AMD mulling break, spinoff

[Fjodor2001]

Haswell IPC I guess is nice, but at what clocks? 8 cores in 95W TDP doesn't suggest super high clocked cores.

That is unknown. We'll just have to wait and see. But given that it's on 14 nm and with no iGPU, I think there is ample headroom for quite high frequencies.

Anyway, where did you see the 95 W TDP limit, and is that regardless of number of cores? I have a hard time seeing how that can be true for 16 core Zen.

Skylake should be a nice boost from Haswell, and it's coming this year.

Sure, if you think 10-15% performance increase is "nice". But to be honest, most people don't.

If Zen CPU w/ 8 cores @ 95W proves competitive, then what's to stop Intel from lowering prices on X99 and 6/8 core Broadwell-Es and then putting an unlocked 10 core+ Broadwell out as an extreme edition at the $999 price point?

What's stopping them is that Intel likes it's high margins. They won't enter into a price war unless absolutely forced to. The question is whether they are willing to give up market segments to AMD to keep that policy? We'll have to wait and see.

Also, I'm assuming 8 core Zen will be priced at far less than $999.

You seem to think Intel has no options and/or is incompetent at understanding the competitive landscape, and I think that's probably not a wise assumption.

I do? Where have I said that? Stop putting words into my mouth please.

It's up against much fiercer, better funded competition this time around than it was in the past. Turning things around only gets harder over time. Not saying it's impossible, but probably worth tempering enthusiasm.

Not really. AMD was not in a much better position last time they made a comeback.

You seem to be ignoring what the competition has in the pipeline.

Nope, I sure think the competition has interesting stuff ahead too. But to be honest looking at AMD's pipeline I think they will make a greater leap ahead. Partly because they've been further behind, and also because they are now introducing several completely new technologies and uArch, e.g. Fiji, HBM, 14 nm, and Zen. All happening close in time.

 

[MiddleOfTheRoad]

There is surely nothing to this story coz . . .

Funny, but I don't recall AMD reporting a 3 Billion dollar loss like they did in 2008.

They aren't healthy -- but they aren't exactly burning 750 million dollars per quarter like they did in 2008. You have a very short memory.

 

[dark zero]

I fear that with Altera situation, Intel will end on the same situation too... it was too much even for them.
AMD is practically dead... Zen is their last chance.
If AMD manages at least to launch a flagship of 8C 16 T at 125W with the performance of 5% or less than the 5960X at 550 dollars OR 6C 12 T at 95W with the performance of 5% or less than the 5930K at 349 dollars it will be an EPIC WIN from AMD.

 

[Arachnotronic]

That is unknown. We'll just have to wait and see. But given that it's on 14 nm and with no iGPU, I think there is ample headroom for quite high frequencies.

A "14nm" process optimized first and foremost for mobile SoCs

Anyway, where did you see the 95 W TDP limit, and is that regardless of number of cores? I have a hard time seeing how that can be true for 16 core Zen.

The recently leaked roadmaps from BenchLife show up to 8 cores in a 95W TDP.

Sure, if you think 10-15% performance increase is "nice". But to be honest, most people don't.

Takes a lot of work to get that 10-15%, especially when you want to keep power efficiency up and die sizes reasonable.

What's stopping them is that Intel likes it's high margins. They won't enter into a price war unless absolutely forced to. The question is whether they are willing to give up market segments to AMD to keep that policy? We'll have to wait and see.

Also, I'm assuming 8 core Zen will be priced at far less than $999.

If AMD is selling a better part for cheaper, then Intel won't sell many chips at "high margins." It's better to take lower gross profit margins per unit, keep utilization high (this is key for margins), and try to maintain share especially when you are the company with the better intrinsic cost structure.

I do? Where have I said that? Stop putting words into my mouth please.

In suggesting that Intel would just "let" AMD have market share it is implicit in your comments

Not really. AMD was not in a much better position last time they made a comeback.

How so?

Nope, I sure think the competition has interesting stuff ahead too. But to be honest looking at AMD's pipeline I think they will make a greater leap ahead. Partly because they've been further behind, and also because they are now introducing several completely new technologies and uArch, e.g. Fiji, HBM, 14 nm, and Zen. All happening close in time.

Right...

 

[cbn]

But what she promised in the last Q&A is that AMD would regain share from Nvidia with their 300 series, and if their 300 series is nothing more that a rebranded 200 series with a higher price tag, how are they expecting to regain market share? Nobody forced her to promise anything, it was her own doing, and she will pay dearly in the next couple quarters.

Maybe one thing they are planning to do is increase production of the Oland GPU which appeared to be in relatively short supply compared to Cape Verde.

 

[ShintaiDK]

The chart that tells the grim story that some people refuse to accept in the hopes that reality somehow magically changes.

And another one to spice it up.

But I am sure we will hear the next excuse and how AMD is on the way back with the "next product".

 

[Man I Suck]

Haha. AMD bought ATI years ago. They still can't salvage that trainwreck so now they're considering just getting rid of it.

Slow learners.

 

[Phynaz]

You're commenting on the current state of AMD. But since we're talking about the future, you need to take Fiji, HBM, Zen and 14 nm into account. Things will look very different then.

He's talking about their business model, not their products.

 

[Fjodor2001]

He's talking about their business model, not their products.

And your point is?

 

[Fjodor2001]

Yes, we all know Intel has poor results per R&D spending.

But it's not really relevant anyway, since Intel has R&D in so many more areas than AMD and nVidia. You need to compare Intels uArch and GPU R&D spendings to those of AMD specifically to be relevant. We've been over this numerous of times, so it's a bit embarrassing that you keep bringing such irrelevant comparisons.

 

[Fjodor2001]

But I am sure we will hear the next excuse and how AMD is on the way back with the "next product".

You cannot extrapolate future data based on historical data alone. Get real.

You're one of those guys who in 2002 would have said Apple would be bankrupt in 2005. Here's what it turned out like:

 

[ShintaiDK]

Oh yes, AMD will be the 1/10000th and become the next Apple. I forgot that. Intel and nVidia is doomed and all your wishes comes true.

I assume you already stocked up on AMD stocks for the event.

 

[mrmt]

Yes, we all know Intel has poor results per R&D spending.

How so? Intel seems to be having a very good return of their investment.

But it's not really relevant anyway, since Intel has R&D in so many more areas than AMD and nVidia. You need to compare Intels uArch and GPU R&D spendings to those of AMD specifically to be relevant. We've been over this numerous of times, so it's a bit embarrassing that you keep bringing such irrelevant comparisons.

One must not compare AMD budget against Nvidia or Intel to see that the company is not able to develop projects of the same scope as before, just compare AMD today with AMD in 2009.

 

[Sonikku]

I am not understanding what I am reading here.. So is this saying that there will be no more dedicated GPU's after this generation from AMD? Are they going belly up then?This is not good news..

Remember when Intel started locking multipliers and putting their product on cruise control because competition ceased to threaten them? Expect similar behavior from Nvidia soon.

 

[mrmt]

Flushing the Bulldozer R&D pipeline was the right move. That architecture is a failure and a dead end; every dollar spent on it is a dollar that can't be spent on Zen development, where AMD might have a chance of actually being competitive (or at least not 4-5 generations behind).

Killing the CMT chips? Yes, it was the right move. But killing the cat family? that's dumb IMO.

What happened with the GPUs was a massive miscalculation. I suspect AMD thought that 20nm would be viable sooner or later despite the delays, and were ready to go with slightly modified die-shrinks when that happened. What they failed to anticipate was that not only would 20nm be a complete bust for anything larger than cellphone/tablet SoCs, but that Nvidia had a backup plan including a whole new generation of GPUs on the 28nm process.

AMD history is full of miscalculations like that. Funny that these "miscalculations" don't affect other companies as much as it does with AMD.

The problem is that there was no way to give an honest answer without actually making the problem worse. What do you think would have happened if she had told the truth - "We're basically in a holding pattern for 2015, with just one major new GPU product and a bunch of refreshes;

She said that about the CPU business in 2015 and the sky didn't fall. Today everyone wrote off their CPU stack but everyone already had anyway, so things didn't change too much from a commercial POV, but at least management gave a believable message in years, and they just throw it away by hyping the GPU business and underdelivering with the rebranded 300 series.

 

[Arachnotronic]

Yes, we all know Intel has poor results per R&D spending.

But it's not really relevant anyway, since Intel has R&D in so many more areas than AMD and nVidia. You need to compare Intels uArch and GPU R&D spendings to those of AMD specifically to be relevant. We've been over this numerous of times, so it's a bit embarrassing that you keep bringing such irrelevant comparisons.

To me it seems AMD wants to compete with Intel pretty much across the board.

Desktop PC chips? Yes.

x86 server processors for enterprise, networking, etc.? Yep.

Notebook PC chips? Yep.

Embedded? Yep.

ARM servers? AMD exclusive.

High performance computing? Yes.

AMD's FAD strategy seemed to be "we're going to play in all of the markets we played in before and go after some that we neglected, too!"

So when I see AMD spending ~$1B/yr on R&D trying to play in the same markets as a company that spends ~$11B+, it's really hard to shake off the feeling that AMD might be trying to do too much with too little.

 

[mrmt]

Funny, but I don't recall AMD reporting a 3 Billion dollarlike they did in 2008.

Those were the times. AMD at that time could afford the loss and keep fighting. Today it cannot.

 

[myocardia]

Why do so many of us think that AMD will be fine financially, for the next 18-24 months? I personally see this as the first hint that AMD is/will be struggling financially for that time, until they are able to release the Zen, which may very well save them, although that obviously isn't a guarantee.

 

[CHADBOGA]

What has been communicated by AMD so far for Zen is 8-16 cores, 40% above Excavator performance (i.e. Haswell level of IPC).

AMD also communicated that Bulldozer wouldn't suffer IPC loss.

Their 40% claim is shady as hell in my opinion.

 

[sandorski]

Much ado about nothing. I am sure they have contingency plans which include selling off some part of the company. That doesn't mean they are about to do so. It just means that if it becomes necessary, they have a plan in place.

 

[DrMrLordX]

Killing the CMT chips? Yes, it was the right move. But killing the cat family? that's dumb IMO.

It was apparently necessary. Their R&D pipeline looks really messed-up right now. They had enough gas left in the tank to launch Carrizo/Excavator and (hopefully) finish Zen. It's not like the cat line is dead . . . they're just going to keep flogging Puma for awhile and rely on process tech refinements to make little improvements here and there. They're going to keep pushing Vishera on AM3+ through the rest of 2015 and the first half of 2016 as well, just like they're pushing Kaveri in the same time period.

AMD is relying on subtle improvements in process tech and/or uarch to keep Vishera, Puma, and Kaveri/Godavari alive for another year. Puma may be with us longer than that, until AMD has Basilisk ready. It's mildly interesting for enthusiasts who know how to take advantage of such things (at a discount; these chips are cheap), but it isn't enough of an improvement for AMD to gain ground on Intel.

Why do so many of us think that AMD will be fine financially, for the next 18-24 months? I personally see this as the first hint that AMD is/will be struggling financially for that time, until they are able to release the Zen, which may very well save them, although that obviously isn't a guarantee.

The general idea is that AMD doesn't have another debt payment to make until 2019, and that they have enough cash-on-hand to make that payment assuming they don't let expenses get out-of-control between now and then. Products like Fiji and Excavator could improve their revenues. Based on their technical merits, for right now, they look like solid products. If they fail to market them effectively and they don't sell well, then obviously, there's gonna be some pain. There's also the issue of how long AMD will rely on anchoring various product segments with those products.

Much ado about nothing. I am sure they have contingency plans which include selling off some part of the company. That doesn't mean they are about to do so. It just means that if it becomes necessary, they have a plan in place.

Back on topic! woot

Yeah I was thinking the same thing.

 

[MiddleOfTheRoad]

Those were the times. AMD at that time could afford the loss and keep fighting. Today it cannot.

Bullcrap.

If AMD could have afforded that loss than we would have had actual new product offerings over the past 4 years -- instead of 4 years of band-aids applied to poorly executed CPU architecture (Bulldozer).

They clearly couldn't afford the 3 billion loss from 2008 and were forced to spin off their fab just to stay alive. Added to all the debt created from the overpriced ATi acquisition.... They are a company that has proven to be cat-like with 9 lives.

I still say buying ATi was the biggest mistake in their history (they could have bought S3 or PowerVR for pocket change instead) -- the fiasco like Bulldozer pales by comparison.

 

[Arachnotronic]

AMD also communicated that Bulldozer wouldn't suffer IPC loss.

Their 40% claim is shady as hell in my opinion.

Reminds me of the following:

 

[cbn]

Killing the CMT chips? Yes, it was the right move. But killing the cat family? that's dumb IMO.

I think getting rid of the cat family was the right thing to do considering AMD's circumstances.

Trouble with cat cores is that they are an architecture mostly aimed at tablet devices (Intel/Rockchip will have the low end here).

And AMD needs to have a common architecture share both high and low end laptop/2-1's.

Zen can do that and provide the necessary volume at both the high end (large iGPU) and low end (small iGPU) by having OEM's share costs.

One motherboard for two levels of mobile processors. Construction cores and cat cores couldn't do that.

 

[cbn]

With that mentioned, I would like AMD to do the one thing Intel won't do:

Gives us the CPU cores instead of throwing in the extra iGPU at the low end.

4C/8T Zen with small iGPU is going to be more useful and versatile compared to 2C/4T Zen with medium size iGPU. (This especially considering AMD also sells dGPUs)