Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question
sticky

AMD CPU speculation... and expert conjecture - Page 8

Tags:
  • AMD
  • CPUs
Last response: in CPUs
Share
a b à CPUs
December 3, 2012 2:57:24 PM

So the Steamroller Server delays are official now. The bigger problem is they're still showing 28nm in 2014. They must not have confidence in GF/TSMC to hit a 20nm node in time. That's going to hurt when Intel has moved to the 14nm node.

http://www.cpu-world.com/news_2012/2012120301_AMD_serve...

Maybe there's still a chance for Steamroller APU next year? News on that is still mixed.

The other speculation was AMD might scale up their new Jaguar quad core to higher speeds. Which is basically what the module skeptics have been saying from the beginning. Keep progressing the K10.5 core.
December 3, 2012 3:34:25 PM

If they dont wait for 20nm, theyll need to make sure its shrinkable, 20nm cant be that far off.
Im afraid of cadence on this as well
a b à CPUs
December 3, 2012 7:46:26 PM

Why cant Amd just release steamroller and the next gen server CPU on 32nm who cares if its on 28nm just wait to do that next year they need to stop waiting on fabs and just release what product they have. They really need to stop counting on Global foundries if they don't they wont stop going under. Not only that but a 28nm TSMC tiny APU for tablets/laptops would be nice as well is it really this hard Amd or are you just waiting to go bankrupt our hoping someone buys you out?
Related resources
a b À AMD
a b à CPUs
December 3, 2012 8:08:19 PM

doesn't work like that. You need more die area if you are adding in transistors for performance. you need to go down a node to do that.
a b à CPUs
December 3, 2012 8:45:29 PM

esrever said:
doesn't work like that. You need more die area if you are adding in transistors for performance. you need to go down a node to do that.



its simple stop making designs that need more transistors and use the area they do have more efficiently, seriously they are making the same mistake with steamroller as bulldozer counting on some new design from GF.

Their delays will never stop until they change same as their decrease in sales. If they think i'm waiting until 2014 to upgrade to steamroller and also buying a new board after spending 200$ then they do need to get out of the pure CPU market.

However i will be buying a steamroller laptop.
a b À AMD
a b à CPUs
December 3, 2012 9:38:20 PM

the whole driving force for better performance is moore's law which depends on progressing die shrinks. The gain you get from the same node isn't anywhere as significant as a 50% increase in transistors.
a b à CPUs
December 3, 2012 9:54:41 PM

esrever said:
the whole driving force for better performance is moore's law which depends on progressing die shrinks. The gain you get from the same node isn't anywhere as significant as a 50% increase in transistors.


But does 50% more transistors mean 50% more performance? I think everyone here knows Amd can improve performance with even less transistors.
a b À AMD
a b à CPUs
December 3, 2012 10:56:50 PM

may or may not be the case but its not economical.
December 3, 2012 11:47:49 PM

Imagine it as roots of a plant.
The plant having more roots is capable of drawing water in more ways, or, a cpu having more trannys has more connects/pipes,front end capacity etc etc.
One could physically be the same size as the other, but the one which has more roots/transistors has many more resources, and more capability.
Sorry for the plant analogy, just tired of using cars
a b à CPUs
December 4, 2012 2:22:12 AM

^ Yay an analogy I understand :3.
December 4, 2012 2:58:03 AM

JAYDEEJOHN said:
Imagine it as roots of a plant.
The plant having more roots is capable of drawing water in more ways, or, a cpu having more trannys has more connects/pipes,front end capacity etc etc.
One could physically be the same size as the other, but the one which has more roots/transistors has many more resources, and more capability.
Sorry for the plant analogy, just tired of using cars

Not for nothing I'm still waiting for all the profits AMD is going to make from GF
and all the new customers, While Intel go broke from being fab heavy.
December 4, 2012 1:28:45 PM

http://www.crazyjoys.com/advanced-micro-devices-nyseamd...

Well, it's official at this point. Steamy is all-or-nothing. AMD is doing one of two things:
1.) Assuming they are getting income from what they have now, plus the Wii U, and thinking it will be enough to keep them going.
2.) They are putting everything into what comes next. Steamroller may be the effort of everything they have, as it may the only way they have a chance of recovering from this slump.

I'm going with the former, because of the 2014 release. If they wanted to keep going as they are they could easily just settle for Steamroller being another Piledriver, mild gains in performance and power inefficiency. That would be set on a year-over-year release, you would think. Waiting the extra while to put it out may be to make it as best they can.

Just a theory. If it is true or even relevant, I'm skeptical at best. That would be around Broadwell (that's what its called, right?) which could be 20% better than Ivy in performance/watt. Steamy would have to be 30-40% better than Piledriver for what they would put into it. Unfortunately, I don't see that happening.
a b à CPUs
December 4, 2012 2:32:04 PM

viridiancrystal said:
http://www.crazyjoys.com/advanced-micro-devices-nyseamd...

Well, it's official at this point. Steamy is all-or-nothing. AMD is doing one of two things:
1.) Assuming they are getting income from what they have now, plus the Wii U, and thinking it will be enough to keep them going.
2.) They are putting everything into what comes next. Steamroller may be the effort of everything they have, as it may the only way they have a chance of recovering from this slump.

I'm going with the former, because of the 2014 release. If they wanted to keep going as they are they could easily just settle for Steamroller being another Piledriver, mild gains in performance and power inefficiency. That would be set on a year-over-year release, you would think. Waiting the extra while to put it out may be to make it as best they can.

Just a theory. If it is true or even relevant, I'm skeptical at best. That would be around Broadwell (that's what its called, right?) which could be 20% better than Ivy in performance/watt. Steamy would have to be 30-40% better than Piledriver for what they would put into it. Unfortunately, I don't see that happening.


Here's the problem: AMD isn't making a lot of money on their console wins. The Wii U BOM indicates that the biggest cost of the Wii U is the $140 to create the tablet for crying out loud. AMD is making ZIP profit for processor sold in that space. Nice win, but no profit margin. That accomplishes NOTHING financially for AMD. All it does is tie up resources that would be better put to use where they can actually turn a profit.
a b à CPUs
December 4, 2012 3:02:58 PM

JAYDEEJOHN said:
a cpu having more trannys..


Sorry, but I prefer my CPUs straight! :p 
a b à CPUs
December 4, 2012 7:09:09 PM

gamerk316 said:
Here's the problem: AMD isn't making a lot of money on their console wins. The Wii U BOM indicates that the biggest cost of the Wii U is the $140 to create the tablet for crying out loud. AMD is making ZIP profit for processor sold in that space. Nice win, but no profit margin. That accomplishes NOTHING financially for AMD. All it does is tie up resources that would be better put to use where they can actually turn a profit.


They must have got some decent NREs to do the co-development with IBM/Nintendo. In other words it kept them from having to lay off even more employees.

Not huge profits but more of a royalty with low overhead on their part. Some of that depends on how popular Wii U becomes.
a b à CPUs
December 4, 2012 8:40:23 PM

esrever said:
the whole driving force for better performance is moore's law which depends on progressing die shrinks. The gain you get from the same node isn't anywhere as significant as a 50% increase in transistors.


What if you just made a bigger processor with same size transistors? Do I really care if my CPU is the size of a saltine vs the size of a postage stamp? Not really. They could go back to slot CPU for all I care. :) 

a b À AMD
a b à CPUs
December 4, 2012 8:58:22 PM

twelve25 said:
What if you just made a bigger processor with same size transistors? Do I really care if my CPU is the size of a saltine vs the size of a postage stamp? Not really. They could go back to slot CPU for all I care. :) 

if you are willing to pay (change in area)^2 more money then sure.
a b à CPUs
December 4, 2012 9:25:31 PM

twelve25 said:
What if you just made a bigger processor with same size transistors? Do I really care if my CPU is the size of a saltine vs the size of a postage stamp? Not really. They could go back to slot CPU for all I care. :) 



The Broadwell motherboards will probably end up smaller than the old Pentium 2 cartridge/slot.

The slot design has made a comeback. Especially for servers.
a b à CPUs
December 4, 2012 11:04:44 PM

Cazalan said:


The slot design has made a comeback. Especially for servers.



Which server chips are you referring to?
a b à CPUs
December 5, 2012 12:19:56 AM

esrever said:
if you are willing to pay (change in area)^2 more money then sure.


Not only that, a bigger chip means lower yields for top end parts.

Cheers!
a b À AMD
a b à CPUs
December 5, 2012 2:24:16 AM

de5_Roy said:
amd says they will keep supporting socketed cpus
http://techreport.com/news/24009/amd-were-not-abandonin...
tbf, intel never said they will abandon socketed cpus entirely. chances are hedt platform will retain lga cpus (thus forcing interested users pay moar moniez).

only the extreme cpus costs $1000 would likely be socketed if that was the case.
a b à CPUs
December 5, 2012 2:59:51 AM

I work with large amounts of servers and there is just no chance those are going to be soldered on the motherboard. So I might suspect that in the future, enthusiasts will be buying a lot more Xeon.



December 5, 2012 4:41:25 AM

earl45 said:
Not for nothing I'm still waiting for all the profits AMD is going to make from GF
and all the new customers, While Intel go broke from being fab heavy.

Since you feel inclined on old news
http://www.tomshardware.com/news/amd-mubadala,19550.htm...
As I said long ago.
As for Intel heavy in fab, this new slower market has taken them by surprise, and changes have been made already.
Now, as far as sinking ships, look to pirate bay for that, as only ThunderMan had those visions
a b à CPUs
December 5, 2012 8:37:31 AM

de5_Roy said:
amd says they will keep supporting socketed cpus
http://techreport.com/news/24009/amd-were-not-abandonin...
tbf, intel never said they will abandon socketed cpus entirely. chances are hedt platform will retain lga cpus (thus forcing interested users pay moar moniez).

Intel is thinning the motherboard vendors. they are abusing their market position to force companies out of business. Isn't Intel such a great company to have?

companies like ECS, Evga, biostar, foxconn, and jetway aren't going to be able to afford buying up hoards of Intel processors to solder onto their product and wait till it sells.

Its questionable to see who comes out on top, asus, msi, gigabyte, asrock ... Think about OVERSTOCK. not only would they lose money on the boards that didn't sell, now they are giving intel money for a cpu that didn't sell.

Intel is trying to turn motherboard vendors into pc vendors such as dell, hp, and acer.

Its a great move for Intel's pocketbook, they get to sell one cpu for every motherboard manufactured. Its a disaster waiting to happen for small business computer & repair shops.

How many businesses will go away at the hands of Intel's 14nm innovation?
December 5, 2012 2:37:28 PM

JAYDEEJOHN said:
Since you feel inclined on old news
http://www.tomshardware.com/news/amd-mubadala,19550.htm...
As I said long ago.
As for Intel heavy in fab, this new slower market has taken them by surprise, and changes have been made already.
Now, as far as sinking ships, look to pirate bay for that, as only ThunderMan had those visions

You have a history of making very biased hypothesis, for AMD and against Intel,
which I may add has not taking place at all to date.
So after 3 years or more of doom and gloom for Intel and AMD being so smart about GF
you have been wrong about it all.
a b à CPUs
December 5, 2012 2:40:29 PM

twelve25 said:
Which server chips are you referring to?


ARM blades mostly.



a b à CPUs
December 5, 2012 2:47:16 PM

noob2222 said:


How many businesses will go away at the hands of Intel's 14nm innovation?



If the socket was key to their business then they're on the decline already.

They're ignoring the tablet/phone/netbook and other embedded markets.
December 5, 2012 4:31:57 PM

earl45 said:
You have a history of making very biased hypothesis, for AMD and against Intel,
which I may add has not taking place at all to date.
So after 3 years or more of doom and gloom for Intel and AMD being so smart about GF
you have been wrong about it all.

I said they had a partner, so my link.
I also said Intels investments in their fabs will costs them, as they ratchet down.
Their current stock position is not what it was, and is my point.
a b à CPUs
December 5, 2012 6:31:34 PM

Cazalan said:
If the socket was key to their business then they're on the decline already.

They're ignoring the tablet/phone/netbook and other embedded markets.

as I stated, Intel is trying to force motherboard vendors into the likes of hp, dell, acer, ect.

motherboards are cheap to make in comparison to a full computer.

small computer repair shops will be hit the hardest ... "to fix your dead cpu, this will cost $500 for the motherboard with the soldered cpu" ... you can buy a new computer for that, customer leaves and goes to best buy.
December 5, 2012 6:44:03 PM

JAYDEEJOHN said:
I said they had a partner, so my link.
I also said Intels investments in their fabs will costs them, as they ratchet down.
Their current stock position is not what it was, and is my point.


Let's see AMD sold it's fabs to GF and you said that was a good thing being fabless
you turn out to be completely wrong on this.
This is what GF gave AMD.
1) All CPU's delayed to market and under performing.
2) Yield problems.
3) The cost of doing business with GF has cost AMD dearly.

Let's not forget GF being ahead of Intel in process,
you were more wrong then ever right.
a b à CPUs
December 5, 2012 7:27:23 PM

earl45 said:
Let's see AMD sold it's fabs to GF and you said that was a good thing being fabless
you turn out to be completely wrong on this.
This is what GF gave AMD.
1) All CPU's delayed to market and under performing.
2) Yield problems.
3) The cost of doing business with GF has cost AMD dearly.

Let's not forget GF being ahead of Intel in process,
you were more wrong then ever right.

how much money does AMD have to upgrade the fabs?

How much money does Abu Dhabi (aka GF) have to upgrade the fabs?

Upgrading fabs takes money in the bank, and thats something AMD doesn't have.

Where would AMD's fab process be if they were still the sole owner? how many qualcomm chips would AMD be producing?

The only thing hurting AMD in the short term is the excusivity to GF.
Quote:
AMD had a five-year deal for the exclusive right to manufacture certain 28 nanometer Fusion APU chips, and the foundry is now waiving that right.


this is whats costing AMD 450M over a period of 2 years, to get rid of exclusivity.
December 5, 2012 7:29:47 PM

I never said GF was ahead, I said doing this allows for the monies, which Intel could only dream about, gives them such ability.
Besides Intel, GF has the resources to get to lead process, which may happen.

As to underperforming, thats AMDs fault, as to time to market, GFs and AMDs together, which wouldnt have changed hadnt the sell off occured.

Look at it this way, if AMD is more timely because of say TSMC, who wins?
If their product performs better because of say TSMC, again, who wins?

Also, Keller may not have come avoard if things werent different, and this is a win for team green.

Dont forget I also said if AMD deserves a hit theyll get one.
Well, BD was awful, a step back.
PD, a tad better, and what BD should have been.
So, this isnt GFs fault, or time to market etc, PD should have been here almost 2 years ago, and that lies on AMDs doorstep
December 5, 2012 9:11:00 PM

Too many people talking gaming and calling it a failure. The real question is in the server performance where the real money is.
a b à CPUs
December 5, 2012 9:31:01 PM

twelve25 said:
I figured it had to be something like that. I was scratching my head trying to remember which new Opteron or Xeon slot processor I had missed. :) 



The SeaMicro blades are similar but a bit larger than a P2.

They're 5x11" but with 8 physical CPUs.

a b à CPUs
December 5, 2012 9:49:48 PM

noob2222 said:
as I stated, Intel is trying to force motherboard vendors into the likes of hp, dell, acer, ect.

motherboards are cheap to make in comparison to a full computer.

small computer repair shops will be hit the hardest ... "to fix your dead cpu, this will cost $500 for the motherboard with the soldered cpu" ... you can buy a new computer for that, customer leaves and goes to best buy.



The small computer repair shops have been dead for a while. The DIY market has been in rapid decline.

The gigabytes/asus/etc make the most money selling into the HP/Dell's. The PC box builders don't really make their own motherboards. They're just rebranded. Not much change there.

They're going to have to adjust. Intel wants to embed the system RAM next.

As more sectors move to SoC there's not much left to replace. Connectors are the weakest link right now. USB ports. HDMI ports. Those are the things getting torn up by too many insertions and ESD.




December 6, 2012 2:28:27 AM

JAYDEEJOHN said:
I never said GF was ahead, I said doing this allows for the monies, which Intel could only dream about, gives them such ability.
Besides Intel, GF has the resources to get to lead process, which may happen.

As to underperforming, thats AMDs fault, as to time to market, GFs and AMDs together, which wouldnt have changed hadnt the sell off occured.

Look at it this way, if AMD is more timely because of say TSMC, who wins?
If their product performs better because of say TSMC, again, who wins?

Also, Keller may not have come avoard if things werent different, and this is a win for team green.

Dont forget I also said if AMD deserves a hit theyll get one.
Well, BD was awful, a step back.
PD, a tad better, and what BD should have been.
So, this isnt GFs fault, or time to market etc, PD should have been here almost 2 years ago, and that lies on AMDs doorstep

Having all the money in the world don't make GF a better CPU company.
If it was all about money Apple would be one of the best CPU company's around.
December 6, 2012 4:33:08 AM

They have resources in IP, some great designers and engineers, but no monies, til the sale.
Now, newer minds can be added as well, plus all the best machinery.
This wouldnt have happened at an accelerated pace if AMD had held on.
a b à CPUs
December 6, 2012 5:33:45 AM

If AMD kept the fab they would still be at 45nm. No money to invest in it. They had to sell.
a b À AMD
a b à CPUs
December 6, 2012 5:36:33 AM

AMD should have never had the deal with glofo. It hasn't paid off and its just been delay after delay from glofo and the processes never meeting expectations.
a b à CPUs
December 6, 2012 6:15:11 AM

esrever said:
AMD should have never had the deal with glofo. It hasn't paid off and its just been delay after delay from glofo and the processes never meeting expectations.


They probably didn't have a choice in the initial deal. They had to sell that fab and it was a package deal. At the time they hadn't been profitable for a couple years, and the investors were willing to kick in 10+ billion to push the fab forward.

After the sale they eventually became profitable again.

I still don't see the big deal about GF. They yields have been good for a while. BD wasn't a flop because of GF. It's a weak design plain and simple. The chips are clocking just as high as Intel's 32nm process. Look at the Steamroller fixes and you'll see Bulldozer was crippled in the instruction decoder. That had nothing to do with GF.

The module design was a gamble that didn't pay off. AMD's best sales came with Llano and Bobcat which are both K10.5 derivatives. Now they're pushing Hondo SoC and Jaguar which are the same family. Single to quad cores that are independently clocked.

Even if AMD had tried to switch the CPUs to TSMC last year it wouldn't have mattered. TSMC didn't have the capacity to take it on.
a b À AMD
a b à CPUs
December 6, 2012 6:24:41 AM

the chips were designed to run higher. Just looking at the power consumption and the OC numbers. If you can cool bulldozer, it OCed. The leaking 32nm process made it impossible to run the chips at high speeds.

The initial 32nm process was garbage on llano and bulldozer. Yields were abysmal. Power consumption was high. Not to mention it was late to begin with.

The 45nm was pretty bad at the beginning also.

they still don't have the 28nm up after 2 years behind scheduled.
a b À AMD
a c 84 à CPUs
December 6, 2012 6:50:02 AM

a lot of people, not just in this site, seem to think amd was 'quick' to deliver piledriver after bulldozer came out 'so late'. since amd is dependent on glofo, i thought that both pd and bd are late, so was glofo with their fabrications.
old roadmap:

(shiny!) new roadmap:

i didn't iunderstand why the gaps became two years and why 32nm was skipped and why glofo lists 28nm still under 2011. if i read the old and new roadmaps right, we should be playing with 28nm steamroller apus since... q2-q3 2011...?

AFG: I hope you don't mind mate but I fixed your picture issue ;) 
a b à CPUs
December 6, 2012 12:33:05 PM

JAYDEEJOHN said:
As to underperforming, thats AMDs fault, as to time to market, GFs and AMDs together, which wouldnt have changed hadnt the sell off occured.


Of course, that is speculation as AMD did spin off the fabs, due to having spent far too much on the ATI buyout and then Barcelona being a disaster.

IMO, the spinoff did nothing to promote cooperation between design & fab, and in fact almost assuredly hindered it due to each company having different goals and priorities. Certainly the cost savings of amortizing the SOI costs over multiple customers never materialized, plus GF switching to gate-last HKMG after being gate-first on 32nm didn't help matters either.

Quote:
Dont forget I also said if AMD deserves a hit theyll get one.
Well, BD was awful, a step back.
PD, a tad better, and what BD should have been.
So, this isnt GFs fault, or time to market etc, PD should have been here almost 2 years ago, and that lies on AMDs doorstep


You forgot Llano also being delayed due to low yields.

Whether the problem was AMD not following the design rules for manufacturing properly, or the DRM being not limiting enough and causing problems, I don't think we know enough to assign blame completely one way or another. IMO, the truth probably lies in-between so both companies deserve blame.
a b à CPUs
December 6, 2012 12:39:17 PM

dozerman said:
Too many people talking gaming and calling it a failure. The real question is in the server performance where the real money is.


Heh, we heard ya the first time :D ..

Anyway AMD has been stuck around the 5% mark in server marketshare for over a year now - if PD and/or the SeaMicro effort pays off, we might get a hint during the Q4 earnings report due out in about 6 or 7 weeks from now. But AMD undergoing another 15% layoff a few months after the last one, plus selling their Austin campus, plus seeking out Goldman Sachs and getting another cash bailout from ATIC does not bode well for any possible sudden increase in their cash flow from the most lucrative segment.

Only thing I've seen recently is Rory Read stating something about black Friday not sucking too much, which would seem to be about the consumer segment as I doubt IT buyers honor the black Friday tradition too much and line up at night to be first in line to buy a server farm at 50% off prices :D ..
a b à CPUs
December 6, 2012 12:41:24 PM

Cazalan said:
The small computer repair shops have been dead for a while. The DIY market has been in rapid decline.

The gigabytes/asus/etc make the most money selling into the HP/Dell's. The PC box builders don't really make their own motherboards. They're just rebranded. Not much change there.

They're going to have to adjust. Intel wants to embed the system RAM next.

As more sectors move to SoC there's not much left to replace. Connectors are the weakest link right now. USB ports. HDMI ports. Those are the things getting torn up by too many insertions and ESD.


Actually the one nearest my house in northern Virginia just expanded their floor space. I bought a couple storage drives from them recently, and they seem to always have a few customers. Of course, we are considered a somewhat affluent market so that could be it..
    • First
    • Previous
    • 8 / 329
    • 9
    • 10
    • 11
    • 12
    • More pages
    • Next
    • Newest
      • 1
      • 2
      • 3
      • 4
      • 5
      • 6
      • 7
      • 8 / 329
      • 9
      • 10
      • 20
      • 30
      • 40
      • 50
      • 60
      • 70
      • 80
      • 90
      • 100
      • 200
      • 300
!