Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Watch out Intel here comes AMDhabi!!!!

Last response: in CPUs
Share
October 7, 2008 10:25:17 AM

http://www.theinquirer.net/gb/inquirer/news/2008/10/07/... Doubt the source. This isnt good for Intel. Whens the last time Intel did a 6 Billion dollar upgrade? This puts competition back in the cpu market

More about : watch intel amdhabi

a b à CPUs
October 7, 2008 10:31:02 AM

I think it is correct - Charlie D knows AMD.

I am still waiting for my 30k AMD Graphics box tho.

Bunny suit Charlie if this is false ... Bunny suit and you will be shining shoes for a week.

October 7, 2008 10:46:51 AM

If its true, which is most likely, Intel is in for a fight . This changes everything
Related resources
October 7, 2008 11:30:48 AM

If we can keep this civil, Id like to hear peoples opinions as to if they think this will put AMD ontop, and if so, why. And if not why not? Basically, everything Ive heard is that Intel has resources and that AMD cant compete with Intel because of this. This may no longer be true or pertitent, as it looks as tho AMD has some serious backing now. All politics asside, is this going to hurt Intel? Is this going to lift AMD beyond Intel? or do you think its going to be business as usual?
a b à CPUs
October 7, 2008 11:39:38 AM

If AMD gets more budget money, they can spend more on researching the next processor. There are certainly some capable minds at AMD.
October 7, 2008 11:45:32 AM

Definitely good news for AMD.

Hard to say what impact this will have on Intel. Hopefully AMD can catch them off guard and pull out another K8.
October 7, 2008 11:47:26 AM

I hope AMD does come back with a punch to knock Intel down. The issue I see is can AMD manage the money correctly?
October 7, 2008 11:49:41 AM

My take is, as Intel ran AMD into the ground, this is what they got for doing it, a stronger, much more capable AMD. This isnt a serves them right thing, but, if it was done differently, it may have benefitted Intel more, tho us consumers much less, and prices would be higher, so in the end, hopefully, this will still be good for us
a c 83 à CPUs
October 7, 2008 11:53:46 AM

Intel has nothing to fear, at least from this. AMD has been talking about doing this for quite some time. The extra cash might help, but only in the short term. I was actually a bit alarmed at the statement that the new company would be looking for outside orders to fill. This could cause AMD issues if they are to busy making chips for someone else and orders for Opteron/Phenom's go unfilled. Remember the supply issues after dell started using AMD CPUs? If the plants are already near full capacity, I don't see how adding more orders is going to help.
a b à CPUs
October 7, 2008 11:59:59 AM

Wow! I don't know how many other people made the connection between investment from Abu Dhabi and the new "Asset Lite" strategy, but this totally makes sense now. When I first heartd of AMD selling a stake to Abu Dhabi I thought it was strictly for an infusion of cash considering their debt and quarterly losses. I understood the concept behind Asset Lite, but I have to give AMD props for pulling this together. I bet is was DIrk Meyer who came up with the idea and not Hector, that's why Hector is out and Dirk is now the CEO.

It's become obvious that AMD has greatly benefitted from their partnership with TSMC as eveidenced by the ATI48xxx series GPU's. And the success with TSMC and the 48xx's is with a just a working partnership. Now, with the new Foundry Company, which AMD will obviously have priority with, it just may be what the Green Team needs to get beck into the processor game hardcore.

While it will be couple years, I eagerly await what AMD and Foundry Company will produce. And, if this partnership works out, Intel will have some serious competition again.

Time will tell...
October 7, 2008 12:10:56 PM

I posted in another thread if Intel could realistically do battle against a whole country. Well, here you have it. One must remember, that only 2 fabs were going at the time of Dell and thats not even close to their production capabilites now, as theyll add 50% more fabs, and their production will be at 45nm not 90 nm, so the yields will be much higher
October 7, 2008 12:27:07 PM

Well, I would like to see some real competition for Intel but the other side to this is that you can throw money at a problem and it doesn't solve it! My personal experience with Abu Dhabi run companies was a lot of ineficiency that was papered over with money. Quality control was out the window. Besides Hector is still involved with this.
October 7, 2008 12:29:44 PM

Well great. This settles a limited amount of AMD's debt gets their partner company's production up. Partner company... 2 groups now trying to make a profit off the same amount of chip sales. Sure AMD gets some back, post tax but still 2 groups.

This in all likelyhood will possibly push AMD's prices up or at bear minimum make it more difficult to bring them down. Issues Intel doesn't have.
a b à CPUs
October 7, 2008 12:46:15 PM

lol. It's from the Inquirer take it with a grain of salt.
a b à CPUs
October 7, 2008 12:51:40 PM

it is also posted on Bloomberg. I dont see this as a threat to Intel, Just a lifeline for AMD
October 7, 2008 12:59:04 PM

Read ALL the links. Its going to happen bar governments, shareholders etc. From the way I understand it, the think tank side will hold the license, as the fabs really only produce the chips, and the thinking side has majority. Tho, all in all, as a whole, itll supposedly be 50% for decisions made.
AUE may not make great business ventures as you may have experience with it or not, but having more money than sense is still going to help AMD. I guess now we will see just how much better Intel really is, as now AMD can buy its way to the best people, the best processes and all the people behind K8 etc arent to be written off as well. This does make a huge difference, and anyone not taking it seriously, especially Intel, may find things changing
October 7, 2008 1:01:13 PM

JDocs said:
2 groups now trying to make a profit off the same amount of chip sales.



Err, not quite.


The foundry side will do chips for 3rd parties, like TSMC.
October 7, 2008 1:03:37 PM

BadTrip said:
it is also posted on Bloomberg. I dont see this as a threat to Intel, Just a lifeline for AMD


A Lifeline is all that it is at this point.
AMD does not need capacity, they need improved products.
If capacity was an issue, their prices would be higher. (Simple Supply/Demand Curve)

Perhaps the new quads will help.
We will just need to wait and see.

And $6Billion is not that much money to Intel if you keep things in perspective.
Last Quarter their profits were 1.6 Billion which comes to about $6.4Billion a year.

Now, I'm glad to see that AMD will likely stay afloat longer.
But what I really want to see is AMD competitive again to keep prices down.
October 7, 2008 1:07:53 PM

The potential yields are over twice what AMDs ever had. Theyll be able to do this
a b à CPUs
October 7, 2008 1:07:53 PM


But why oh why oh why is Hector Ruiz still involved..


That bloke just needs slapping with a wet salmon... then a tuna, then a gold fish......

Hes now in the fab business
October 7, 2008 1:10:30 PM

He needs a fish Indian style heheh
a b à CPUs
October 7, 2008 1:12:01 PM

JAYDEEJOHN said:
He needs a fish Indian style heheh




Indian style ? :) 
a b à CPUs
October 7, 2008 1:17:22 PM

zenmaster said:
A Lifeline is all that it is at this point.
AMD does not need capacity, they need improved products.
If capacity was an issue, their prices would be higher. (Simple Supply/Demand Curve)

Perhaps the new quads will help.
We will just need to wait and see.

And $6Billion is not that much money to Intel if you keep things in perspective.
Last Quarter their profits were 1.6 Billion which comes to about $6.4Billion a year.

Now, I'm glad to see that AMD will likely stay afloat longer.
But what I really want to see is AMD competitive again to keep prices down.


I agree, according to Bloomberg, the total investment is $8.4 billion, and Intel's r&d budget for this year is $11.2 billion. While this is very good news for AMD, I just dont see how it is serious threat.
October 7, 2008 1:22:21 PM

Well, lets say the pectoral fins only go in one direction....
a b à CPUs
October 7, 2008 1:25:27 PM

JAYDEEJOHN said:
The potential yields are over twice what AMDs ever had. Theyll be able to do this


I am not sure where you are getting that figure. I may be wrong but that sounds a little far-fetched. Let me see if I can find some numbers and work something up.
a c 108 à CPUs
October 7, 2008 1:31:40 PM

Abu Dhabi cash is green - don't know how some folks will feel about them owning 20% of the parent company, though.

When you consider the Malta Fab, TSMC SOI capacity and the chipset gains I'd say AMD is well positioned to take back a chunk of market share and possibly hold it this time.

Intel will always be 2-3 times bigger, though ....
October 7, 2008 1:33:12 PM

But AMD isnt as diversified as Intel. To what expent is this for cpus only? Also, didnt they just announce a new chip? Having state of the art facilities, access and ability for once of IBMs processes and the ability to hire whomever they want is all positives for a company who is only slightly behind if Deneb comes in as advertised
October 7, 2008 1:40:13 PM

BadTrip said:
I am not sure where you are getting that figure. I may be wrong but that sounds a little far-fetched. Let me see if I can find some numbers and work something up.

Firstly, keep everything with context of what Ive said. At 45nm, the yields will be higher, add to that the other fab plus the 45nm , easily 2x. And this isnt just for cpus, so there shouldnt be a problem even going back to the larger marketshare AMD had when they had delivery problems before.
October 7, 2008 1:55:17 PM

I see how this could be good for AMD (which is a good thing overall), but I fail to see the threat to Intel. Just looking at the cash injection alone doesn't even put a dent into Intel. I have only been able to skim over a few of the articles. Someone please enlighten me to the issue that affects Intel directly (other than their competition possibly getting some more stability of course).

Best,

3Ball
a b à CPUs
October 7, 2008 1:56:06 PM

zenmaster said:
A Lifeline is all that it is at this point.
And $6Billion is not that much money to Intel if you keep things in perspective.
Last Quarter their profits were 1.6 Billion which comes to about $6.4Billion a year.


While $6B may not be that much to Intel, Intel is not getting this infusion of capital, AMD is...and in that case, $6B ($8.4B total investment) is A LOT of money.
October 7, 2008 1:57:07 PM

this is not the first time this country injected cash into amd.
money is not the problem, bad products is money can't correct
that. remember p4 bad product intel didn't have a money
problem.
October 7, 2008 2:02:52 PM

Hiring new minds, having top of the line manufacturing, hiring older seasonsed minds, those are all things concerning Intel in this. Puts things much more on an even keel
a b à CPUs
October 7, 2008 2:09:59 PM

Because they hyjacked all of the suppliers .... remember the antitrust suite ... and falsified benchies ... gave out huge incentives and punished dissenters ... the whole P4 saga.

AMD had a superior product with the A64 and X2 ... up to the release of Core2.

Intel's huge marketing machine continued to roll.

They payed off sites who could show the P4 in a positive light ... check out the P4 benchies um ... on some um ... sites.

Once core2 started rolling they were able to clear most of the P4 inventory ... call it halo effect. Mostly to Govt I imagine.

Intel are evil.

Despite that I must report my Q6600 is going very well ... heh heh.
October 7, 2008 2:15:05 PM

Let me say it like this if Deneb is the new Phenom it's going to take
a lot more than 6billion just stay in the game.
October 7, 2008 2:24:32 PM

Amiga500 said:
Err, not quite.


The foundry side will do chips for 3rd parties, like TSMC.


Either way they will still both be trying to make a profit off AMDs chips. The Foundary Company won't say well lets do AMD's chips at cost in the hopes we'll make money else where. Not saying AMD won't make money off this but their cost per unit will definitely be higher.
October 7, 2008 2:26:24 PM

3Ball said:
I see how this could be good for AMD (which is a good thing overall), but I fail to see the threat to Intel. Just looking at the cash injection alone doesn't even put a dent into Intel. I have only been able to skim over a few of the articles. Someone please enlighten me to the issue that affects Intel directly (other than their competition possibly getting some more stability of course).


Sorry... WHAT?!?!



You see how this is good for AMD, but don't see how it is bad for Intel?

AMD and Intel compete in a 2-horse race.

What helps one horse hinders the other.


This will enable AMD to dramatically increase the engineering resources devoted to "bulldozer", enable them to develop heterogeneous fusion C/GPUs at the same time, and look at continuing with "bobcat"*.

*apparently it is not cancelled.



I don't think any of that can be considered "good" for Intel. :) 
October 7, 2008 2:30:19 PM

JDocs said:
Either way they will still both be trying to make a profit off AMDs chips.


AMD will be trying to make a profit off AMD's chips.

The foundary company will be looking to make money off AMD's chips and other chips.




JDocs said:

The Foundary Company won't say well lets do AMD's chips at cost in the hopes we'll make money else where. Not saying AMD won't make money off this but their cost per unit will definitely be higher.


AMD's chips are being sold at a profit at the moment (i.e. they are selling for more than the cost of manufacturing).



It was the company debt and the cost of upgrading FABs that was crippling AMD (the old AMD).
October 7, 2008 2:33:07 PM

Deneb is Deneb, and saying something like that is like saying if i7 is like P4.... And UAE is in it to make money, not lose it. No one should or could paint this as a bad move for AMD. Now whether its a bad move for Intel, thats the question. If Barcelona had this kind of cash injection etc etc. This isnt about the past, no not even K8. This is all about tomorrow. Each has had their day, up til now, but now its different, no matter how you color it. Its changed overnight. If you look at the past, and delve on it, you may as well be living in it. Im not putting anything or anyone down here. Like Ive said, AMD is now in the position to actually make a top cpu, using top manufacturing, and having the funding, the resources, both with machinery and people plus the time to do it. Also, theyll have funds for marketing as well. Theyll be making money theyve never made before , from other sources previously unseen. This is going to effect TSMC, Samsung etc, itll have a ripple effect. Theres a whole new player now, one that can actually go where Intel hasnt before, in using its fabs for other businesses. All this amounts to profits. Yes, theyll have to produce, and come thru, but Im wondering how people can go around and say first AMD cant compete with Intel because of resources, and at the same time say AMD=failure? Guess we will find out now.
October 7, 2008 2:36:44 PM

exit2dos said:
Quote:
Hector Ruiz will resign as chairman of AMD to become chairman of the chip business.

I find this rather disturbing.
http://www.computerworld.com/action/article.do?command=viewArticleBasic&taxonomyId=12&articleId=9116438&intsrc=hm_topic


I do wonder, since AMD doesn't have controlling interest in this new company - how will this affect their x86 license?
I'd have to see about digging up what I can find on the license to be sure, but it doesn't appear as though there should be a problem here. AMD is still AMD, it's just that now they're fabless. I can't say for sure whether or not the license restricts them to fabs they own, though I suspect it doesn't else this move would seem rather careless.
October 7, 2008 2:43:14 PM

Amiga500 said:
The foundary company will be looking to make money off AMD's chips and other chips.


No, the foundry company, if it's really an independent company, will be trying to make money building chips; if some company other than AMD offer them more money than AMD can afford to pay, then AMD will find itself looking for another place to build its chips.

If it's a separate company, its responsibility will be to its shareholders, not to AMD; and while AMD is obviously a large shareholder, it's not the majority.

Quote:
It was the company debt and the cost of upgrading FABs that was crippling AMD (the old AMD).


And this won't reduce the cost of upgrading fabs, it will just dump that cost onto the new company; which may well still go bust if the new owners can't afford to keep pumping money in.

Having worked for a fabless chip company I'm far from convinced that this is in AMD's long-term interest; they're going from controlling their own chip production to being just another customer.
October 7, 2008 2:55:54 PM

Read all the information out. Its a 50-50 reltionship firstoff, and both investers have interests in AMD, whether its fab or not, so of course AMD gets first call, or would you rather make money on one side while potentially losing much more elsewhere? Was that the kind of company you worked for? I doubt it. This is different and cant be compared the same, as cross interests apply here.
As for reducing the costs of upgrading? Whats that to do with anything? And as far as the new owners, you ever look at the price of gas lately? Im sure they arent going to run out of money.
These things you have mentioned dont directly apply to this relationship. And what makes anyone think there wont or even cant be more cash injection? If these new partners are in it to make money, you can bet theyll pony up if called on to do so, and yes, they do have the funds
October 7, 2008 3:01:07 PM

Look bottom line is amd has had money injected into it from a few
different place before and after phenom,all im sayin without a different
mind set about cpu's this money will not change anything.
(Look all i've heard was native quad core it's all BS
out of all the native quads amd has it can't beat intels cheapest double
cheese berger, thats not a money problem thats a design problem.
so again no matter how much money is thrown at a bad design it's still
will not help the company (AMD)
October 7, 2008 3:04:22 PM

JAYDEEJOHN said:
Read all the information out. Its a 50-50 reltionship firstoff, and both investers have interests in AMD, whether its fab or not


According to the article, it's a 56:44 relationship, with AMD in the minority position.

Quote:
so of course AMD gets first call


Not if they only have a 44% share.

Quote:
or would you rather make money on one side while potentially losing much more elsewhere?


Again, if it's an independent company its responsibility is to maximise profits, not to support AMD; if a better offer comes along AMD will be looking for somewhere else to make their chips.

Quote:
As for reducing the costs of upgrading? Whats that to do with anything? And as far as the new owners, you ever look at the price of gas lately? Im sure they arent going to run out of money.


So your theory seems to be that the Arabs will keep pumping billions of dollars into this company in order to prop up AMD; I don't think the world really works like that.

BTW, last I looked the price of oil was below $90 and sinking...
October 7, 2008 3:19:15 PM

The fab partner is 1. Not many, just 1. Yes they have majority, but they also hold minority with AMD on the other end. So all this cross/other ownership doesnt exist on the fab side. Also, you fail to consider one thing. Ill let you guess, as youve not thought this out. And yes, the price of gas has to drop another 50 a barrel before its back to what it was not long ago.
a c 108 à CPUs
October 7, 2008 3:21:47 PM

MarkG said:
No, the foundry company, if it's really an independent company, will be trying to make money building chips; if some company other than AMD offer them more money than AMD can afford to pay, then AMD will find itself looking for another place to build its chips.

If it's a separate company, its responsibility will be to its shareholders, not to AMD; and while AMD is obviously a large shareholder, it's not the majority.

Quote:
It was the company debt and the cost of upgrading FABs that was crippling AMD (the old AMD).


And this won't reduce the cost of upgrading fabs, it will just dump that cost onto the new company; which may well still go bust if the new owners can't afford to keep pumping money in.

Having worked for a fabless chip company I'm far from convinced that this is in AMD's long-term interest; they're going from controlling their own chip production to being just another customer.


There is a legal reason why the United Arab Emirates holds 56 percent and AMD holds 44% percent on the foundry side - and subsequently the UAE holding a 20 percent interest in the parent AMD.

As a major minority stakeholder with that level of ownership these are not 'free market' foundries in the sense you are implying. AMD owns the capacity available in the existing facilities and certainly that made available at Malta.

Excess capacity may be available for a third party but I would feel certain that its status would be secondary to the demands of AMD.

A majority ownership position in a joint venture such as this may not imply superior voting rights and control over directors and officers.
a b à CPUs
October 7, 2008 3:34:35 PM

Yes ... oh and Chunky old Hector is still in control - he can still fire Dirk.
Hector is on the board and has hefty rights and a shedload of stock.
Dirk is an employee ...

Perception is everything in managment.

Hector still pulls the strings.

He never stopped.
October 7, 2008 3:44:00 PM

The production. Thats the key. Means nada about wjether AMD would ever even stand a chance at denial in the first place. Production capability will be over 2 x what theyve had in the past. So, that eliminateds that as being a possibility, besides what I and wc pointed out. Sure theres going to be questions about this, but too early to make such statements. We have to actually think how this all plays out in the big picture, put fanboyism/favortism aside, and think about it. Will there be negatives as far as AMD goes? No doubt, but none from what Ive read here, at least not for a long while. The real question is, will there be negatives for Intel? And at a much sooner scenario?
!