Is It Too Little Too Late

[4Ryan6]

First of all let me make it perfectly clear this is not a fanboy, flame, troll, or any intended bad purpose thread as a moderator here at THGF it would not be in my best interests to start a thread like that, however this is a thread of my own concerns regarding AMD, and its future survivability.

In the day that AMD was King of the hill, with the socket 939 FX line they got there by standing on the shoulders of the OCing community, when Intel released the Core 2 and AMD had no counter to it and Intel surged ahead, AMD laid down like a dog and decided to shoot for the business market, Opterons rained down and AMD walked away from the OCing community, the very ones that put them where they were.

Intel was smart enough to see the worth of the OCing community so they allowed their CPUs to be OCd, Intel leaves AMD in the dust like a Top Fuel Dragster vs a Volkswagon Beetle, so now after realizing their mistakes AMD is trying to regain the OCing community by flooding the market with their Black Edition CPU line of unlocked multiplier CPUs, unfortunately they still don't cut it.

This surely seems like a bash AMD thread but its not, I have been loyal to AMD for years hoping for AMD to be able to come back and pull a rabbit out of the hat, but with the overclockability of the Intel 775, and the raw power and overclockability of the I7 line can AMD actually, continue this half stepping and survive.

 

[fazers_on_stun]

^ IMO AMD simply did not have the resources to compete everywhere Intel has - look at the cancellation of Bobcat in the netbook market as just one example. And it taking 2+ years for them to finally catch up with Intel's previous gen on desktop CPUs. If Intel keeps executing its roadmap like it has for the last 3 years, and AMD sticks to theirs, by the time their next gen CPU Bulldozer comes out Intel will be 2 gens ahead. It all comes down to $$, and with Intel a year ahead on process nodes, that's a year ahead on lower fab costs and hence profit margins.

AMD rested on their laurels with K8 for too long, and Core2 basically caught them with their pants, skivvies and socks down . So for the next couple years, we'll see the P2 975, 985, $9.95, a sawbuck .

It's basically a Heimlich squeeze in all directions, and it already caused AMD to cough up their fabs last year. Despite the fanbois claiming that being a stroke of genius, yadda-yadda, I'm fairly certain that AMD would have loved to keep their fabs if it had been a financially viable option. Besides, it was Hector's idea and we all know what kinda genius he is .

Also, I don't think the enthusiast market is that big or compelling anymore - computers in general and CPUs in particular are just commodity items nowadays & Joe 6-pak could care less that some CPU got up to 5GHz on air or 7GHz on LN2. Sorta like the Ham Radio enthusiasts being a well-recognized group of expert enthusiasts 50 or 60 years ago, but once everybody had a transistor radio, or at least a cellphone , the Hamsters faded into insignificance.

Shouldn't this thread be in the AMD & Intel sticky??

 

[UltraO]

Hehe ^^ I agree, all these black editions made only to make OC'ers go nuts & crazy and say "OMG OMG AMD HAS UNLOCKED MULTIPLIER * Dribbling mouths * AMD FTW INTEL COST 1K UNLOCKED LET'S GO BREAK WORLD RECORD AND KICK A$$!". Though even the "locked" C2Qs and i7s seem to overwhelm the unlocked BEs.

I however, think that the number of enthusiasts is bigger now, than it was for let's say 5 years ago. I must say however, the progress in technology in the CPU & Graphics area is going very fast and is accelerating! Back when there were Pentium 3s AMD came with the Athlons and kicked Intel's a$$. AMD kicked Intel's Pentium butt all the way until the Core 2s came out. Since then AMD has been behind, all the time...

 

[jennyh]

^ IMO AMD simply did not have the resources to compete everywhere Intel has

You're a real genius aren't you fazers?

 

[Scotteq]

...and so it begins....

 

[fazers_on_stun]

You're a real genius aren't you fazers?

LOL - I can tell you appreciate my amazing grasp of the obvious, eh ?? I guess I could get a job at AMD's Department of Du'h with this skill level, no doubt...


Now, other than my delivery, which part of my post do you wish to contest??

 

[theholylancer]

Well, lets step back a little bit

take a look at the amount of people caring what CPU their computer has vs what can it do.

AMD is trying to move a platform ahead when people are demanding more power, and more flexibility and their attempts of the spider deal is alright.

And if they can get the SoC style chips with decent gfx on-die out first by at least a year.

Then yes, they can win, not good for us enthusiasts by any margin, but they can survive and win.

 

[fazers_on_stun]

Unless AMDs roadmap changed again this morning while I wasn't looking, Bulldozer (fusion) won't be out until 2011. It's possible they could pull it in like they did Istanbul, but this is supposed to be a radically new architecture with on-die GPU, at least the last time I read about it. So if anything I would expect it to get pushed out, given the complexity and novelty.

 

[theholylancer]

Same for intel on this one, but with them acting faster with on die pcie, who knows what will happen...

amd talked about this first, and they made the ati move to support it, whilst even if intel pushes out something like lynnfield with GMA onboard their biggest selling point would be lower integration costs for OEM, which some say is very big, whilst i hope and imo, they will not draw much of a market when people still can't do more things with their boxes.

Then there is LRB, if that comes out and it becomes on-die with a current gen (as in 4800 G200) perf, then AMD will simple be dead if fusion is not launched with a good performance, and i hope then ati lives on...

 

[fazers_on_stun]

It'll be interesting to see how the on-die IGP in Clarkdale (?) performs - I had heard something like 4x performance increase, which will probably compete well with AMDs IGPs. Time will tell.

As for the future, check out THIS link for some info on relative R&D expenditures. Seems that Intel's is something like 4x AMD's, but then AMD's revenues are something like 9x smaller than Intel's. So AMD is like the 90-lb swimmer with a 30-lb brick tied to him, while Intel is the 800 lb fat guy who can float even with a 120-lb brick tied to him .

Anyway, my point above is that Intel spending so much more on R&D, is likely to pull even further ahead of AMD. However this is a simple analysis since Intel obviously spends R&D funds on much more than CPUs & GPUs. Such as buggy SSDs ...

 

[jennyh]

Who cares what igp intel put on the same die? It's gonna be total garbage anyway. I'd rather wait another 2 years for something that was actually worth buying instead of any intel igp.

Funnily enough, in 2 years time intels igp's will probably be about the same as AMD's are now.

 

[OvrClkr]

Well I guess it's my time to disagree.... Yes intel pwns AMD.. we all know this but as far as overclocking goes the only Intels that can achieve high clocks are SOME 775 dual core CPU's and the old pent 4's.... As far as AMD goes they hold the record for the highest quad overclock both on the AM2+ platform and the AM3. The fact that the i7's cannot compete with AMD's records is IMO embarrasing since you are paying a premium in the first place..... There is absolutely NO excuse for intel to sell a chip (enthusiast chip BTW) for a grand that cannot crush AM3's when it's time for Ln2...... That is my complaint for Intel....

IMO as long as we keep buying both Intel and AMD chips, the cycle will never end.....

Intel = VERY Fast and Expensive

AMD = Fast and Inexpensive

I agree with medjohnson7, as long as my chip can hold its own.... I will never be interested in spending mad coin on something that will give me a slight performance gain....

 

[medjohnson77]

Well the way I look at it is that as long as the little guy(AMD) puts out not the fastest, but CPUs that can hang with or close to the big guy, for a decent price, and they can handle all my needs, I will be buying their product. Not a fanboy for either side, but I want to see AMD stay alive, and hopefully come out with the fastest CPU's . Is that going to happen? Who knows, but one can hope.

 

[DXRick]

I wonder what is keeping AMD alive, given their big quarterly losses. It reminds me of Eastern Airlines, who told us (I worked for them at the time) that they had plenty of cash to handle the losses but went bankrupt anyway.

 

[JAYDEEJOHN]

Its not just who holds the top rung here.
Its about it all, the igps, power usage, discrete gpus etc etc
Some decent wins for AMD: Their ability to surprise lately shouldnt be under appreciated. Turning duals into quads is a genious move, it has to up sales.
Having the highest clock generated ever on a quad by many differing quads over Intel
The mobile sector is owned on the discrete end now as ATI has taken the lead there
ATIs advanced early release of its DX11 parts

Who knows if itll be enough, but this clearly isnt the same company some have come to hate in the past due to their past failures

 

[OvrClkr]

I wonder what is keeping AMD alive, given their big quarterly losses. It reminds me of Eastern Airlines, who told us (I worked for them at the time) that they had plenty of cash to handle the losses but went bankrupt anyway.

The reason AMD is still alive is due to the fact that they are still selling alot of CPU's, in the last quarter they have outsold Intel to be frank, but now that the i5's debut is around the corner, we will have to see if that will change AMD's pace....

The economy hit a record low and that helped AMD....Really helped AMD......But who knows what will happen......time will tell......

 

[theholylancer]

Its like how Honda is tanking while the copycat Hyundai is seeing rises in sales, the cheaper guys will always win in a bad econ time, as people start to cut back. Even if they may not perform as well or last as long as the real deal.

 

[Onus]

There are a couple of chunks of the market that need the CPU performance that, right now, only Intel can deliver. Where enough time means enough money, even the premium prices Intel charges are acceptable.
For everyone else, it simply doesn't matter. At the low end, however, it sometimes comes down to the quality of the IGP on the chipset. As resolutions go up, and more of even the casual games demonstrate the limp impotence of Intel IGPs, AMD solutions look better. I believe that's a huge market, of both home and business users. AMD may be down, but I don't think they're out, not by a longshot. It may not be their CPUs that save them, but the whole package.

 

[JAYDEEJOHN]

Hmmm, where have I heard that this economy would favor AMD more than Intel before?

 

[medjohnson77]

There are a couple of chunks of the market that need the CPU performance that, right now, only Intel can deliver. Where enough time means enough money, even the premium prices Intel charges are acceptable.
For everyone else, it simply doesn't matter. At the low end, however, it sometimes comes down to the quality of the IGP on the chipset. As resolutions go up, and more of even the casual games demonstrate the limp impotence of Intel IGPs, AMD solutions look better. I believe that's a huge market, of both home and business users. AMD may be down, but I don't think they're out, not by a longshot. It may not be their CPUs that save them, but the whole package.

"AMD may be down, but I don't think they're out, not by a longshot. It may not be their CPUs that save them, but the whole package"

I agree with you there and JdJ has said with the way things are and the ever gloom of Jobs, or the lack of Jobs right now, It is hard not to look at AMD's offering's and not go with them for many. They really have made progress, sure there not on top, however, I can't complain In the performance department on my 940 from them, and with the Grafix card performance of the 4800 series, the whole platform thing is really showing very nice performance, and is competive with some of Intels top offerings giving what it cost to build the AMD platform.

 

[4Ryan6]

Well I guess it's my time to disagree.... Yes intel pwns AMD.. we all know this but as far as overclocking goes the only Intels that can achieve high clocks are SOME 775 dual core CPU's and the old pent 4's.... As far as AMD goes they hold the record for the highest quad overclock both on the AM2+ platform and the AM3. The fact that the i7's cannot compete with AMD's records is IMO embarrasing since you are paying a premium in the first place..... There is absolutely NO excuse for intel to sell a chip (enthusiast chip BTW) for a grand that cannot crush AM3's when it's time for Ln2...... That is my complaint for Intel....

IMO as long as we keep buying both Intel and AMD chips, the cycle will never end.....

Intel = VERY Fast and Expensive

AMD = Fast and Inexpensive

I agree with medjohnson7, as long as my chip can hold its own.... I will never be interested in spending mad coin on something that will give me a slight performance gain....

So you're basing your statement on Ln2 OC tests ???, well that would be viable if those same AMD CPUs could produce those results on air and water cooling, but they don't.

All that claimed speed from OCing with Ln2 brought on the OOHs and AAHs, and some of us fell in that jump on the AMD bandwagon, but the actual OCing reality on air and water cooling was no where near the claims at all.

Intel has as much right to sell their high end CPUs for a Grand as AMD did, or did you forget the release prices of the AMD FX57 and AMD FX60, when it comes to an air or water cooling setup the real results of OCing AMD come in very disappointing, when compared to what you can get out of an Intel.

I own Intel and AMD, so I have both to compare as far as their OCing capabilities of what they can and cannot do, and my present results are from air cooling, so I know where the limitations are between the two, thus the reasons for my concerns in the first place.

Its understandable that you'd wave your AMD flag so high, its like walking through a desert looking for water and AMD finally gave you some, of course you'd appreciate it, you're dying from thirst, unfortunately you're still dying from thirst, because what AMD actually gave you was Ln2.

 

[fazers_on_stun]

Who cares what igp intel put on the same die? It's gonna be total garbage anyway. I'd rather wait another 2 years for something that was actually worth buying instead of any intel igp.

Funnily enough, in 2 years time intels igp's will probably be about the same as AMD's are now.

Well since Intel has >50% of the graphics market with their presently crummy IGPs, then 4x improvement might get them another 15 - 20% marketshare. So I'd guess AMD had better be caring about what IGP Intel puts on the Clarkdale

We should see some reviews of this "total garbage" IGP in a few months, about the same timeframe as your "guarantee" of AMD returning to profitability ...

 

[fazers_on_stun]

I wonder what is keeping AMD alive, given their big quarterly losses. It reminds me of Eastern Airlines, who told us (I worked for them at the time) that they had plenty of cash to handle the losses but went bankrupt anyway.

Well AMD has been busy selling of chunks of themselves, but now that they are down to bone + ATI, I'd hafta guess it'll be ATI next on the auction block, if their financials don't improve as soon as some here like to guarantee .

 

[fazers_on_stun]

The reason AMD is still alive is due to the fact that they are still selling alot of CPU's, in the last quarter they have outsold Intel to be frank, but now that the i5's debut is around the corner, we will have to see if that will change AMD's pace....

The economy hit a record low and that helped AMD....Really helped AMD......But who knows what will happen......time will tell......

You do know that AMD lost CPU marketshare last quarter, right? All the gain they made in the first quarter, so they're down below 20% again...

Just to set the facts straight, AMD underperformed the street expectations last quarter - they lost 62 cents per share - INTC and NVDA actually outperformed the street and had a positive return per share. So, no - the economy hurt AMD and helped INTC and NVDA. For proof, read the conference call transcripts from Meyer et al after the Q2 report came out.

 

[OvrClkr]

I agree with you ryan, I always agree with you... im just upset that Intel is really overpricing their chips....Im not trying to argue over the whole Ln2 debate, just kinda sucks that you pay good money on something that does not perform when you push it..... On Air AMD does not do bad at all , nor does Intel.... But look at it this way....

Yesterday I clocked my x2 550 @ 3.9Ghz ( 1.45v vcore ) ( 1.4v for the NB ) using DDR2 800MHZ <--- stock overall temps never hit 48c (ambient @ 26c)

3dmark06 score : 16,210 ( 550 used as a dual core ) GTX 260 (216) stock clocks

===========================================================

Now a friend of mine that owns an Intel Q9400 overclocked to 3.6Ghz using a 4870x2 failed to surpass my score.... that is an EMBARRASMENT due to the fact that he is running 4 cores and it is obvious that his GPU should crush my 260... That is my point.....

http://www.tomshardware.com/forum/page-253377_29_300.html

on top of that he is running 8Gb of DDR2, while I run 3.25Gb (XP).... that just makes it even worse...