Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question
Closed

AMD@$4.15, So when is the Q9550 pricedrop to finally kill them off?

Tags:
  • CPUs
  • AMD
  • Intel
Last response: in CPUs
Share
July 29, 2008 4:05:06 PM

Yeah, nothing like a nice flamestarter of a thread title... :lol: 

But seriously, AMD is totally toast, so when is Intel going to drop the prices on the current Yorkfields to take them out of their misery? It was supposed to be the last week of July, and we're just a couple of days from August. Any news?

BTW, anyone who wants to change my mind and tell me that AMD is going to pull out of the slump and become a true competitor again, save your breath. I have just one word: Horsecrap! Do you have to wait to go to the funeral home before you're sure a guy's dead? Doesn't absence of life signs have anything to do with it? AMD is dead man walking. Deal with it.

I'm wearing my asbestos underwear so if you have to flame, I won't be singed. :pt1cable: 

Edit: $4.11 and dropping. $3s anyone? This is like watching a plane crash in slow motion...

More about : amd q9550 pricedrop finally kill

July 29, 2008 4:16:28 PM

nkal83... and so... what? Wall Street has welcomed the news, hasn't it? I've never seen a hardier bunch of enthusiasts than for AMD. I have to admit, you have my respect for your completely unquestioned allegiance, but there comes a point where you have to look at reality. Intel now makes more money in a couple of weeks than AMD is worth altogether. Isn't it time to take off the blinders?
July 29, 2008 4:29:09 PM

antonmadcow said:
nkal83... and so... what? Wall Street has welcomed the news, hasn't it? I've never seen a hardier bunch of enthusiasts than for AMD. I have to admit, you have my respect for your completely unquestioned allegiance, but there comes a point where you have to look at reality. Intel now makes more money in a couple of weeks than AMD is worth altogether. Isn't it time to take off the blinders?



amd wont go down soon they have a good hold on the graphic card market. now they have that opteron.

i dont know why you sound so happy about this if amd goes down your intel processors will be insanely expensive
July 29, 2008 4:38:29 PM

I'm not happy about AMD's death at all. It could open up a huge can of antitrust whoopa$$ for Intel and that could equal problems for all PC users. What I can't understand is how Wall St. keeps punishing AMD, bringing it down to below $2.5 bil market cap, and all AMD guys can say is "look... we actually sold a few thousand videocards!" Big freakin' deal. The bottom line is that AMD-ATI is now worth almost a third of just what it paid for ATI! This is an a$$kicking of historical proportions. The Wall St. group knows what business is and what you have to do to stay in business. And they are telling us loud and clear that AMD does not have it!
July 29, 2008 4:43:00 PM

cal8949 said:
amd wont go down soon they have a good hold on the graphic card market. now they have that opteron.

i dont know why you sound so happy about this if amd goes down your intel processors will be insanely expensive


It won't ever go down - no matter what - because Intel can't afford to let it happen. Don't worry about that. In the "worst" scenario someone would buy it and Intel would have to lend the "new" company a x86 licence in order to avoid a major antitrust case.

It's amusing that people still consider the possibility of a "non-AMD world".
a b à CPUs
a b À AMD
a b å Intel
July 29, 2008 4:46:05 PM

Yeah, let see this "cow" guy cheer when the price of the Q9450 suddenly goes to $2499...

Personally, I wouldn't mind, actually. My Intel shares would go up a lot without these price wars and without competition, and my Q6600 will last a while anyway.
a b à CPUs
July 29, 2008 4:55:50 PM

What is the point of this thread, really?

Flamebait from a troll...

Just remember to buy low and sell high...and AMD is about as low as they're gonna get!
July 29, 2008 4:55:50 PM

Yeah, so, i run intel and nvidia in my system but i can't figure out what makes this guy think amd is going under. So, there chips are not as fast....that's fine, they are cheaper, so they are used in bulk orders for corporate businesses where pricing is the main issue, not performance. On top of that, they just bought out ATI....of course their stock is going to be devalued.....my suggestion would be to wait about 4 months, then put alot of money in AMD stock.....
July 29, 2008 5:13:18 PM

I agree that AMD is not going under because Intel will not allow it, but I can see why people think they are. Something to do with 7 straight q's of negative growth.

Quote:
On top of that, they just bought out ATI....of course their stock is going to be devalued.....my suggestion would be to wait about 4 months, then put alot of money in AMD stock.....


The ATI merger is not what has caused their stock devalue like it has. It affected it for a short time, but it is this low now because they cannot seem to execute (expect for the 4xxx series which is doing quite well).

AMD is not going anywhere, someone will bail them out.
a c 127 à CPUs
a b À AMD
July 29, 2008 5:20:57 PM



Its good news. Any news that goes to Wallstreet is blown out of proportion either good or bad to change the stock.

cal8949 said:
amd wont go down soon they have a good hold on the graphic card market. now they have that opteron.

i dont know why you sound so happy about this if amd goes down your intel processors will be insanely expensive


The graphic market wont save AMDs CPU market. They need to get their buts in gear and start working hard to get better CPUs.

chunkymonster said:
What is the point of this thread, really?

Flamebait from a troll...

Just remember to buy low and sell high...and AMD is about as low as they're gonna get!


Thats what they said at $7 dollars.........

I see this thread as informative. Of course the OP could have not put the AMD dying stuff in but its not far from reality. AMD has lost a lot of money, they are worth way less than they were 2 years ago and their stok has dropped dramatically.

Of course I am waiting for AMD supporters to bust in and turn it into a flame war instead of talking about the important topic of what AMD is doing and what they can do better.
a b à CPUs
a b À AMD
a b å Intel
July 29, 2008 5:29:59 PM

From the reviews I've read, AMD is already doing the right things. For example Anandtech has a review (or rather "preview") of new motherboards with SB750 which make the Phenom overclock very nicely.

However, if Nehalem is as good as reviews show it, AMD will still have a big problem competing on the CPU front.

July 29, 2008 5:55:30 PM

I'm just curious how AMD dropped the ball so bad... K8 was better than the NetBurst P4s it was being put up against... all the way through the Pentium 900 series. Did AMD just think their architecture would hold up forever? The moment they had the lead in performance they should have been thinking "Crap, we just woke the sleeping giant... gotta work extra hard now." and it seems like all they did was just attempt to sell the same processors with a new name, a new socket and slightly faster clocks. So while Intel was transitioning from NetBurst to C2D, AMD said hey "let's switch to AM2, cut the cache, clock 'em a little faster and just hope to ride the wave." Ugh... after years of waiting all they give us is Phenom?
July 29, 2008 6:16:18 PM

There was one basic problem with AMD in the past couple of years: Dr. Hector Ruiz. He took the goose that laid the golden eggs and shot it in the butt through incompetence and negligence that makes Ken Lay look like a model of executive accountability. Why the #$%& is it trolling to take off the rose (or green) colored glasses off and call it as it is. AMD @ $4.11. Dispute that. I remember reading way back when the AMD guys were saying that $25 was the absolute floor. Then $15. Then $10. Lately $5. The AMD blind followers were all wrong then and they're all wrong now. AMD has no future. Intel is not going to bail them out.

However, there is a very specific point to this thread: When is the Q9550 price drop and Q9400/Q9650 intro happening???
a b à CPUs
July 29, 2008 6:23:12 PM

I think AMD actually does have a future. The new SB750 has potential, and now that Hector is gone, they have some chance. It won't be great for a while, but I don't see them as gone either, especially if their 45nm process is halfway decent (it doesn't even have to speed stuff up much, as long as it improves yields).
July 29, 2008 6:26:06 PM

cjl, with all due respect and please don't take any offense but...

Even if Dirk was Superman and he isn't, IMHO the battle was lost by the end of last year. Everything that has happened since has just been death throes.
a b à CPUs
July 29, 2008 6:26:52 PM

rodney_ws said:
I'm just curious how AMD dropped the ball so bad... K8 was better than the NetBurst P4s it was being put up against... all the way through the Pentium 900 series. Did AMD just think their architecture would hold up forever? The moment they had the lead in performance they should have been thinking "Crap, we just woke the sleeping giant... gotta work extra hard now." and it seems like all they did was just attempt to sell the same processors with a new name, a new socket and slightly faster clocks. So while Intel was transitioning from NetBurst to C2D, AMD said hey "let's switch to AM2, cut the cache, clock 'em a little faster and just hope to ride the wave." Ugh... after years of waiting all they give us is Phenom?


Day 1 of Economics 101: When a product is in its final testing phase, its replacement is comming off the design board.

AMD dropped the ball, and did so badly. Taking on ATI's debt didn't help out either, and barring a combined CPU/GPU architecture, I fail to see how the ATI aquisition helped AMD.

Still, they have done enough (4800's and Phenom) to stop the bleeding. But we know Nehalm is coming out, and NVIDIA seems to have a surprise for later this year...ball's in their court for now.
July 29, 2008 6:27:02 PM

I find the people funny that love to choose the winning side and bash the losing competitor! OOOooohh AMD is at 4.15 big deal! Everything you have spouted from your mouth has made you sound like an ass!

We dont need people like you trolling these forum's and starting these thread's,dont you have something else better to do?

Highschooler's man :pfff: 
July 29, 2008 6:27:52 PM

aevm said:
From the reviews I've read, AMD is already doing the right things. For example Anandtech has a review (or rather "preview") of new motherboards with SB750 which make the Phenom overclock very nicely.

However, if Nehalem is as good as reviews show it, AMD will still have a big problem competing on the CPU front.


While their new chipset has shown good results for enthusiasts, and their graphics cards are doing well, how much can those two items really keep AMD afloat? They are still bleeding cash, and unless they find a way to stop the flow, they will run out of cash by the end of the year, or even Q3, as some have theorized.

They cannot afford to get more loans, and the loans, they already have, are due in 2010, I believe. Unless they think they can sell their graphics cards and chipsets at CPU prices, they will be struggling.

On a side note, if Jobs bought AMD (hypothetically) he couldn't continue to make x86 CPUs, without negotiating with Intel for an x86 license. So, Jobs would have a couple of fabs just sitting around, not making anything, until the license is given.
Also, Intel might not be able to afford to have AMD go bust, but they cannot give AMD money. It's a business, and right now, AMD is hurting. If AMD goes bust, it's AMD's fault. Like rodney_ws mentioned, what did AMD do during the K8 heyday, when they turned a profit?
a b à CPUs
July 29, 2008 6:29:55 PM

antonmadcow said:
cjl, with all due respect and please don't take any offense but...

Even if Dirk was Superman and he isn't, IMHO the battle was lost by the end of last year. Everything that has happened since has just been death throes.

Really?

Did you not pay any attention to the graphics market recently? Even if you ignore the revenue that AMD is making from the HD4k series, it demonstrates one point extremely clearly. A company can easily go from a miserable failure (HD2900) to a reasonable success (HD3800) to the best value on the market (HD4800) in a fairly short period of time. AMD has been behind before, and they didn't die off then. What makes you so positive that they will die off now?
July 29, 2008 6:33:01 PM

Dude, a few thousand videocards don't change anything as they are statistically insignificant. Unfortunately (and I say unfortunately since AMD's death would be a severe blow in the pocketbook to all computer users) my backup is the thousands of experts on Wall St. and your backup is thunderman. :) 

(Just kidding... don't get mad) :) 
July 29, 2008 6:36:03 PM

AMD originally banked on parallel processing after K8. They realized too late that that wasn't actually where the market was going, and frantically put the K10 together. That's a very over simplified version of what I've heard.

AMD isn't going anywhere. They're in bad shape, yes, but filing bankruptcy doesn't mean the company's done making products. The company I work for just recently came back out of bankruptcy. You just work through it.

Will AMD catch back up? Who knows... everyone can speculate until their dead. We just have to wait, watch and see.
July 29, 2008 6:40:01 PM

The fact that AMD has been behind before and survived, is not in question. The point is, when AMD was behind before, did they carry the debt load they have now? Unless AMD has a sudden surge of cash, and not from another loan, their outlook does not look very good. Can GPUs revenue support AMD's operating costs?
a b à CPUs
a b À AMD
a b å Intel
July 29, 2008 6:42:37 PM

NMDante said:

Also, Intel might not be able to afford to have AMD go bust, but they cannot give AMD money. It's a business, and right now, AMD is hurting. If AMD goes bust, it's AMD's fault. Like rodney_ws mentioned, what did AMD do during the K8 heyday, when they turned a profit?


I don't understand, why can't Intel just let AMD go bust? Wouldn't that be the greatest thing ever for Intel? Would the US government force Intel to split into pieces and compete against itself? When they did that to AT&T decades ago, the newly created Baby Bells turned out to be a fantastic investment, and AT&T shareholders made lots of money.

Also, why can't Intel give AMD money? I remember Microsoft giving Corel and Apple lots of money when they were in serious danger. I think they made their money back 20 times or so with the Apple investment.
a c 124 à CPUs
a b À AMD
July 29, 2008 6:45:06 PM

NMDante said:
While their new chipset has shown good results for enthusiasts, and their graphics cards are doing well, how much can those two items really keep AMD afloat? They are still bleeding cash, and unless they find a way to stop the flow, they will run out of cash by the end of the year, or even Q3, as some have theorized.

They cannot afford to get more loans, and the loans, they already have, are due in 2010, I believe. Unless they think they can sell their graphics cards and chipsets at CPU prices, they will be struggling.

On a side note, if Jobs bought AMD (hypothetically) he couldn't continue to make x86 CPUs, without negotiating with Intel for an x86 license. So, Jobs would have a couple of fabs just sitting around, not making anything, until the license is given.
Also, Intel might not be able to afford to have AMD go bust, but they cannot give AMD money. It's a business, and right now, AMD is hurting. If AMD goes bust, it's AMD's fault. Like rodney_ws mentioned, what did AMD do during the K8 heyday, when they turned a profit?


Pure FUD.

AMD's cash position has barely budged over the last year. Their operating loss has been reduced 75% in the last 12 months. Total revenues in 2008 will most likely top 2007 (their highest year ever).

And as I understand their debt structure they have no debt principle obligation until 2012.

Typical BS from the usual suspects ...
July 29, 2008 6:45:42 PM

When you have crashed your car, no driver on this earth - regardless of how skilled he may be - can get that thing rolling again.
AMD is the crashed car...
July 29, 2008 6:49:44 PM

Wisecracker said:
Pure FUD.

AMD's cash position has barely budged over the last year. Their operating loss has been reduced 75% in the last 12 months. Total revenues in 2008 will most likely top 2007 (their highest year ever).

And as I understand their debt structure they have no debt principle obligation until 2012.

Typical BS from the usual suspects ...


Yeah, BS from the usual suspects... the Nasdaq investors. :kaola: 

I will always believe what is stated as gospel from guys on Tom's forums than I will over institutional investors managing trillions of dollars in portfolios. :lol: 

Ycon said:
When you have crashed your car, no driver on this earth - regardless of how skilled he may be - can get that thing rolling again.
AMD is the crashed car...


... and burned! :bounce: 
July 29, 2008 6:58:39 PM

antonmadcow said:
nkal83... and so... what? Wall Street has welcomed the news, hasn't it? I've never seen a hardier bunch of enthusiasts than for AMD. I have to admit, you have my respect for your completely unquestioned allegiance, but there comes a point where you have to look at reality. Intel now makes more money in a couple of weeks than AMD is worth altogether. Isn't it time to take off the blinders?



If Intel drops prices that much they will get broken up by the FTC and the DOJ will treat them worse than MS. If AMD does go out of business (doubtful - Barcelona will hold them up since the stock price isn't revenue) then that will hurt customers because

1) 100s of milions in AMD infrastructure is toast, companies lose millions, perhaps billions.
2) Prices for CPUs go through the roof because Intel has to expand operations.
3) DOJ comes in and Intel becomes a CPU company, a chipset company, and an everything else company.

You really need a hobby.
July 29, 2008 7:01:58 PM

I suggest everyone clicks the bright red exclamation point at the top of the post to tell the moderators to get rid of this garbage post due to excess fanboyism and lameness.
a c 127 à CPUs
a b À AMD
July 29, 2008 7:07:05 PM

xx12amanxx said:
I find the people funny that love to choose the winning side and bash the losing competitor! OOOooohh AMD is at 4.15 big deal! Everything you have spouted from your mouth has made you sound like an ass!

We dont need people like you trolling these forum's and starting these thread's,dont you have something else better to do?

Highschooler's man :pfff: 


Its not about choosing the winning side. It is about seeing it as it is. Seeing that AMD is in a very bad financial position and not trying to make everything seem better just because a better product is around the corner is what its about.

Blinding oneself to a companies position is stupid. Me for example. I love Fords. Always have. But for the past few years they have been in very bad financial troubles and I fear they may go the way of the dodo.

Just no reason to sugar coat it or believe the technology experts at Wall Street. I swear some of the articles made me laugh so hard.

NMDante said:
The fact that AMD has been behind before and survived, is not in question. The point is, when AMD was behind before, did they carry the debt load they have now? Unless AMD has a sudden surge of cash, and not from another loan, their outlook does not look very good. Can GPUs revenue support AMD's operating costs?


No. There is no way ATIs revenue can support AMD. Its good for ATI but not for all of AMD. If it was vice versa then yea AMDs revenue would be able to support ATI. But its not.

AMD will more than likely get a cash infusion from that Abu Dabai or whatever that already did before. Will it help? Maybe. Will it happen? Not sure. Ah its kinda sad.
July 29, 2008 7:08:06 PM

antonmadcow said:
I'm not happy about AMD's death at all. It could open up a huge can of antitrust whoopa$$ for Intel and that could equal problems for all PC users. What I can't understand is how Wall St. keeps punishing AMD, bringing it down to below $2.5 bil market cap, and all AMD guys can say is "look... we actually sold a few thousand videocards!" Big freakin' deal. The bottom line is that AMD-ATI is now worth almost a third of just what it paid for ATI! This is an a$$kicking of historical proportions. The Wall St. group knows what business is and what you have to do to stay in business. And they are telling us loud and clear that AMD does not have it!



AMD has the FASTEST Web server chips. They have the fastest VM server. They (Wall Street) do that because people like you root for Intel when they have crappy chips, crappy graphics and terrible relationships with OEM customers. Since they know that people don't care they have to look the other way from Inhell's despicable practices and assume that AMD just sucks when everyone knows that's not true.

Oh yeah, they now have the fastest IGP and desktop\mobile GPU. If they can dentnVidia's Quadro sales, they (ATi) can have a $1B quarter too. Plus, it looks like Apple may jump n the 790GX bandwagon. I mean if they want the fastest IGP, they have to go ATi. It would be too funny if ATi's chipset sales came back because of Apple. Cause we all know that Inhell can't make a GPU to save their lives. That's why I don't see what the hell DreamWorks is thinking about. Inhell has been promising worthwhile graphics FOR YEARS and hell even S3 is better.

AMD should definitely break even this quarter as I can bet Barcelona\Budapest are burning up the sales charts. Just Sun probably bought a million, not to mention HP for their 8 socket system and Dell for their VM box (that has set records BTW). I really don't understand your purpose for posting this. Are you just being funny?

AMD should run Inhell out of business just so your foot is wedged way down your throat. Don't wish bad things on people.
a b à CPUs
July 29, 2008 7:09:10 PM

Here's an unlikely scenerio:

Now that ATI is worth something again, AMD may look to sell them off for quick cash.

With Intel ready to enter the GFX market (again), wouldn't it "inconvienent" if NVIDIA was there to pick up ATI? Its war by proxy. Make sure Intel gets into a war on another front, while AMD improves its core products, mainly its CPU's.

Its a longshot, but it could happen. I guess it depends on how desperate AMD is to knock Intel down a notch or two...
a b à CPUs
a b À AMD
a b å Intel
July 29, 2008 7:11:58 PM

sandmanwn said:
I suggest everyone clicks the bright red exclamation point at the top of the post to tell the moderators to get rid of this garbage post due to excess fanboyism and lameness.


LOL, the moderators will not appreciate 50 e-mails about the same thread. Just click it yourself if you want.


July 29, 2008 7:12:31 PM

AMDs not going anywhere...

If their stock drops to $3/share, I might be more than inclined to purchase some. Sure the days of $20/share are long gone, but a revival back up to $8-$10 a share within 3-5 years isn't too far out of the question.
a c 127 à CPUs
a b À AMD
July 29, 2008 7:13:24 PM

BaronMatrix said:
If Intel drops prices that much they will get broken up by the FTC and the DOJ will treat them worse than MS. If AMD does go out of business (doubtful - Barcelona will hold them up since the stock price isn't revenue) then that will hurt customers because

1) 100s of milions in AMD infrastructure is toast, companies lose millions, perhaps billions.
2) Prices for CPUs go through the roof because Intel has to expand operations.
3) DOJ comes in and Intel becomes a CPU company, a chipset company, and an everything else company.

You really need a hobby.


There is no way the FTC and DOJ can justify breaking up Intel if they just lower the prices of the CPUs especially if its not below cost. If Intel did drop the chips below the cost of producing them then yes that could happen. But if Intel is just dropping them to make them more available to consumers and to phase out older CPUs there is not a thing wrong with it.
July 29, 2008 7:20:09 PM

rodney_ws said:
I'm just curious how AMD dropped the ball so bad... K8 was better than the NetBurst P4s it was being put up against... all the way through the Pentium 900 series. Did AMD just think their architecture would hold up forever? The moment they had the lead in performance they should have been thinking "Crap, we just woke the sleeping giant... gotta work extra hard now." and it seems like all they did was just attempt to sell the same processors with a new name, a new socket and slightly faster clocks. So while Intel was transitioning from NetBurst to C2D, AMD said hey "let's switch to AM2, cut the cache, clock 'em a little faster and just hope to ride the wave." Ugh... after years of waiting all they give us is Phenom?




AMD is doing great against a company that would COMPETE WITH A NON-PROFIT and even **** on the product they signed up to support. Of course these billion dollar OEMs are a little MORE THAN SPINELESS for letting Inhell get away with the crap they have. If I was a billion dollar company (HP makes almost $100B\year), I would tell Inhell to stick it and see if their chips sell in those little Intel Inside packages and no PC.

At the point where AMD should have gotten more market share, they didn't, but how is that possible with two to three years of platform superiority and stability? Easy, Inhell whisperng in the ears of OEMs (echoes of "where will you get your chipsets resonate?) to keep AMD around 15% of their purchases. They have bribed them with ad dollars, research dollars, etc. That's fine, but AMD had a full line of CPU for every situation, so the law of averages says they should have continued to grow.

Plus, a new CPU architecture takes FIVE YEARS, not the 6 months of GPU archs. hey had just began to make money when Inhell decided that people were payign to much for even their dual core chips and dropped the bottom out. Of course Hector should have blinked and not let 5000+ sink to < $100. No matter what Inhell charges, a 5000+ is worth a lot more.

Phenom is a brilliant chip. They just needed to catch up chipset wise. If they get more support for the dual loads in SW, they will be at least tied with Penryn and very close to Nehalem, which will only be high-end desktop. Without Inhell-optimized code, it already is. it must be great to be able to force devs to optimize for your chips to the detriment of competitors.

No wonder I don't buy their chips.
July 29, 2008 7:20:18 PM

i think there is no way Intel would let AMD crash, unless they would be looking for BIG problems.

Actually what I think is we consumers are the ones who would have a problem, not unless AMD produces something that would "really" compete with Intels product such as Nehalem, Intel wouldn't be producing better products, in other words, there is currently no competition between AMD and Intel, Intel is currently not only toying with AMD letting them catch something they virtually can't, but they are also toying with us consumers that we are currently not getting the best out of Intel. If not for the K8 competing with Netburst, Intel wouldn't be developing C2D, and we would still be at p4 now, or i don't think there would even be a quad core even if Intel can easily produce such.

I think the reason why Intel is releasing its Nehalem earlier is the sudden change of CEO in AMD, keeping them only 1 step ahead of AMD(they are having precaution to avoid what has happened with nvidia's GTX against the HD 4800 series) even if I think Intel has way lot more under its sleeves and we're not getting it because AMD cant catch up.
a c 127 à CPUs
a b À AMD
July 29, 2008 7:26:02 PM

Hey BM, did ya ever maybe think that Larabee is not what you think? Is it soo hard for people to think maybe Intel has worked their butts off on this and its actually a good product for what Dreamworks will be doing?

Seriously. We have to take all news with a grain of salt, but you can't expect people to cheer for everything good from AMD and boo Intel. Seriously stop the fanboyism.
July 29, 2008 7:26:40 PM

NMDante said:
While their new chipset has shown good results for enthusiasts, and their graphics cards are doing well, how much can those two items really keep AMD afloat? They are still bleeding cash, and unless they find a way to stop the flow, they will run out of cash by the end of the year, or even Q3, as some have theorized.

They cannot afford to get more loans, and the loans, they already have, are due in 2010, I believe. Unless they think they can sell their graphics cards and chipsets at CPU prices, they will be struggling.

On a side note, if Jobs bought AMD (hypothetically) he couldn't continue to make x86 CPUs, without negotiating with Intel for an x86 license. So, Jobs would have a couple of fabs just sitting around, not making anything, until the license is given.
Also, Intel might not be able to afford to have AMD go bust, but they cannot give AMD money. It's a business, and right now, AMD is hurting. If AMD goes bust, it's AMD's fault. Like rodney_ws mentioned, what did AMD do during the K8 heyday, when they turned a profit?



What you have to realize is that AMDs Q2 Operating Loss was really only $200M. The rest was not lost cash but ATi writeoffs. They took charges of approx. $900M.
Operating income should break even this quarter especially with Phenom 9850 being the best selling AMD chip on Newegg and 4000 being the most popular GPU in years.

The question of ownership is complicated. Who really owns a public company? I would say that they could take monies up to half the value nd as long as the majority of shares is public, it is still within the realm of being "owned" by AMD. I can see Lucas Arts et al salivating over Barcelona now. Dreamworks is the only major studio contracting from Intel and that won't even happen until 2010. Right now they still have an AMD infrastructure.
July 29, 2008 7:29:54 PM

sandmanwn, how about we click on you for excessive irrelevance? Since when is it to be considered lame to discuss the future existence of one of the top two CPU manufacturers? Or should we just say that everything is wonderful in AMD land and the birdies are singing and the sun is shining. Wake up and smell the Chapter 11.

a b à CPUs
July 29, 2008 7:41:29 PM

AMD might be selling more, but are they making a PROFIT for each item sold? I still think the 4800 series is being sold at a loss in an attempt to gain market share. Even if thats not the case, the profit margins for AMD right now can't be good...
a c 127 à CPUs
a b À AMD
July 29, 2008 7:49:03 PM

The 9850 is the best selling chip on Newegg??? Um yea.... sure...
a b à CPUs
a b å Intel
July 29, 2008 7:52:25 PM

Quote From 24/7 Wall St

Quote
AMD (AMD) earnings are not getting any better. The company just replaced its CEO. Due to negative operating results and $5 billion in long-term debt, AMD may well have to raise another $1 billion to $2 billion to cover future losses and R&D expense. With its stock at a 52-week low and a market cap of only $2.7 billion, the price of its shares could be chopped from $4.26 to $2.
End Quote

Is $2 stock price a possibily, My quess Yes. The problem is that institutional
fund managers tend to "dump" stocks under $5. Case inpoint Nortel (NT) drop below $2 then came Make up to $2 -> $2.20. They did a reverse Split ( 1 for 10 ) to get their Price back up. The're around $7 now.

Can AMD survive. Short answer is Yes, They could pull a worldCom. Declare BK wipe out debt and re-emirge. I personally do not like this senerio as the stock holders get shafted!!!. I do know what that is like as I lost about $8 K on WCOM and NT thinking they would come back.

Note to poster referencing Nasdaq - AMD is NOT a Nasdaq stock.

Also made WCOM and NT losses up on CSCO. Sold 400 shares - have 500 left. Paid equivalent of 94 Cents per share, current share = $22.49
a c 124 à CPUs
a b À AMD
July 29, 2008 7:55:35 PM

gamerk316 said:
AMD might be selling more, but are they making a PROFIT for each item sold? I still think the 4800 series is being sold at a loss in an attempt to gain market share. Even if thats not the case, the profit margins for AMD right now can't be good...


AMD gross margin was reported at 52% for 2Q08 - up from 34% for 2Q07.

Intel's 2Q08 was 55.4%
July 29, 2008 7:59:06 PM

jimmysmitty said:
There is no way the FTC and DOJ can justify breaking up Intel if they just lower the prices of the CPUs especially if its not below cost. If Intel did drop the chips below the cost of producing them then yes that could happen. But if Intel is just dropping them to make them more available to consumers and to phase out older CPUs there is not a thing wrong with it.


I don't think so. Intel is already selling chips below cost. Can you say Q6600? How much does an E6600 cost? he fact is that if Inhell continues to rop prices on the low end and leaves high end prices up above $1000 they are purposefully forcing AMD to live on less than they can. That is illegal. The "monopoly" can't purposefully hurt the smaller company with an unsustainable price point. It's called fixing I believe.

It's bad enough that I feel that Q6600 was a purposeful barrier to entry to desktop quad. Fortunately, AMD is getting original Opteron prices for Barcelona but 65nm 300mm wafers gives them 2X the output. That means 1Q of Barcelona sales is worth two quarters of K8 sales. They will break even this quarter n operating income.
a c 124 à CPUs
a b À AMD
July 29, 2008 8:02:17 PM

RetiredChief said:
Quote From 24/7 Wall St

Quote
AMD (AMD) earnings are not getting any better. The company just replaced its CEO. Due to negative operating results and $5 billion in long-term debt, AMD may well have to raise another $1 billion to $2 billion to cover future losses and R&D expense. With its stock at a 52-week low and a market cap of only $2.7 billion, the price of its shares could be chopped from $4.26 to $2.
End Quote

Is $2 stock price a possibily, My quess Yes. The problem is that institutional
fund managers tend to "dump" stocks under $5. Case inpoint Nortel (NT) drop below $2 then came Make up to $2 -> $2.20. They did a reverse Split ( 1 for 10 ) to get their Price back up. The're around $7 now.

Can AMD survive. Short answer is Yes, They could pull a worldCom. Declare BK wipe out debt and re-emirge. I personally do not like this senerio as the stock holders get shafted!!!. I do know what that is like as I lost about $8 K on WCOM and NT thinking they would come back.

Note to poster referencing Nasdaq - AMD is NOT a Nasdaq stock.

Also made WCOM and NT losses up on CSCO. Sold 400 shares - have 500 left. Paid equivalent of 94 Cents per share, current share = $22.49


2007 Revenue: $6.013bil
TTM Revenue: $6.285bil

July 29, 2008 8:03:45 PM

jimmysmitty said:
Hey BM, did ya ever maybe think that Larabee is not what you think? Is it soo hard for people to think maybe Intel has worked their butts off on this and its actually a good product for what Dreamworks will be doing?

Seriously. We have to take all news with a grain of salt, but you can't expect people to cheer for everything good from AMD and boo Intel. Seriously stop the fanboyism.



How is admitting that Intel can't out GPU a kid with a box of crayons booing them? I would hope that Dreamworks gets a great GPU, but the last Inhell GPU was the lowest of the low (i960). They can't even get their graphics to run DX9 so it's not so far-fetched to doubt that they can provide something better than Quadro their first time out.

DW is doing 3D movies. I know what they want. I just have my doubts. People are doubting that AMD can catch up so what's the difference?
July 29, 2008 8:04:22 PM

My misstatement. AMD is NYSE. Baron, would your comments be taken as being less unilateral if you didn't use Inhell? :) 
a b à CPUs
July 29, 2008 8:11:20 PM

BaronMatrix said:
I don't think so. Intel is already selling chips below cost. Can you say Q6600? How much does an E6600 cost? he fact is that if Inhell continues to rop prices on the low end and leaves high end prices up above $1000 they are purposefully forcing AMD to live on less than they can. That is illegal. The "monopoly" can't purposefully hurt the smaller company with an unsustainable price point. It's called fixing I believe.

It's bad enough that I feel that Q6600 was a purposeful barrier to entry to desktop quad. Fortunately, AMD is getting original Opteron prices for Barcelona but 65nm 300mm wafers gives them 2X the output. That means 1Q of Barcelona sales is worth two quarters of K8 sales. They will break even this quarter n operating income.

IIRC, the price per chip to Intel was something like $65 for a dual core 65nm part. So the Q6600 would be twice that. Since they are selling for $190, give or take, they are nor selling below cost. Besides, they are ramping down 65nm CPU production anyways - the Q6600 is one of the last 65nm parts you can even buy, aside from the extreme low end parts.
July 29, 2008 8:13:47 PM

jimmysmitty said:
The 9850 is the best selling chip on Newegg??? Um yea.... sure...



I edited it to say best selling AMD chip. Why did you think I meant overall?
      • 1 / 3
      • 2
      • 3
      • Newest
!