AMD Names a New CEO & President

is it get a new CEO week?

Please please make AMD competitive with Intel again!

Lets hope best for AMD. Competition in all aspects is beneficial for the consumer.

Good luck! Hope you do better than Hector.

Good! Now can this new CEO speed up the Bulldozer?

AMD doesn't need to compete with Intel in the desktop cpu arena. They are moving in other directions, hence the delays.
AMD shipped 12 million APU's in the 2nd Quarter alone. And APU's is just one of the new markets they are breaking into.
They got smart and stopped trying to focus on beating Intel in the dying desktop sector and decided to focus on where they can actually make profit and gain market share.
It's working.

..or in other words. APUs are a made up market because AMD can't compete anymore. Competition drives innovation but when Bulldozer can't compete with Sandybridge it will just continue the downward slide of AMD. There is no competition when the only person you're competing against in yourself. APU benchmarks are just putrid.

Pretty much summed up AMD's position. They realized they couldn't win outright against Intel so theey decided to make up a one legged hop competition which Intel is too cool to even compete in.

As much as I like AMD GPUs, second that. Though we may see APUs become more useful in the future.

Until we actually see how the Bulldozer architecture performs against Intel's newest, there is little to say about how good or how bad AMD's position is against Intel.

Sure you could say the Intel has been eating away at them for the past 2-3 years. But then again Bulldozer has been in development for so long that when it does hit the market, it will be old tech.

And I, for one, hope it keeps up with Sandy Bridge, because it will mean AMD's old tech is just as good as Intel's newest... and that'd be awesome.

he looks like kenneth from 30 rock.

Yea sure. But they sure as hell need to compete with Intel in the server and HPC market where the money to be made is, and currently they are not doing so well.

I bet they brought this guy in to help push AMD into other markets that are not even as important as getting a strong server line up is.

AMD is in excellent shape and has a bright future from everything I see. Bulldozer, Trinity and many other products are on the way. AMD is two years ahead of Intel on APUs and the system builders are buying them faster than AMD can crank them out at the moment. With the new Bulldozer architecture AMD will be competitive with Intel in all market segments and leading in APUs by a long shot for quite awhile. Intel will feel the pain as consumers vote with their wallets as OEM's are doing on APUs right now.

The new CEO won't need to work too hard for the first few months as AMD has everything under control for the foreseeable future but Read will need to start planning out new products for 2015 and beyond.

I would say that in case of AMD what they need is marketing. To be honest AMD wasn't much behind 3-4y ago, and they even where better back in athlon 64 times but still their market share was 15-25%. That is very low considering their competetive pricing. I know that it was/is in part becouse Intel was bribing PC manufacturers, but that is something new CEO should work on.

Fusion is good, but they still need to progress in desktop CPU so that they can later implement this into APU

good luck!

System builders buying APUs? Cool story bro. Bulldozer might be good, but it ain't here yet and meanwhile high-end is controlled by Sandy Bridge. Intel doesn't need APUs... if they want to make extra cash, they'll just license nVidia to make them. APUs are good for low-end, that's all.

However, AMD *REAL* graphics kick some real ass. I'd concentrate even more effort there to make sure no one buys nVidia at all

Jimmysmitty, You do know Amd is the leader in server products right? Amd has destroyed Intel for years with the opteron series. Low power draw better pricing more cores. Intel is great on the desktop side and that's it. Amd destroys the server side dominates the laptop/netbook side and is up and down on the desktop side. I actually run encoding software that has the option to use 6 cores for encoding, If i want to take advantage of that on the intel side i'd be out another $800 having to stick with the extreme cpu side. Also intel just released a "water cooled only" cpu line up, you tell me how that panes out.

Intel's Core i7 (Sandy Bridge) is essentially a copy cat of AMD's original idea. Some of you, have already forgot the mere fact that Intel didn't have any plans on creating (neither, releasing) a CPU + GPU on die silicon chip.

Watch as AMD releases Bulldozer and Intel, will (most probably) be releasing, yet another copy cat.

The water cooled only is only a rumor, we don't know yet how a good air heatsink will do. And it's for extreme gamers, that's all. Not for servers. Also, ever heard of HT? If your software can work with 6 cores but not threads, too bad for you.

Somehow all the server setups I've seen go for Xeon and not Opteron. Strange. Don't have any real XP there, but I don't think it's as simple as you put it.

As for AMD dominating netbooks/laptops... there're WAY more SB/Atom laptops/netbooks sold. Though the number of netbooks might have went down (for good - I'd take and AMD solution over Atom any day!), AMD still doesn't have anything for hi-end laptops to compete with i5/i7 mobile series.

if nerdy and awkward appearance is to be attributed to business success then AMD just struck a goldmine. hot damn that guy looks geeky!

As has been noted, the portable phone/tablet and All-in-one markets trump any of us system builders by quite a bit. Focusing on that portable market and better APUs should be AMD's primary goal -- from a business standpoint. Of course I'd like to have a blazing fast CPU that competes with intel and is a better priceerformance buy, but to get there they'll need revenue and more publicity.

Who doesn't want a single chip that draws less power and means I can avoid buying a discrete graphics card and still game at 1080p? Throw in a discrete graphics card if it's not enough and who the hell would buy intel?

Dirk helped AMD make Llano and Brazos, which are innovative products that are selling. Bulldozer also seems very innovative from what's known about it thus far, although performance remains to be seen.

Let's hope this isn't another "make a fast buck" corporatist douche businessman who will ignore making good products, and focus on ways to become "profitable" by screwing everybody a la Intel, and otherwise engaging in shady business practices.

Unless it comes from iCrap, a compnay that thrives on propaganda and deceit for success, not advancement of technology.

Here's hoping he can get Lenovo to sell some nice designs powered by Trinity next year!

And his first act as CEO... Announce the "cancellation' of Bulldozer, since it does not seem to be real anyways.

I've never heard of a company called "iCrap" before.

Bulldozer is as real as a heart attack as Intel is soon to discover.

and what is your definition of a "system builder"? people who build computers must be hardcore gamers and have 2k+ to burn? What if Sandybridge dominates high end? I built 5 computers so far not a single one of them have a cpu that's $150+, APU works well all-around for the majority, great for htpcs and family computers and there is a huge customer base for it, APUs offer unbeatable graphics and CPU performance for their price. And they will make much more revenue than Sandybridge.

For an HTPC or family PC, you'll do fine with a dual-core (make it AMD if you want it cheap) or a cheap quad-core and onboard graphics. What are you doing on your HTPC that needs an APU and onboard graphics can't handle? Again, AND created an artificial market because the "customer base" is too dumb to understand what hardware they need for their purposes. For the same price, I could get a cheaper CPU (not an APU) and a graphics card and it will still be faster than the APU.

And you're all forgetting that Intel so far didn't even bother to respond. I pray that they don't fall for it and ignore AMD's pathetic efforts, but if they will... I mean, why not make nVidia produce APUs for them? Intel can rent them an x86 license or something... Intel's graphics won't be able to compete with APUs (though too many people ignore the fact that they don't need to, and happily flame Intel), but nVidia can pull it off. They might not have an x86 license, but I'd be very surprised if they're not experimenting around with it in order to prepare if they ever DO get a license.

GO AMD!

lets define competitive here.

i dont believe that bulldozer will compete with the you have to be insane to buy this 1000$ per cpu high end.

but for a mid range computer, i believe they will at least be a good choice matched up with a intel, thats coming from not knowing anything, because, i don't think they would release a new cpu without it being better than what they currently have.

and if its not better than the high end cpu, what can it be better than?

i hope its phenomenal, but lets be serious here, the first round of them wont be, now where intel has everything to gain, is a lower-mid end gamer market.

currently, that would be someone like me who dropped in a hd5770 about a year ago, or close to a year ago. if they could supply a cpu, with a gpu, that at least matched a mid range card (good enough to run most games max at 1920x1200 at decent frame rates) or even bundle a X850-X870 one one die, they could effectively stab intel in the throat, because its integrated is a joke, and anything non integrated cpu x gpu costs SO much more that amd could effectively run the prebuild market.

no one buying a pre build is getting it for power to begin with, and than there are people who are cheap on their system builds, so getting a amd apu, mixed with a gpu, you could do a decent crossfire.


ill take more cores over threads any day, a thread cant always be utilized in a way that makes a difference, but a core can. and for editing, i have seen between 10% to a rare 50% increase, and in some cases ht slows the computer down... real cores to my knowledge dont do that ever.

my preference is real core >>>>>>>>>> thead any day.

Real core = thread. When you have a threaded application(at the software level) it will use all your threads in (relatively) same way, CPU with HT or not. However, HT is actually a tiny core which will save the registers on the stack when the big core(real one) is waiting(when the cpu execution waits for memory return, depending on the instruction), and will execute an instruction in that time frame.
If the software is optimized, HT has close NO EFFECT at all.
If the software slows down when HT is enabled, means that the particular software has instruction that makes the tiny core to store/restore the registers so often that the actual storing and restoring takes more computational power than the instruction it actually executes.

Bulldozer is a step in a heterogeneous computin: More integer cores, not so many FPU because your GPU will do much better in FPU computing than your CPU. >> Here comes the future APU: the CPU executes the instruction that are more efficient on the CPU, the GPU executes instruction that are more efficient on the GPU than CPU. Be it games, excel, compiling, browsing, encoding or whatever the workload, in time the software will use both in the same time.

my experience with threads comes from the Pentium 4 that was threaded, i believe 520 or 540 or something was its number. and using a basic and slower dual core chip (never owned but used it at the time)

it was that single experience that made me want real core only.
more applications support real cored over threads, and in most peoples computers, that is what they will need more of.

from what i read a few months back, the intels that compete with amd price wise, have less cores than the amd, where amd gives a quad, intel gives a dual with threads.

if im taking that logic, bulldozer will have 8 cores, competing with intels 4 cores with 4 logical. and because i cant believe that amd would develop an architecture that is slower than their current best, i have to imagine that its fast enough to compete with at least sb, but given that its 8 real over 4 real 4 logical, id chose the bulldozer even if intel was marginally faster.

sorry if i got off topic or dont make a lot of sense... a bit tired.