busydude
Diamond Member
- Feb 5, 2010
- 8,793
- 5
- 76
But they did demo the Bulldozer live during financial analyst day a few months ago...
If you call playing a 1080P video a demo.
But they did demo the Bulldozer live during financial analyst day a few months ago...
Seeing as AMD does not hold a leadership position when it comes to CPUs, I take it that he's saying that their GPUs will be good."I believe we have significant opportunities to cement our leadership positions in several key market segments based on the strength of our upcoming products "
Damage control or truth?
"I believe we have significant opportunities to cement our leadership positions in several key market segments based on the strength of our upcoming products "
Damage control or truth?
In fact, what "leadership positions" does AMD currently hold? GPU performance-per-watt?
I'm wondering if it's actually the GPU portion of Sandy Bridge that's going to kill AMD. I have a feeling that they've been delaying Fusion intentionally until the time when Intel had decent integrated graphics (with SB they do).
AMD is going to lose a lot of money because of SB in several ways.
My one observation is that it took AMD way too long to release Fusion. It should have been elementary for them to do considering their expertise. The fact that Intel did it first is embarrassing, unless of course AMD delayed it on purpose.
We NEED AMD to be competitive, otherwise, back to the $500 under-par CPU's.
You have to admit, AMD made a laughing stock of Intel with the Athlon64 and X2 series. And Intel came back with a vengeance. Yesterday was more proof, if Conroe and the chips since weren't enough !
I don't ever see intel going back to 500 dollar processors.
I agree. That won't happen.
IF AMD were to close, I could see Intel slowing down the pace of new development (slightly), but they would not raise the prices significantly.
I would think Intel would put much greater efforts into its fight against ARM rather than just 'faster faster faster' with AMD.
I don't ever see intel going back to 500 dollar processors.
Smells like Bulldozer is a flop, and it sounds like Meyer was forced out.
Guess I won't be waiting until Q2/April to upgrade when Sandy Bridge is here and it delivers.
Think on the Intel side: Otellini (manager) vs his predecessor, Barrett (engineer)...Otellini coming in and replacing Barrett sure as hell didn't mean Core sucked, far from it.
I really don't think this has anything to do with BD. Dirk was a technical guy and did a good job at getting AMD on the right track, but once on the right track he didn't do a very good job of making AMD money. I see this as more of a "we need someone better able to take our product lineup and make us some friggin money with it" decision. Even when AMD processors were superior to Intel ones, AMD still failed at doing what really matters: making money. Look for the next CEO to have more management experience, and maybe be one of the ex-ATI people. Think on the Intel side: Otellini (manager) vs his predecessor, Barrett (engineer)...Otellini coming in and replacing Barrett sure as hell didn't mean Core sucked, far from it.
Can you name them?AMD is going to lose a lot of money because of SB in several ways.
Without AMD around, the average price of a CPU will most certainly increase. Maybe we won't see mainstream processors @500 dollars, but it would not surprise me.I don't ever see intel going back to 500 dollar processors.
I agree with extra. AMD failed to make money, hence the rushed replacement.
Actually, I think moving to Core 2 was Otellini's idea. Barret stuck to relying on process technology strength for far too long. The Pentium 4 died when his CEO job ended.
http://www.pcworld.com/article/59825/intel_previews_35ghz_pentium_4.htmlIn coming years, the P4 architecture will scale to 10 GHz, Otellini says.