AMD Selling More CPUs, Posts Record Quarter Too
Intel just announced that it had its best quarter ever, and it turns out that AMD had a pretty decent one too. AMD announced revenue for the second quarter of 2010 of $1.65 billion – a record on its own for the company, which perhaps signals an extremely healthy time in the processor business.
Even with the growth in revenue, AMD posted a net loss of $43 million, or $0.06 per share, which is mostly attributed to the restructuring with GlobalFoundries and not due to product pricing. AMD also posted an operating income of $125 million. The company reported non-GAAP net income of $83 million, or $0.11 per share, and non-GAAP operating income of $138 million.
"Robust demand for our latest mobile platforms and solid execution drove record second quarter revenue and a healthy gross margin," said Dirk Meyer, AMD President and CEO. "Our unmatched combination of microprocessor and graphics capabilities resulted in customers launching a record number of new mobile and desktop platforms. We added Sony as a microprocessor customer and continue to see our existing customers expand their AMD-based platform offerings."
cannot wait for AMDs triumphant return to the top.
AMD has all the performance/cost sweet spots in mid and lower sections of desktop CPUS and sells well on these.
So basically we have 2 companies that for the last year are operating in different niches, no wonder they both maximized their profits since their opposing fronts do not overlap...
In order for profits for both companies to drop and prices get better for us we need a full scale war from these companies....
Lets watch the language please mate.
cannot wait for AMDs triumphant return to the top.
So sad...
AMD has all the performance/cost sweet spots in mid and lower sections of desktop CPUS and sells well on these.
So basically we have 2 companies that for the last year are operating in different niches, no wonder they both maximized their profits since their opposing fronts do not overlap...
In order for profits for both companies to drop and prices get better for us we need a full scale war from these companies....
True, but when AMD offered much much better products during the A64 days, Intel still dominated by far. Few people bought AMD back then. So no, Intel isn't selling expensive products due to the lack of competition, they're doing it because they can and people will still buy from them. Sad but true...
Maximized their profits? Say no to drugs!
Intel made massive profits, AMD is selling huge processors for low costs because their designs suck. It sounds like they lost money on desktop CPUs, since they mentioned mobile, and we all know ATI has bee
carrying them.
Intel is maximizing profits, AMD is struggling to survive.
I don't think anyone believes AMD can match Intel in processor design anymore, but even if they close the gap that can have a big impact on them. ATI is a huge advantage for them, that with a good processor, can be leveraged even more.
I sure hope Bulldozer is good. Remember the last time AMD was supposed to catch up with Intel (Barcelona)? It didn't quite work out that way. Intel has too big of an advantage in manufacturing for AMD to keep creating badly designed processors.
ATI > Nvidia
That`s the way it is. AMD isn`t really trying to compete on the high end market, but they have the best price/performance ratio. You can get a 30% faster CPU from Intel, but you would have to pay 2 to 4 times more for that CPU.
Talking about ATI... they are just owning the graphics card market right now. The 480 is only a little bit slower than the 5970, and costs less too, but the 480 requires more power and generates higher heat.
Don't forget about AMD's incredible 12 core opteron processors. In Linux they absolutely trounce more expensive Xeons in the world of rendering, oh yea and theyre lower power... Im sure theyre are selling decent.
-----------------
That's probably the most on point comment here. Server market has been helping them greatly. Enthusiast market is tiny and AMD has long given up on that. AT first people really punished them for it, but now folk are catching on that they don't need a $1000 CPU... they need a $1000 computer.
There is also the fact that Intel is far more diversified then AMD, so there are more revenue streams that go into their numbers. AMD should start looking at that if Bulldozer is received well.
"The views expressed here are mine and do not reflect the official opinion of my employer or the organization through which the Internet was accessed."
The graphics subdivision did very well, but was also slightly constrained by the TSMC 40nm yeilds ... they could have pumped out a lot more (and sold) lower end DX11 parts.
TSMC have announced a major upgrade to their Fab15 facility.
The server end of the company should have done better but Server OEM's were slow to respond with designs to accomodate the new products.
The competition is now coming strong from Intel with their i3 and i5 parts having low end graphics ... thats the new front line of the war they need to address with Fusion ... alas delayed for a couple more months. When it arrives it will trounce Intels offerings at least in the graphics performance area.
AMD will make further announcements regarding Bulldozer and Fusion at the August Hot Chips Event.
Bulldozer taped out a while back in Q2 but was announced a couple of days ago.
AMD are currently sampling silicon for both the Bobcat and Bulldozer offerings.
This much I found from reading 12 recent arrticles.
My ancient Q6600 holds its own against modern AMD's, and your comparing a heavily overclocked AMD vs a stock Intel - nice one.
Thank there shoddy past platforms - thanks to crappy via, sis and nvidia chipsets but atlast with there own chipsets there starting to change that.
It certainly changed my "fast but perhaps unstable" thoughts (from the K7 days) about AMD (well, more the overall setup), to the now thinking even there low end offerings with a board featuring an ATi/AMD chipset are still more capable overall then an Intel offering (come on, with ATi video onboard, crappy systems can even play games FFS).
Nice work AMD
AMD still needs to dust off the old K7 design, scale it down to 45nm and underclocked it to compete with the Atom... with a better ATi chipset and more flexible platform (2+ ram slots, pcie 16x etc) they could have Intel for breakfast.
vastly superior? compared to what?