the questions asked by TGH was a little....pro-AMD.
a c 127 à CPUs
December 7, 2007 8:42:51 PM

Ok just to clear it up a bit for what was off topic, I am sick and tired of the people who cannot go to www.newegg.com and see that you can get Vista Ultimate for 169.99. Its is the OEM version but is exactally the same as retail minus the shiny box. Same features, smaller box less price.

Now that that is out of the way, This article is a joke really. It almost looks controlled like one of the past few AMD articles. I like the honesty but they never ask some of the important questions like how is it being well recieved if it has been recalled(including Barcy)? A Phenom 9600 runs either the same or higher price as a Q6600 and underperforms in both app performance and in terms of efficiency. And we have to go with the lewst retail price as regular people will have to pay retail prices not 1ku prices.

I myself prefer Intel but if a client asked me now what to get I would never recommend Phenom. Since they use more power, perform less and don't provide any OC'ing compared to a C2D/Q/A64X2. Its great to have a posotive attitude but why buy a inferior product when one thats a year old still beats it?

I just feel sad about those who bought any B2 Phenoms as their performance will never improve compared to a Q6600 or maybe(yes maybe) a B3 Phenom.
December 7, 2007 8:52:15 PM

Evilonigiri said:
Isn't he the new AMD CEO?

I think the questions asked by TGH was a little....pro-AMD.


A little pro-AMD? :lol:  :lol: 

The reviewer set up simple questions that were more in the way of letting the AMD guy pass on some BS and there was no challenge what-so-ever to his statements. The reviewer sometimes asked a question and got an answer that was completely off base, such as:

Tom's: "Why are the new cpus shipping at comparatively low clock speeds?"

J. Polster: "As I said before, that is directly related to the market segments we are addressing".

This guy sounds like a politician, answering a question but not addressing the substance of the question itself. What does the market segment have to do with the Phenom being slow? And of course, the Tom's guy didn't persue his question but let it ride. This review came across to me as little more than a paid advertisement.
December 7, 2007 9:55:00 PM

OMF Why is he such a liar? Q. Why are you clock speeds so low?
A. PHAT LI3Z, for **** sake tell them you **** up not 'we are selling to a certain segment. PUT OUT THE GOOD CHIP TO PROVE YOUR CHIPS DONT SUCK ****, oh wait you **** up, i am so pissed off with this company. Liars. Get yor **** together so i dont look like a tit buying your stuff.

:breathes:

Bloody hell what a scum ball, dont tell them you messed up, just keep them from getting any useful info. If amd dies then so does our hope of any good chips and we will be back to buying intel only. AMd better not become the next cyrix.

FIX PHENOM AND GET BARCELONA WORKING. Morons.
December 7, 2007 10:14:43 PM

Phenom is NOT in the midst of a recall. Give it a rest. I have to give them the benefit of the doubt. 433M transistors, something may go wrong. The cash crunch just amplified it and allowed the Brood to come out in force.

DOOM AND GLOOM, DOOM AND GLOOM.


I remember saying that the world will not let AMD go out of business. They'll get this all straightened out and then you can all find something else to complain about.
December 7, 2007 10:16:48 PM

Including the Abu Dhabi stock purchase, that's a cool BILLION to feed the coffers. That makes up 66% of 2007s losses.
December 7, 2007 10:26:01 PM

BaronMatrix said:
Phenom is NOT in the midst of a recall.


True that. Can't recall what you haven't shipped...


BaronMatrix said:
I remember saying that the world will not let AMD go out of business. They'll get this all straightened out and then you can all find something else to complain about.


True too. But it'll take years to recover, if even possible, and not be relegated back to permanent second place, which would be kind of sad...
December 7, 2007 10:27:42 PM

BaronMatrix said:
Including the Abu Dhabi stock purchase, that's a cool BILLION to feed the coffers. That makes up 66% of 2007s losses to date.


fixed it for ya... :D 
December 7, 2007 10:38:34 PM

Baron, I don't mean to sound DOOM AND GLOOM.

After all, many years ago I bought my first AMD chip, a 1700+. That was upgraded to a 2000+, then a 2700+ and a 3200+. After that I moved to a A64 3500. From there I changed platforms again and went to a X2 4400+ and later a FX-60. Through the past many years I have bought one Intel powered machine, which I got on sale and use in the office only.

After years of upgrades to higher performing chips and platforms, I was treated to an uninspiring AM2 platform, which only recently got any decent performance chips, the 5000+ BE and the 6400+ BE. The QFX had a big build up and a sudden high temperature failure. As I remember, you had looked forward to that design in similar manner as I, and when it didn't meet expectations, neither of us bought.

Now the Phenom has appeared. AMD has been playing this up for a year, telling us how great it would perform, up to 40% faster as we were told last year. From the reviews so far, it seems slower than my old FX-60, possibly slower than my X2 4400+. Now shipments are stopped and recalls seem to be underway. I can think of no other way to say it, but that I'm disappointed. All that the AMD guy says is that later, sometime in the future, Phenom will come out at faster clock speeds and perform well.

At this point, I don't know if I'd believe an AMD exec if he said the sky was blue without going outside to verify it myself. I've heard their lines, sometimes seeming as outright lies, too many times to believe them. They are like the boy who cried wolf. The time may come when AMD does ship a good chip that performs well, but if it happens, will anybody believe them? No, I don't want to sound DOOM and GLOOM. What I want to sound is disappointed.
December 7, 2007 11:41:58 PM

azfj60 said:

True too. But it'll take years to recover, if even possible, and not be relegated back to permanent second place, which would be kind of sad...


It won't take years; all they need is a killer product at a decent price.
It'll take years if they make a decent/average/mediocre product and sell it cheap as dirt.

kinda like now.
December 7, 2007 11:51:05 PM

WR said:
Quote:
To hurt AMD? Who started the pricing war? Not Intel. Who made claims about upcoming processors vs. the competition? Not Intel. Who delayed product launches? Not Intel. So, who is hurting who?

Intel started the "price war," but AMD is to blame for allowing that to happen.

This was not a situation of two very similar products. Intel released a product something like 80% faster than their previous generation but did not change the pricing model (mainstream at $200-300). It's slippery trying to blame them for that. But it did cause AMD's prices to drop sharply in reaction to the suddenly new market.


What you're forgetting is that, by the time Core 2 was launched, Intel had been running 65nm process for over a year, and it had matured where they were getting better yields per wafer, which equals less cost to make.
It's not like they just started pushing Core 2 out of the blue, on a new process. They had made Pentium D and Pentium 4 on 65nm before Core 2, so the learning curve when Core 2 was introduced to the manufacturing line, was minimal or not even there.

Yes, the product was faster than previous generation, but it also cost less to make than the previous generation. People seem to want to forget that. So, Intel passed that cost savings to the consumer. I suppose you would've been happier if they tried to sell the Core 2 line for $600 or more?
December 7, 2007 11:54:30 PM

jimmysmitty said:
Ok just to clear it up a bit for what was off topic, I am sick and tired of the people who cannot go to www.newegg.com and see that you can get Vista Ultimate for 169.99. Its is the OEM version but is exactally the same as retail minus the shiny box. Same features, smaller box less price.

Now that that is out of the way, This article is a joke really. It almost looks controlled like one of the past few AMD articles. I like the honesty but they never ask some of the important questions like how is it being well recieved if it has been recalled(including Barcy)? A Phenom 9600 runs either the same or higher price as a Q6600 and underperforms in both app performance and in terms of efficiency. And we have to go with the lewst retail price as regular people will have to pay retail prices not 1ku prices.

I myself prefer Intel but if a client asked me now what to get I would never recommend Phenom. Since they use more power, perform less and don't provide any OC'ing compared to a C2D/Q/A64X2. Its great to have a posotive attitude but why buy a inferior product when one thats a year old still beats it?

I just feel sad about those who bought any B2 Phenoms as their performance will never improve compared to a Q6600 or maybe(yes maybe) a B3 Phenom.



Guy's like us just about live at newegg cause we are system builders but that has nothing to do with retail Vista.
People buy from Wallmart/Best buy's and Vista's price is outrageous.

Like Tom's interview and comments, that Phenom is a good cpu with good performance.
While we all my have issues with both AMD and Intel Lets not Kick AMD while there down, we have never seen AMD in this condition before, but AMD is a big company and will have to roll with the punches till there back on track . This bug is not a catastrophic failure but just a setback. Let's wait and see the new Phenom cores with higher clock speed due in the next few months.

December 8, 2007 12:02:59 AM

frozenlead said:
It won't take years; all they need is a killer product at a decent price.
It'll take years if they make a decent/average/mediocre product and sell it cheap as dirt.

kinda like now.


Agree, It took intel just one core to bounce back and before conroe intel was not in great shape.
AMD can bounce back just as fast.
a c 127 à CPUs
December 8, 2007 12:12:57 AM

BaronMatrix said:
Phenom is NOT in the midst of a recall. Give it a rest. I have to give them the benefit of the doubt. 433M transistors, something may go wrong. The cash crunch just amplified it and allowed the Brood to come out in force.


One question here. So far Intel has not had any problems with 400+million transistors(582million for Kentsfeild). They moved to 45nm and have the QX9650(which has 820 million) and still nothing like what AMD is dealing with. Now the QX9650 has had a bit longer to produce. Phenom, it also had 1 more year than the Kentsfeild, still has problems.

December 8, 2007 3:57:06 AM

frozenlead said:
It won't take years; all they need is a killer product at a decent price.
It'll take years if they make a decent/average/mediocre product and sell it cheap as dirt.

kinda like now.


Then they better already have it designed, and in prototyping. Design to delivery cycles are measured in years, not months...
December 8, 2007 6:35:01 AM

Here is a link that summarizes the situation at AMD and is not so rosy. :non: 

I personally think this site generally has a slight Intel tilt (example: The Truth About PC Power Consumption and AMD's Smart Strike: Athlon X2 BE-2350; maybe is because I am a AMD fanboy. :kaola: ). Occasionally, there is a few well deserved word for AMD but not may not be one of them.

Anyone who thinks AMD is not keep Intel's price down are just kidding themselves.
Quote:
The key figure: gross margins. Investors are looking for Intel's booming notebook processor business to help it report gross margins of 53.4% or better, up from a disappointing 46.9% during its previous quarter. In the past, Intel has clocked gross margins as high as 62%. That slimming came courtesy of competition from AMD. An improvement in Intel’s gross margin will signal that Intel is continuing to regain the high ground in its fight with its smaller rival.

From Forbes.com: Intel's Margin Of Safety


As for the price war, it really takes more than 1 party to sustain it and it basically boils down to Intel just doesn't want a strong AMD that can pose a threat to it. Intel clearly got the performance upper hand but is cutting deep into its margins to compete on the only thing AMD currently can compete on and that is price. What other choice does AMD have but continue the fight while trying to get new products out to compete on other fronts?

No, Intel doesn't have to pass on its savings on the the consumers especially when their margins is nowhere near what they used to enjoy!

Then again, price wars means lower prices for everyone so everyone (besides AMD and Intel) should just be happy about it! :pt1cable: 

Intel is certainly on top of its game, as of late, but I haven't seen Intel act so swiftly and so aggressive for the past 10 years or so (not that I keep track of it too well). I would like to think AMD pays no small in "wakening the sleeping gaint" and it'll be a tough period ahead for AMD. :sweat: 
December 8, 2007 12:33:29 PM

AMD is such a gigantic manufacturer.
Its investment certainly gives a lot of job opportunity.
With such an important economic partner, it is reasonable for the government to give a good investment environment for AMD.
But still, giving subsidies maybe an act going too far...
December 8, 2007 1:22:11 PM

This interview was a setup, with the author thowing softballs. Even with that, the answers were evasive.
As for what happened in the past, that was before AMD embarrassed Intel with the K8, which was so much superior to their best. I have never seen Intel so focused as they are now. They are leveraging their vastly superior financial position to fund parallel development teams to simultaneously develop generations of processors. They have dropped HUGE money - even for them - on new fabs. They are increasing their lead in fabrication technology. This isn't the Intel that I knew. They used to be satisfied to milk processors for as long as they could before developing new ones. They are really out to stomp AMD.
!