AMD Beats the Street; Reports 128 Million Dollar Loss for Q3 2009

Despite what JennyH said in another thread, AMD posted a loss of $128 million.

http://www.reuters.com/article/pressRelease/idUS197097+15-Oct-2009+BW20091015

SUNNYVALE, Calif.--(Business Wire)--
AMD1 (NYSE:AMD) today reported revenue for the third quarter of 2009 of $1.396
billion. Third quarter 2009 revenue increased 18 percent compared to the second
quarter of 2009 and decreased 22 percent compared to the third quarter of 2008.

In the third quarter of 2009, AMD reported a net loss attributable to AMD common
stockholders of $128 million, or $0.18 per share, which includes a net favorable
impact of $54 million, or $0.08 per share, primarily from a $66 million gain
from the repurchase of debt as described in the table below2. AMD`s operating
loss was $77 million.

In the second quarter of 2009, AMD had revenue of $1.184 billion, a net loss
attributable to AMD common stockholders of $330 million and an operating loss of
$249 million. In the third quarter of 2008, AMD had revenue from continuing
operations of $1.797 billion, a net loss attributable to AMD common stockholders
of $134 million and an operating income of $122 million.

While this may sound like bad news, it's actually good news. AMD beat analysts' expectations and is getting closer to the black.

Will Q4 be their quarter? I still don't think so, but it looks distantly possible now.
 
Solution
pile_of_crap.jpg
yeah, well with Core i7 CPU's and motherboard costing 12 milion each of course things are going well...

I wouldn't buy intel i7 or i5 simply because of the excessive cost of both the motherboard and CPU.

Right now the Phenom II X4 955 Black overclocked to 3.8Ghz look like the best bang for the buck option.
 

jennyh

Splendid


Just to clarify - amd made a profit on their 'products', ie everything they sold. That part of the business is profitable again, and that's what really counts.

AMD didn't just beat analysts predictions, they were more than twice as good as what was being predicted. -18c a share was better than every single one of the analysts were predicting. The best prediction was -21c, AMD beat them all.

They can hardly fail to not post a small but noticable profit in Q4. ATI have hundreds of millions to make on graphics next quarter, that alone should be enough to push the entire company into a profit of $200m-ish.
 

bboynatural

Distinguished
Oct 13, 2009
272
0
18,790



http://www.tomshardware.com/forum/272065-33-gamers-only-worth !!!!
>.>

I don't think i5 can outperform phenom II 955 if the phenom outperforms a i7...
don't forget the limited Dual GPU because of dual x8
And the fact that this socket won't have 6 cores while AM3 will have BOTH 6 AND 8 cores, one for 2010, the other for 2011.

I ALWAYS SAID THAT LGA1156 WAS EVILLL!!! >=D
 

bboynatural

Distinguished
Oct 13, 2009
272
0
18,790
Right now I have an AMD PII X4 810 in my HTPC (which is overkill) and an intel i7 920 in my gaming PC.

The basic math of what I paid for MB+RAM+CPU for each:
Intel: $300+$130+$320 = $750
AMD: $200+$110+$180 = $490

The thing is, I'm happy I bought the i7 for my gaming rig. That's the computer I use to do a lot of DVD ripping, and my i7 system is over 2x faster than my AMD system in that task. Another reason I'll continue to be happy is the i9... which should I choose to upgrade my CPU in a year or more, I won't have to buy a new MB because of a socket change. The AM3 socket... who knows? AM3 has been out for much longer than 1366, so whatever new hotness AMD is working on, there's a good chance their move to a new socket and I'd have to upgrade with a whole new MB.

The only reason I considered spending over a grand (total) on a new intel computer was because I expect the thing to last me at least 3 full and happy years before I have to think about upgrading the CPU and MB again. RAM you can add in. GPUs can be switched out any time. You can always add more Hard Drives. But once your MB doesn't support the new chips, you gotta spend another $200+ on top of that CPU price, with the chance of having to buy new RAM as well.

...

My last gaming computer base was a AMD 939 socket SLI board, with an Athlon 3200+, later upgraded to a Dual Core Opteron 165. It lasted me 3 years before it become horribly CPU bottlenecked in games and I went to the i7.



http://www.fudzilla.com/content/view/15619/35/
http://www.fudzilla.com/content/view/15567/35/

Nop, AM3 is fully alive and ready to own LGA1156, who is running straight into a dead end :)
 

jj463rd

Distinguished
Apr 9, 2008
1,510
0
19,860

According to the beta benchmarks at anandtech the i5 750 does indeed outperform the Phenom II X4 955 BE at stock speeds in most of the benchmarks.
http://www.anandtech.com/bench/default.aspx?p=109&p2=88

Myself I own a Phenom II X4 955 BE CPU.
However the i5 can be over clocked by over 50%.
Sadly though many of the new motherboards are apparently defective because of those Foxconn sockets.
 

era86

Distinguished
Sep 24, 2009
184
0
18,710


I don't think 1156 is evil... :)

It caters to the mainstream market very well.



Many? I'm sure the defective Foxconn boards are floating around, but it isn't a huge epidemic. "Some" would be a better term I suppose.
 

bboynatural

Distinguished
Oct 13, 2009
272
0
18,790
I don't have the 1156. I have the 1366. Given that my i7 920 is 2x faster than my X4 810, in applications that I actually use... I don't see how I missed out.

Oh it's not what I meant, I was just answering to your

Another reason I'll continue to be happy is the i9... which should I choose to upgrade my CPU in a year or more, I won't have to buy a new MB because of a socket change. The AM3 socket... who knows? AM3 has been out for much longer than 1366, so whatever new hotness AMD is working on, there's a good chance their move to a new socket and I'd have to upgrade with a whole new MB.

By saying that AM3 was alive! that i7vsphenomII955 was for jj463rd saying that i5 can outperform Phenom II 955

Also jj463rd, that benchmark doesnt look edible, not even one bit...

On medium quality, anadtech claims that Phenom II 955 can run at 51fps?? dunno what card they used tho..not a very precise benchmark..

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/phenom-x4-955,2278-9.html

at 1920x1200 on HIGH, here it gets a fair 71, the performance of the i5 on medium (even tho the WHOLE bench was fked, i5 performs AROUND the same as i7, and here, Phenom II 955 clearly has a leading advantage...

There was many benchmarks in the link I gave you proving that phenom II 955 performs overall better then a i7-920, I don't think theres anyway way in hell a i5 could perform better.

Also, if a possible "advantage" might exist, it would:
1) be VERY small, maybe 1 or 2 fps?
2) Gone the moment you add a second GPU and Crank the AA : SOMEHOW (because this isnt supose to be CPU wise) Intel's CPU drastically fail the AA benchmarks, often dropping by 20FPS while Phenom II955 drops (hold your breath) by 4 fps only... =/
Also no matter what the overclocking of i5 is, You provided us yourself with those overclocking peril pages...Also no 8core neither 6core for LGA1156.

This socket was uber fail to start with...
 

bboynatural

Distinguished
Oct 13, 2009
272
0
18,790
Of course, knowing if 1366 actually does outlast the performance peak of AM3 is in the stars. But I have a hard time being convinced that I paid extra for no good reason. Especially when I can see the performance difference clear as day between my two computers when I transcode.

No you didnt!
The thread I made CLEARLY states that this is for people who GAME ONLY (most of the gamers NEVER zip OR video encode...that is why I made that thread).
You talked about DVD ripping, thus making a i7 a way better deal, I will never deny that.
 

era86

Distinguished
Sep 24, 2009
184
0
18,710
I don't get it... why would anyone who is a "gamer" care about the CPU choices one makes? GPU performance is what usually determines the true performance of most games anyway right?
 

era86

Distinguished
Sep 24, 2009
184
0
18,710


Ah I see. Well my point still stands. My board has been just fine. Though, I am not an OCer so I may not see this defect manifest itself.
 

bboynatural

Distinguished
Oct 13, 2009
272
0
18,790
Yes but to some extent comes bottlenecking from your CPU, thus making your GPU not work the way it supose to work.
One simple example is this review from Guru3D
http://www.guru3d.com/article/radeon-hd-5770-in-3way-crossfirex-review-test/7

As you see, even the intel i7 can't fully support a 3way HD5000 serie.
it cant provide it with enough horsepower, thus making a 3way Crossfire less good then a simple crossfire.

Anything under Phenom II 955 or 965 is LIKELY to bottleneck someting as high as the HD5870 on crossfire. As for 955 or 965, nobody really know until we get some real good benchmarks. Don't forget that the 955 was a big enough jump from the 940.
 

era86

Distinguished
Sep 24, 2009
184
0
18,710
But do people need 3-way crossfire for today's games? Maybe if you're running at very extreme resolutions!

And why would you want to do a 3-way configuration. By then, there should be better single GPU solutions, right? "Should" is the keyword there though :).
 

bboynatural

Distinguished
Oct 13, 2009
272
0
18,790
You don't need 3 way to encounter a bottleneck.
As you can see in this benchmark, the 3 ways is just abit stronger then the HD5870 on crossfire.
To make it more simple, the i7 was just a LITTLE close to be the cause of a bottleneck with HD5870 crossfire (aka Hd5870x2, or HD5900 seems to be the new name for dual chip..)
We still cant say 100% sure that Phenom II 955 can be the source of a bottleneck in the current generation, But id be surpised if a cpu that came 1 year after the i7 can cause a bottleneck where the i7 dont... VERY surprised, especially when that both CPU performs same when handling GPU's (phenom II 955 even performs better in most cases)
 

bboynatural

Distinguished
Oct 13, 2009
272
0
18,790
.....? what was the point of this answer?
I basically said that you didn't waste your money going i7 and this is the answer I get?
Where is the trolling? Your mad because a Phenom II 955 performs the same as your super special awesome
"<Gaming PC> | Cosmos 1000 Case | Zalman 850W PSU | EVGA X58 3XSLI | i7 920 OCed to 3.3GHz Stock Voltage/Fan | 6GB OCZ Platinum 1600 | Sapphire HD5870 | 2x Samsung 2343 (2048 x 1152) + 1x Samsung 2333HD (1080p) | 4x 1TB HDs in RAID 5 | Windows 7 Build 7100" In gaming?

Once again, I am talking only gaming wise and this is why I said you didn't waste money so what the hell was the point of that reply? I didn't claim anywhere that this is my thread?
learn courtesy, it could help you in life instead of always jumping to conclusion and been mean.
 

bboynatural

Distinguished
Oct 13, 2009
272
0
18,790
Yes I am wasting my time, because you are obviously the idiot type and cannot take time to check how this thread moved to this topic.

yeah, well with Core i7 CPU's and motherboard costing 12 milion each of course things are going well...

I wouldn't buy intel i7 or i5 simply because of the excessive cost of both the motherboard and CPU.

Right now the Phenom II X4 955 Black overclocked to 3.8Ghz look like the best bang for the buck option.

This is what made this thread change subject
i5 sounded like a great deal until the recent news about the defective sockets hit.
i5 outperformed the Phenom II's at a similar cost
http://www.tomshardware.com/forum/ [...] g-chipsets

Right now I would only go the i7/x58 or Phenom II/AM3 or AM2+ route.
Too bad about the P55/1156 platform.Hopefully that will be fixed soon otherwise it will scare people off that platform.

I answered to HIM who said that he would go with i7, so I don't even know why the fk did you get involved in this whole i7 thingy. Your answer was that AM3 is not a dead socket, your the one that started arguing with me over i7 vs phenom II and your clearly one big idiot.
This isnt your thread either, I have the right to talk, if your not happy, bang your head on the wall. :)
 


Really? you can get a pretty decent P55 mobo for about $134. Not much difference between it and the $200 option sans some IEEE connectors that most gamers don't use.

And DDR3 can't be the reason since its now cheap thanks to Core i7 pushing it.

I think its hard to say if you have a LGA1156 Core i7 860 vs a Phenom II X4 955. the price difference is not that great and the performance is very dependant.



Sorry but you have two things there I don't like:

1. That link about LGA1156 being dead is wrong. Thats been a planned CPU from the start. Its a low end dual core. We don't know Intels full plans for LGA 1156 yet.

2. You complain about dual x8 PCIe 2.0 when even current gen GPUs can't fully saturate dual x16 PCIe 2.0 ports. Just like a GPU at the time didn't fully saturate AGP when it was mothballed.

Now if they did, then I would understand. But until it does, x8 is fine. A lot of places have done tests and show the performance loss is minimal until you go from x16 to x4.

As for AMD, good for them beating the expectations. But lets see how they fare when those Senior Notes come due. Might take a chunk out.
 


So its in "Extreme" situations meaning people who OC CPUs beyond thier limit in negative cooling. Wont matter for most since we do simplistic OCing.

Also, this is why I use Asus mobos. A bit more expensive but have yet to have a problem with any components.
 

jj463rd

Distinguished
Apr 9, 2008
1,510
0
19,860

I hear you.I usually use ASUS boards myself but apparently many of the P55 boards (ASUS included) are using those defective Foxconn socket parts.
http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/showthread.php?p=4064455#post4064455

Also Toms Hardware has noted some other problems with these new motherboards.
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/budget-p55-motherboard,2436-15.html

However I think that they are in the process of being fixed so I would avoid these early P55 boards until then.Myself I WANTED to build a i5-750 system I guess I'll have to wait for a while.
 

croc

Distinguished
BANNED
Sep 14, 2005
3,038
1
20,810


I think that I'll wait for the 10-q results to be posted... Non-gaap 'explanations' by AMD seem to be just a bit 'weasle-ey' if you get my meaning.
 

bboynatural

Distinguished
Oct 13, 2009
272
0
18,790



1. This is for next year, While intel will release a less performant dual core, intel will release a 6 core. If we consider the next year, no matter what intel will release, amd will have the bulldozer 8 cores. If I remember correctly, the LGA1156 is a Quad-Core SKU and will simply never get the upgrade that AM3 or LGA1366 will have. In the end, people that want performance/buck will ditch LGA1156 for AM3 because they have cheaper CPU than the LGA1366.

2. Check this out:
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/radeon-hd-5850,2433-14.html

2 HD5850 on crossfire. The cpu used was the very powerfull i7-860 instead of the i5 that most ppl will get. Lets assume the horsepower of the CPU wont be a cause of better performance.

The first chart is only interesting because it has the Bloomfield in blue, the lynnfield used here was overclocked and I would like to compare stock to stock.

Check the green lines in the second chart for L4D.
The performance on a Dual X16 is 162 on stock
The performance of dual X8 is 137 on stock.

Thats near 30 FPS you lose.
Once again you have to consider that the cpu horesepower MIGHT come into action we never know and 2
Those were 2HD5850. 2HD5870 will require FAR more power. And if we get 30fps drops with HD5850, we don't know for HD5870. Now those are the YEAR old games. Imagine with crysis 2 for example (or whatever will use the cryengine 3) In a requiring engine like cryengine, EVER fps count. So for the same $$, People will probably afford a Phenom II 955 and being 100% future proofed for Dual GPu.
Even if there is no "big" drop, 30 was enough to scare many people and i5 lost alot of popularity to the Phenom II 955 in MANY forums I went in.

Of course all of this is speculations based on a review about 2 different hardwares, not the CPU we wanted and not the "latest" gpu.

So now we have a choice between a Quad-Core Socket, versus a will be 12 core socket. (http://www.fudzilla.com/content/view/15566/35/) Now this 12 core will be a server CPU, but we still have the 8 cores (http://www.fudzilla.com/content/view/15939/35/) for desktop while LGA1156 will stay tweaking the 4 cores. We also have choice between a Full future proof DualX16 or a dualx8 that already showed some weakness with only 2HD5850.

All this for the same price.
The only factor left is wether you prefer intel, or AMD. =/ So no I don't think I can convince you.
 

croc

Distinguished
BANNED
Sep 14, 2005
3,038
1
20,810


Uh, this thread was about AMD financials. Do you have anything to contribute on that topic?

Off-topic, how many threads a day do you have to trash with your AMD fanboi FUD to satisfy your ego, or are you just going for post-count...?