AMD's China Division Executive Departs Company
AMD has lost another key executive. The company confirmed the departure of David Tang, who was senior vice president and president of Greater China region for the company.
Spencer Pan, corporate vice president and managing director for Greater China has assumed Tang's former role.
It was unclear whether Tang left voluntarily or whether he was let go. According to Digitimes, there have been rumors of a possible exit of Tang for some time.
Given its staff departures as well as economic challenges, AMD could use a small miracle to get its business back on track. Financial securities firm Evercore Partners recently cut AMD's fourth quarter outlook from a revenue expectation of $1.15 billion to $1.13 billion and a loss of 13 cents per share. For 2013, the environment could get worse as the firm predicts $4.8 billion in revenue, down from $4.87 billion. The forecast loss is 18 cents per share.
AMD's stock stood at $2.45 per share. AMD's current market cap is $1.74 billion.
intel effectivly killed amd through a monopoly, and amd never really recovered.
right now we should be seeing a 50/50 market share considering that amd was FAR out preforming intel for a while, but amd never made the money because intel said if people use amd for anything they lose the bulk discounts form them.
hell even today, amd is a great value but they still cant get over 10% market share for some reason.
I hate to see the profit from GPU goes to pay CPU expenses.
I mean you had intel by the balls with the 64's.
Ah well. At least intel is still supplying us with more powerful CPU's despite the lack of competition.
?
Nah, keep shorting.*
* Shorting is where you bet that the stocks will go down by borrowing the stocks, then selling them at the current price, then pay back the stocks when the prices drop.
intel effectivly killed amd through a monopoly, and amd never really recovered.
right now we should be seeing a 50/50 market share considering that amd was FAR out preforming intel for a while, but amd never made the money because intel said if people use amd for anything they lose the bulk discounts form them.
hell even today, amd is a great value but they still cant get over 10% market share for some reason.
besides bulldozer should have complete with Core2 quad Q9000/Nehelem and it is delayed again and again.
So you mean it's hopeless for AMD? I pray not, maybe a miracle could happen.
I don't know why people think that Intel has or will have a monopoly on the chip market, or think thats a bad thing if they do have a monopoly, which they effectively had for a very long time by the way.
The chip market is not like any other market, you have to continuously improve the product otherwise you peeter out and die... sorta like what happened to AMD, CYRIX, and others btw....
Intel makes the best... thats why they are king. Sometimes they do produce a dud, but they adapt and overcome... thats what makes them great.
they fear the cheapest Pentium will sell @ i3 price or i3 selling @ i5 price, but they forgot Intel cannot be greedy & make desktop/laptop expensive when the ARM is attack its market right now.
Before it was released, I figure it was way overhyped.
A friend of mine was debating getting an i7-980X. This was early 2011 and the CPU was used; a relative of his had it. Anyway the concern was Bulldozer would decimate everything. I was doubtful and he did end up getting it. But unbelievable, that CPU is almost 3 years old now and it still ranks near the top! Bull.... what?
One bad product can destroy a company. I know it's not the only issue, but's frig...
And AMD's troubles suck for the whole industry and consumers. Intel does need some competition.
Anyway, I think people forget that Phenom II pretty much saved AMD; its higher clocks, larger L3 cache and reduced power consumption helped alleviate some of the pain they had to ensure as a result of the overhyped, underperforming Phenom. Despite having a narrower front end than Core 2, it was still comparable.
One thing I always found amusing was that people cursed AMD for not sticking with the K8-based architecture longer thus bypassing Bulldozer, yet there were calls for the existing architecture to be phased out as soon as possible before even Thuban was released. In the end, Bulldozer is the way AMD are going and it'll make a lot of sense eventually. It was massively overhyped (can anyone remember "50% faster than the i7-950"?) and in hindsight, it's no wonder there weren't any official previews, but it could've been worse.
Clock-for-clock equivalence is not important in itself since lower IPC can be compensated with higher clock.
The real problem is that AMD's chips do not clock that much higher and do so at high TDP cost. If AMD could produce quad-core chips clocked at ~5GHz stock that could compete with the performance and TDP of a stock i5-3570 then everybody would be happy.
Toootal bullsh*t dude, what the hell does ARM has to do with desktop/laptop processors?
Jeez, seems that today anyone makes up crappy arguments for trashing AMD, when they did not that bad of a job, even with bulldozer
And the Nehalem i7s didn't use a lot of power? Really?
AMD never slacked off, Intel just used it's massive cash reserves, along with our broken system, to screw AMD royally in the ass.
As much as I can approve of the technological developments Intel have done in the past years. I can't help but wonder what else would of been developed had AMD not been screwed over.