Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

AMD on track to report a profit for Q3

Tags:
Last response: in CPUs
Share
August 18, 2008 9:43:39 PM

Just came across this bit of news, apparently AMD have found a friend in the name of "JSC Angstrem", who...you may ask. Well the article tells all, but its nice to see AMD heading in the right direction all be it with a little bit help from our Russian friends :) 

Quote:
Remember AMD’s promise to return to profitability in the third quarter of this year? You may be wondering how this will be possible considering the fact that the company has lost money eight over the past seven quarters, including $269 million in Q2 2008, and no big bucks advances against Intel are in sight. But we are certain that AMD in fact will report a huge profit for the third quarter that may not originate from hugely increased product sales, but will create the foundation for the much anticipated announcement of AMD’s “Asset Smart”.

There has been much talk about AMD’s return into the black over the past seven quarters, which, in aggregate, brought AMD losses of $5.14 billion (including charges). AMD’s numbers became somewhat predictable, if we followed analyst CPU sales forecasts and the company’s claims that it would need at least $2.0 billion in revenue per quarter to return a profit. Cost reductions including layoffs recently took that number down into the $1.6 - $1.7 billion range and AMD plans to cut the requirement to close to $1.5 billion in order to be able to break even.

And even that may be a bit optimistic at the time, as the company brought in only $1.3 billion in Q2, but $1.5 billion in Q1. But a breakeven is a generally believed requirement for the company to announce “Assert Smart”, a move that is expected to split AMD into a manufacturing company and a fabless chip development firm. While production numbers of the quad-core Opteron are improving and the ATI has delivered a fantastic graphics chip, there is at least some doubt that regular sales would allow AMD to become profitable again in Q3, especially if we consider the aggressive pricing of Phenom processors and our own impression that the company’s latest Puma platform is showing up in far less Back-to-school notebooks than we would have expected.

And still, there is little doubt that AMD in fact will announce a profit for Q3.

Why? Simple: AMD has just sold its 200 mm wafer equipment to JSC Angstrem, a Russian semiconductor manufacturer. Earlier this year, JSC Angstrem bought 130 nm CMOS equipment from Fab 30 in Dresden for about $190 million. With this part of the deal, JSC has all of the components to start manufacturing computer chips.

There is some doubt about how much money changed hands during the deal and AMD Europe declined to release any numbers. But JSC Angstrem did. CEO Anatoly Soukhaparov told German newspaper SZ-Online that the company recently received a 815 million Euro loan, the “majority” of which is spent on the AMD manufacturing equipment as well as AMD CMOS technology that was developed in Dresden, Germany. We leave it up to you to guess what “majority” really means, but 815 million Euros translate into $1.2 billion at the current exchange rate. This would mean that AMD will get at least $600 million, $190 million of which have been accounted for in AMD’s Q2 result. That leaves potentially more than $400 million for Q3.

We generally would expect AMD’s revenue to seasonally improve from Q3 and the loss from continuing operations to decline, which leaves AMD with lots of room to return into the black for Q3.

According to Soukhaparov, Angstrem plans to start manufacturing chips in late 2009. It seems that the idea is to create a Russian version of Silicon Valley. Zelenograd, by the way, translates to “Green city”.


Angstrem is expected to produce Bluetooth, USB, Wi-Fi and similar controller chips, which is seen as way to collect experience and knowledge in modern chip manufacturing. However, the deal between AMD and JSC Angstrem is not done. Soukhaparov also stated that the company is negotiating with the U.S. and EU governments to win approvals to import 90 nm processing technology as well. The executive expects that the 90nm deal could close in couple of years and AMD will continue to supply JSC Angstrem with 90nm equipment from Fab 36, resulting in additional revenues for AMD.

It appears that AMD will be spending the windfall on its Fab30-to-38 conversion, which will turn AMD's Fab30 into a 45 nm 300 mm Fab from the current 90nm 200mm facility.

Some may call this sale of manufacturing equipment to achieve profitability cheating and it is certainly not the type of profitability we would have expected when CEO Hector Ruiz promised that the company would return a profit in Q3. But if it is necessary for the company to stand up again and follow through with its “Asset Smart” plan, that that is fine with us.


http://www.tgdaily.com/content/view/38940/118/
August 19, 2008 5:53:27 AM

Quote:
By Theo Valich


Enough said.
August 19, 2008 6:00:00 AM

Well, duh; anyone can create a profitable quarter by selling off chunks of the company. But which part are they going to sell off next quarter?
Related resources
August 19, 2008 7:40:51 AM

I'm no financial expert, but I'm pretty sure theres a difference between operating profit and net profit due to one time sales of company assets.

AMD is still operating in the red as far as I can tell, selling off assets will help stem the cash bleed in the short term but they still need to get back to operational profit in the long run to remain fiscally viable.
August 19, 2008 11:08:16 AM

Thats true. But their margins are set to improve. The ATI branch will go into the black, and once they get into 45nm, itll help immensely. This isnt a situation where theyre hurt at all from this. Its not like theyre going to use a bunch of skt 939s and make a graphics card on old tech. This is wise, and surely helps them. And may I ask anyone opposed to that, why is this bad? As for misleading, we will see when the numbers come out. There certainly are some haters here.
August 19, 2008 11:56:52 AM

yomamafor1 said:
Quote:
By Theo Valich


Enough said.


Indeed.

The boy who cried wolf...


again, and again, and again.



August 19, 2008 12:06:38 PM

May be true , may not be. The extra 400 million may show up yet. At 45nm, at least AMD has a few things going for it. Ive heard the improvements are anywheres from 7 to 12% with Deneb. Itll oc better, and the most important is, itll cost much less to fab. This allows for a lil more competition in perf, and pricing. So, if true, this may allow AMD a lil more needed time to get the real numbers into the black
a b à CPUs
August 19, 2008 12:20:32 PM

In case anyone needs a hint: You generate profits by successfully selling product to end users at a price that puts cash in your own pocket. NOT by selling off chunks of your company and by playing a restructuring shell-game.

Thanks in advance for all the down ratings I'm about to get for daring to question AMD.
August 19, 2008 12:29:53 PM

If the chunks are obsolete, then why not? Thats my point. Maybe they could somehow come up with a way to put them to good use? Any ideas?
August 19, 2008 12:33:24 PM

i think they're strong w\ ati.... if etrade releases my money to use before amd stock is $6 or more i'm going to buy some...

i've already sent them a few semi-nasty emails letting them know how unhappy i am w\ them, my next is going to be asking if they're going to credit me for the price difference in the stock from my intended purchase date last week and when they are saying i can use my money (the 21's) even though the bank transaction took a few days and was complete last week.
a b à CPUs
August 19, 2008 12:43:37 PM

JAYDEEJOHN said:
If the chunks are obsolete, then why not? Thats my point. Maybe they could somehow come up with a way to put them to good use? Any ideas?



If the article is to be believed at all, the answer is clear and is already a done deal: Sell it to **** people into thinking AMD actually delivered a profit.

Quote from the article, on the off chance someone chooses to not read that part because it doesn't jibe with their current views of the world: "But we are certain that AMD in fact will report a huge profit for the third quarter that may not originate from hugely increased product sales..."


Argue technology all day, if you guys want. But from a BUSINESS perspective, you have widespread layoffs in the name of cost cutting, executives leaving the company, and now they're selling off assets and claiming "profits" with the proceeds. And doing so in the face of a massive restructuring.

If anyone is investing in AMD - Watch the next quarterly very closely. Inventories had better be down. That is a sure way to tell if they're moving product. If they're up? Sell.
August 19, 2008 12:53:32 PM

Thats true, every point. My responses were to comments of this as being a negative, when in fact, it is a positive. No spinning, just 400 million reasons to like this. If AMD doesnt get off their arse and make some cpus that sell, itll continue, but each and every step they take is magnified because of their current situation. If it turns out to be making 600 million dollars on selling obsolete material, all the better for them. If they dont right their ship, itll surely , eventually go down. But for now, this transaction, is good news. Win win. Layoffs, etc is bad, execs dont actually make the products, and some may have been bad for the companby and are welcome to have left. Depends how you look at it too. This is a positive, and should be seen as such. As far as profit margins, leave that up to the author, the reader, and business practices.
a c 127 à CPUs
a b À AMD
August 19, 2008 1:25:25 PM

They have said this before. Either way I would think the bulk of their income is from their ATI division due to the 4800 series actually doing very well.
August 19, 2008 1:28:50 PM

JAYDEEJOHN said:
If the chunks are obsolete, then why not?


If it's obsolete, why is someone paying hundreds of millions of dollars to buy it?

Either the buyer is stupid, or AMD could have had a continuing revenue stream by manufacturing the chips that the buyer is now going to make itself. And helping start 'a Russian version of Silicon Valley' could be really bad for AMD in the long term if it actually comes about.
August 19, 2008 1:42:20 PM

Because: supply and demand. Ive got it, you want to buy it. Im already established in my market, ahead of what Im selling you, and am capable of moving forwards beyond that. Happens all the time. Punchpresses, lathes etc. CNC and some old non CNC stuff. Depends on the size of the company and their needs.
August 19, 2008 2:33:16 PM

Scotteq said:
Argue technology all day, if you guys want. But from a BUSINESS perspective, you have widespread layoffs in the name of cost cutting, executives leaving the company, and now they're selling off assets and claiming "profits" with the proceeds. And doing so in the face of a massive restructuring.


The layoffs were obvious. No one has left the company. The assets they're selling are no longer needed. You make it seem like the restructuring is bad.

MarkG said:
If it's obsolete, why is someone paying hundreds of millions of dollars to buy it?


The equipment they are selling, from what I understand from the article, is the equipment used to make 90nm processors. Obviously they aren't going to be producing those anymore. The company that is buying the equipment will use the equipment to make chips for a completely different market. Did you even read the article?
a b à CPUs
August 19, 2008 3:01:09 PM

jeb1517 said:
The layoffs were obvious. No one has left the company. The assets they're selling are no longer needed. You make it seem like the restructuring is bad.



Henri Richard, Chief of Sales

Dave Orton, EVP and former CEO of ATI

Mario Rivas - EVP of Computing Products

Elke Eckstein - VP Manufacturing

Rick Hegberg - SVP Worldwide Sales

And Hector Ruiz himself also abandoned his position as CEO (remains on the Board of Directors)


and you, sir, state that nobody left. An asinine statement considering all of the above have resigned their positions at AMD in the last year.

That is hardly "Nobody"



{edit} To add:


Stephen DiFranco - Corp VP, Consumer Sales and Marketing

Phil Hester - Chief Technology Officer
August 19, 2008 3:26:53 PM

Hester, Orton and Eckstein will be missed, the others no, and some good riddance.
a b à CPUs
August 19, 2008 3:33:10 PM

<sigh>
August 19, 2008 3:45:00 PM

I think the marketing from AMD has sucked for a long time. One of the most exspensive and least productive ways to sell , say a cpu, is motor sports ads. So the ads people, no problem, especially from what Ive seen with the tactics used in the coming of the 4xxx series. Didnt see that one coming eh? No, theyre more ON track than before
August 19, 2008 5:43:31 PM

epsilon84 said:
I'm no financial expert, but I'm pretty sure theres a difference between operating profit and net profit due to one time sales of company assets.

AMD is still operating in the red as far as I can tell, selling off assets will help stem the cash bleed in the short term but they still need to get back to operational profit in the long run to remain fiscally viable.



AMD wold have been breakeven last quarter for operating income had they taken a smaller charge for the ATi stuff they're selling. They lost "ONLY" $269M in operating income. This quarter will see the 4000 series contribution along with Puma, which contrary to popular opinion is showing up everywhere. Then the 2.5GHz Opterons are in the wild for this quarter and those are still ahead of Intel in 4P HPC and Web and in some cases in 2P.

The biggest issue AMD has is getting OEMs to really push them. AMD can make all of the chips they want but if HP et al are lettng them "sit in the back of the warehouse" they can't sell them. I actually find it hard to believe that OEMs don't want a 2.5GHz Griffin ASAP to make gaming laptops with Hybrid XFire. Selling off the assets is a natural part of business. Do you think Intel just through away their 90nm equipment? Don't think so. More than sales it will be because the layoffs and restructuring costs less to run.

We'll see though. I think they may have a nice profit especially with 780G and HTPC. It also seems that they have canceled those $30-60 chips that weren't contributing to the bottom line. It's better to have inventory of Phenom that's worth $100+ than X2s worth under $50. If they can really evangelize the "balanced platrform" they will up sales considerably. I mean, if the GPU is more important for gaming and the IGP for BluRay (imagine someone telling you you can't play BluRay until you upgrade your BIOS and get a new version of the SW you've been using for years.) AMD is in a much better strategic position than Intel and nVidia.

But I reiterate that they should leave off this desktop race and push towards Stars-based Griffin which should get to 3GHz at 45nm. A 3GHz laptop in Q109 would change a lot. Hell, they may even be able to take 9150e, shrink it and get it into a laptop. That would be another large market. I'd love to have a low speed quad core laptop with 3850Xfire.
Can you hear me, Dirk?
August 19, 2008 5:46:22 PM

Scotteq said:
In case anyone needs a hint: You generate profits by successfully selling product to end users at a price that puts cash in your own pocket. NOT by selling off chunks of your company and by playing a restructuring shell-game.

Thanks in advance for all the down ratings I'm about to get for daring to question AMD.



That is a natural part of business. Intel sold lots of businesses and layed off more people than AMD employs last year. They did that so that the big hole that was made with a $183 E6300 was covered until they could dump P4 and get to 45nm.
August 19, 2008 5:55:53 PM

Keep em' spinning BM.
August 19, 2008 6:42:32 PM

yomamafor1 said:
Keep em' spinning BM.



You mean a quad core 45nm laptop is a bad thing? I wish I was running AMD sometimes. I wouldn't have dropped prices as much and would definitely have put more resources into mobile. They should take my advice and shrink Griffin with Stars cores and forget about being able to sell $1500 desktop processors that no one buys anyway (what about .2%).

If I wereto give Intel advice it would be to have left ATis chipset license and stop tying products together. What happens is that if they have a problem, where will people get chipsets or IGPs for all those CPUs? I would also have stayed out of the XO market. Intel is stretched too thin, almost like MS. Nehalem may be their Rubicon as it will require new boards, new chipsets, a whole new infrastructure. I'd also wait and drop server chips first, since if the plan backfires i7 will sit while Deneb and Penryn sell out.
August 19, 2008 9:18:07 PM

And luckily, they don't listen to your advices. What a world of chaos it would be if they actually did listen to you.
August 20, 2008 12:28:56 AM

yomamafor1 said:
And luckily, they don't listen to your advices. What a world of chaos it would be if they actually did listen to you.



Well, let's see. AMD has lost $5B and Intel has been found guilty of bad things all over the world. I guess I could have screwed em up worse than that. You're right.
a c 127 à CPUs
a b À AMD
August 20, 2008 3:18:16 AM

^Like keeping the prices high on something that was 1. older arch (K8) and 2. did not perform as well (K8/K10)?

Sure keep the prices higher knowing that people will buy whatever is cheaper and gives the best bang for their buck. Thats a brilliant strategy.
August 20, 2008 4:28:02 AM

Let me respond to you why your advices would've resulted in bigger crisis than AMD is in now.

BaronMatrix said:
You mean a quad core 45nm laptop is a bad thing? I wish I was running AMD sometimes. I wouldn't have dropped prices as much and would definitely have put more resources into mobile. They should take my advice and shrink Griffin with Stars cores and forget about being able to sell $1500 desktop processors that no one buys anyway (what about .2%).


Well at the moment, Intel is the only one with a quad core mobile CPU, and that unit itself costs over 1000 USD. Aside from that, AMD's CPU would have to lower mobile Deneb's prices in order to compete aganst the mobile Yorkfield. How many people will actually spend that much money in purchasing such a high end mobile CPU? As statistics show, people are much more willing to pay for high end graphics than CPU. If that's the case, what's the point of AMD entering into the fray, commit resources in optimizing Deneb for mobile, and further divert resources from else where? It also seems that Deneb will not have the TDP to actually fit into the mobile segment. AMD would have to wait for 45nm HK/MG, or even 32nm HK/MG before attempting something like that.

I'm not sure how far you would've dropped the prices, but if at the moment performance / price is the only reason why people would select AMD over Intel. In the world where switching from one company to another means an entire makeover in your computer components, AMD's first goal is to secure a relatively safe footing in the market share; to keep AMD users from switching over to Intel. Even if they do lose money now due to extremely low prices, the platform compatibility will allow users to purchase much higher performance CPUs, with much better margin, in the case they do come out.

As for mobile, you have to realize one thing: mobile sector is Intel's playground. Intel has been dominant in the mobile sector since the launch of Centrino back in 2003. Centrino laptops have became a household name for laptop. Therefore in order for AMD to penetrate the market and establish a footing, they would not only have to commit extra resources in altering the current AMD system architecture to favor mobile platform, but also spend enough on marketing to increase the brand awareness. For a cash strapped AMD, it makes much more sense to be in a defensive position, and fortify its foothold in the server segment.

If I wereto give Intel advice it would be to have left ATis chipset license and stop tying products together. What happens is that if they have a problem, where will people get chipsets or IGPs for all those CPUs? I would also have stayed out of the XO market. Intel is stretched too thin, almost like MS. Nehalem may be their Rubicon as it will require new boards, new chipsets, a whole new infrastructure. I'd also wait and drop server chips first, since if the plan backfires i7 will sit while Deneb and Penryn sell out. said:
If I wereto give Intel advice it would be to have left ATis chipset license and stop tying products together. What happens is that if they have a problem, where will people get chipsets or IGPs for all those CPUs? I would also have stayed out of the XO market. Intel is stretched too thin, almost like MS. Nehalem may be their Rubicon as it will require new boards, new chipsets, a whole new infrastructure. I'd also wait and drop server chips first, since if the plan backfires i7 will sit while Deneb and Penryn sell out.


I'm not exactly sure about what you meant by "typing products together", but your "suggestion" of Intel leaving ATI license couldn't be more wrong. Due to the lackluster performance current AMD CPUs have, and users tendency to go for Intel's offering, by confining Crossfire technology only to AMD chipset is no doubt a suicide, just like Nvidia. AMD would lost a lot of graphics card sales just because Crossfire technology is not available on Intel chipset, which is currently the best chipset available on the market for Intel CPUs.

As for IGPs, I think you're overestimating the importance of graphics power. As statistics show, Intel currently controls about 60% of the IGP market, while AMD only controls ~15%. However everyone + dog knows that Intel's chipset sucks arse, while AMD's chipset kicks arse. Why is that?

Personally I don't understand why you have a beef with Intel entering the XO market. Intel is not stretched too thin.

Don't worry about Nehalem. It will do much better than you expect. Sure, it requires a new board, new RAM, but it also offers a lot of advantages that Penryn and Deneb cannot offer. It won't be too long before OEMs switch to GFX equipped Havendale for mainstream and low end PCs, to conserve cost by taking off redundant chipsets.

On the other hand, it would make absolutely no sense by releasing server parts first. Remember Dunnington? It has just been released this year. By releasing server Nehalem parts will only eats up the sales of those products. Oppositely, if Nehalem is released to the enthusiasts crowd first, then it may build up the hypes, which in turn helps more companies to switch to Nehalem.

August 20, 2008 9:44:34 AM

yomamafor1 said:
On the other hand, it would make absolutely no sense by releasing server parts first. Remember Dunnington? It has just been released this year. By releasing server Nehalem parts will only eats up the sales of those products. Oppositely, if Nehalem is released to the enthusiasts crowd first, then it may build up the hypes, which in turn helps more companies to switch to Nehalem.


:lol:  :lol:  :lol: 


You know what your talking about.... NOT.



Yeah, why release the initial trickle of CPUs to the most expensive markets, where the profit margins are largest, where performance is everything, where reputations will spread quickly and be of far more value to the real decision makers in companies when you can sell for comparatively nothing to some enthusiasts?

Hmmm..... let me see....
August 20, 2008 2:53:03 PM

I agree with amiga here, thats a no brainer. Also, do you have a reliable link for the TDP Deneb mobile? Im just asking, as Id like to read it. Itd suck, if true, or be put in a very limited use scenario
August 20, 2008 6:32:24 PM

yomamafor1 said:
Let me respond to you why your advices would've resulted in bigger crisis than AMD is in now.



Well at the moment, Intel is the only one with a quad core mobile CPU, and that unit itself costs over 1000 USD. Aside from that, AMD's CPU would have to lower mobile Deneb's prices in order to compete aganst the mobile Yorkfield. How many people will actually spend that much money in purchasing such a high end mobile CPU? As statistics show, people are much more willing to pay for high end graphics than CPU. If that's the case, what's the point of AMD entering into the fray, commit resources in optimizing Deneb for mobile, and further divert resources from else where? It also seems that Deneb will not have the TDP to actually fit into the mobile segment. AMD would have to wait for 45nm HK/MG, or even 32nm HK/MG before attempting something like that.

I'm not sure how far you would've dropped the prices, but if at the moment performance / price is the only reason why people would select AMD over Intel. In the world where switching from one company to another means an entire makeover in your computer components, AMD's first goal is to secure a relatively safe footing in the market share; to keep AMD users from switching over to Intel. Even if they do lose money now due to extremely low prices, the platform compatibility will allow users to purchase much higher performance CPUs, with much better margin, in the case they do come out.

As for mobile, you have to realize one thing: mobile sector is Intel's playground. Intel has been dominant in the mobile sector since the launch of Centrino back in 2003. Centrino laptops have became a household name for laptop. Therefore in order for AMD to penetrate the market and establish a footing, they would not only have to commit extra resources in altering the current AMD system architecture to favor mobile platform, but also spend enough on marketing to increase the brand awareness. For a cash strapped AMD, it makes much more sense to be in a defensive position, and fortify its foothold in the server segment.



I'm not exactly sure about what you meant by "typing products together", but your "suggestion" of Intel leaving ATI license couldn't be more wrong. Due to the lackluster performance current AMD CPUs have, and users tendency to go for Intel's offering, by confining Crossfire technology only to AMD chipset is no doubt a suicide, just like Nvidia. AMD would lost a lot of graphics card sales just because Crossfire technology is not available on Intel chipset, which is currently the best chipset available on the market for Intel CPUs.

As for IGPs, I think you're overestimating the importance of graphics power. As statistics show, Intel currently controls about 60% of the IGP market, while AMD only controls ~15%. However everyone + dog knows that Intel's chipset sucks arse, while AMD's chipset kicks arse. Why is that?

Personally I don't understand why you have a beef with Intel entering the XO market. Intel is not stretched too thin.

Don't worry about Nehalem. It will do much better than you expect. Sure, it requires a new board, new RAM, but it also offers a lot of advantages that Penryn and Deneb cannot offer. It won't be too long before OEMs switch to GFX equipped Havendale for mainstream and low end PCs, to conserve cost by taking off redundant chipsets.

On the other hand, it would make absolutely no sense by releasing server parts first. Remember Dunnington? It has just been released this year. By releasing server Nehalem parts will only eats up the sales of those products. Oppositely, if Nehalem is released to the enthusiasts crowd first, then it may build up the hypes, which in turn helps more companies to switch to Nehalem.




None of that explains anything. You just ramble for three paragraphs.
August 20, 2008 7:39:34 PM

Intel clearly wants to own this market. The server market has been making them itch, thus the Nehalem = no great shakes for gaming/desktop. They abandoned DT for server this round. Good for the bottom line ya know. And people are ticked because AMD may show a profit? Hafta own that too? I dont care how AMD does it, if it doesnt hurt their future capacity to continue, then its fine. Would a solid, AMD sold x amount of cpus, their gpus are selling like hot cakes, are in the black as well, plus their other ventures all in the black because of marketing,innovation and coming thru look better? Sure
a b à CPUs
August 20, 2008 7:48:06 PM

BaronMatrix said:
None of that explains anything. You just ramble for three paragraphs.



How could you say rambling...

When you have rambled so much over time .. you have a walking stick, a pair of rambling boots and a dog called Norman for that occasion...


Talk about pot calling the kettle black.
a c 127 à CPUs
a b À AMD
August 20, 2008 9:20:49 PM

JAYDEEJOHN said:
Intel clearly wants to own this market. The server market has been making them itch, thus the Nehalem = no great shakes for gaming/desktop. They abandoned DT for server this round. Good for the bottom line ya know. And people are ticked because AMD may show a profit? Hafta own that too? I dont care how AMD does it, if it doesnt hurt their future capacity to continue, then its fine. Would a solid, AMD sold x amount of cpus, their gpus are selling like hot cakes, are in the black as well, plus their other ventures all in the black because of marketing,innovation and coming thru look better? Sure


You still going on about gaming and such? Will you be happy when everyone just agrees with you? If Intel isnt making any major movements in gaming then neither will AMD. Its the same both ways. Only ATI and nVidia will.

No one should be getting pissed IF AMD does profit because that would be great but considering the source, who has been known to be a fanboy and wrong numerous times (i.e. reverse hyper-threading), its hard to believe it. I will believe it when AMD reports this without having to take a hit from the ATI purchase.

But here is what you ahve to remember, the market that buys the GPUs is so small that even if the ATI division was showing a profit it could in no way make up for the CPU side if the CPU side was showing loss.
August 21, 2008 3:28:55 AM

FYI guys, Intel and AMD are pretty much at the bleeding edge of semiconducter manufacturing. When all that expensive FAB equipment is no longer useful for the bleeding edge, it's resold to people who don't need the newest FAB equipment out there. Just part of normal business. Intel even has their resale equipment online for would-be buyers to see http://resale.intel.com
August 21, 2008 10:30:06 AM

My comment only mentioned the gpu side of AMD as a whole, meaning like 1 piston in an engine, with all working to their potential, itd be great for AMD, and would of course be ideal. I mentioned it because even tho its great to see, and experience one of those gpus, that do so well, its only 1 part thats doing this good, and from whats being implied in certain posts here, its like selling old equipment is a lousy thing to hang your hat on, when all Im saying is, it doesnt matter how AMD makes money at this point, whether Intel or AMD sell off their old tech, they still make money off it. And, like I said, itd be surely better to see all factions of AMD operating smoothly and in the black. You completely misunderstood what Ive been saying. Some people in this thread had crapped all over this, going into business semantics on the merit of having more cash, which I replied to as who cares as long as its there for AMD. It helps, and moreso down the road
!