The Rise and Fall of AMD.

[tweakboy]

I have no comment. AMD was good when they came out with the first dual core CPU. X2 64bit they had the lead over Intel IMO at that point. Until Core 2 came out and after that its been disaster from what I read and see.

http://www.techspot.com/article/599-amd-rise-and-fall/

:whiste:

 

[Jaydip]

These doom and gloom threads are becoming quite boring actually.AMD has survived thus far and they are not going anywhere anytime soon.

 

[lehtv]

These doom and gloom threads are becoming quite boring actually.AMD has survived thus far and they are not going anywhere anytime soon.

The article doesn't suggest AMD is going away. To be fair though, the title of the article is misleading - The Rise and Fall of AMD containst three sections: the Rise, the Fall and the Future. Why'd they leave Future out of the title?

 

[phenomkid7]

AMD is an irrelevant company.

Fanboys are hanging on to a 10 year old legacy. AMD has not been relevant since 2003.

 

[Lonbjerg]

I have no comment. AMD was good when they came out with the first dual core CPU. X2 64bit they had the lead over Intel IMO at that point. Until Core 2 came out and after that its been disaster from what I read and see.

http://www.techspot.com/article/599-amd-rise-and-fall/

:whiste:

AMD had a few good years...but the majority of AMD's time, they were a cheaper, lesser performing alternative to Intel.

And they only got a good run because 2 things happend:

- They aquired a lot of talent and technology (Not possible today)
- Intel ran face first into a physics wall. (they have learned their lesson)

But somehow that anomaly is considsered the norm.

I blame peoples age...or poor memory.

Tick-tock will make sure AMD stays in place for the future...

 

[Markfw]

AMD is an irrelevant company.

Fanboys are hanging on to a 10 year old legacy. AMD has not been relevant since 2003.

I rarely comment lately, but most of your posts are baiting, and I am not liking the pattern. I already had to warn you once. Leave the attitude at home. AMD is quite relevant to many. I know everyone is entitled to their opinion, but this really goes too far.

 

[Nemesis 1]

These doom and gloom threads are becoming quite boring actually.AMD has survived thus far and they are not going anywhere anytime soon.

If you believe this . Than I assume you are putting all the money you can into AMD stock . ARE you ? If not Why? Is the big picture for AMD improving or Degrading? Will AMD have A phone chip in 2013. Will AMD have a compelling Tablet chip that offers 10 hours usage in 2013 . Honda isn't it . As haswell will stomp all over the highend AMD tablet chip. If they can get design wins . In quanity. AMD is over thats all there is to it .

 

[Jaydip]

If you believe this . Than I assume you are putting all the money you can into AMD stock . ARE you ? If not Why? Is the big picture for AMD improving or Degrading? Will AMD have A phone chip in 2013. Will AMD have a compelling Tablet chip that offers 10 hours usage in 2013 . Honda isn't it . As haswell will stomp all over the highend AMD tablet chip. If they can get design wins . In quanity.n AMD is over thats all there is to it .

I'm not much into stocks but for a long time now AMD is not competing with Intel in the high end category.Their GPU division is doing OK.I'm not defending AMD but if people believe they can go bankrupt at any moment is probably mistaken.AMD has a huge advantage over Intel regarding integrated graphics so their next gen tablet soc will probably have superior gpu performance compared to Intel.

 

[tweakboy]

I rarely comment lately, but most of your posts are baiting, and I am not liking the pattern. I already had to warn you once. Leave the attitude at home. AMD is quite relevant to many. I know everyone is entitled to their opinion, but this really goes too far.

I hear you. I just thought it was a interesting article.

Im not baiting no one. People on the forums say worse things.
I apologize, I understand your feeling towards my post. sorry but still a good article. thx Markfw900,, gg

 

[mrmt]

I'm not much into stocks but for a long time now AMD is not competing with Intel in the high end category.Their GPU division is doing OK.I'm not defending AMD but if people believe they can go bankrupt at any moment is probably mistaken.

AMD's problem right now isn't solvency but cash flow. Using AMD optimistic projections of break even in Q313, their cash reserves will shrink to the exact amount they need to keep the operation running, around 1 billion, but if you are with the rest of the market and take AMD financial forecasts as soviet propaganda, then you are betting that in order to weather the hardship next year AMD will have to sell or license some significant asset or get someone to put cash into the company. Only after those assets are sold or put as collateral is that we must worry about insolvency.

Most of those doom and gloom articles about AMD aren't really about the company, but about their server/high end/mainstream x86 CPU business, which was FUBAR'ed the day they went ahead with Bulldozer. They tried and failed, now they have to carry on and go for some other market where they can make real money.

 

[Idontcare]

I hear you. I just thought it was a interesting article.

Im not baiting no one. People on the forums say worse things.
I apologize, I understand your feeling towards my post. sorry but still a good article. thx Markfw900,, gg

I find it ironic that you responded to Mark's post as if he was targeting his comment towards you. He was actually referring to member phenomkid7, but the irony is that he could have very well been referring to you and he still would have been spot on...so your response to Mark's post is apropos.

 

[Idontcare]

...Using AMD optimistic projections of break even in Q313...

And didn't we conclude that AMD wasn't even projecting that they would break-even in Q313, that their Q313 goal was simply to have lowered their cost structure to the point that they would then need $1.3B in revenue to break-even (but they weren't willing to project whether or not they actually raise revenues in the meantime to the $1.3B level)?

Given that not even AMD is willing to be as optimistic as saying they will break even in Q313, I think you are giving them well beyond an optimistic revenue projection in your post there. (unless I missed something?)

 

[Jaydip]

AMD's problem right now isn't solvency but cash flow. Using AMD optimistic projections of break even in Q313, their cash reserves will shrink to the exact amount they need to keep the operation running, around 1 billion, but if you are with the rest of the market and take AMD financial forecasts as soviet propaganda, then you are betting that in order to weather the hardship next year AMD will have to sell or license some significant asset or get someone to put cash into the company. Only after those assets are sold or put as collateral is that we must worry about insolvency.

Most of those doom and gloom articles about AMD aren't really about the company, but about their server/high end/mainstream x86 CPU business, which was FUBAR'ed the day they went ahead with Bulldozer. They tried and failed, now they have to carry on and go for some other market where they can make real money.

Agreed and I believe their GPU division is the last bastion of their stronghold.

 

[Arkaign]

I'm not much into stocks but for a long time now AMD is not competing with Intel in the high end category.Their GPU division is doing OK.I'm not defending AMD but if people believe they can go bankrupt at any moment is probably mistaken.AMD has a huge advantage over Intel regarding integrated graphics so their next gen tablet soc will probably have superior gpu performance compared to Intel.

Money talks, and GPU isn't enough of a market to save a company the size of AMD. They will have to massively reduce/eliminate basically everything BUT the GPU division just to stand a chance not to go bankrupt. They've been losing money for too long, and have nothing left to fall back on.

 

[mrmt]

And didn't we conclude that AMD wasn't even projecting that they would break-even in Q313, that their Q313 goal was simply to have lowered their cost structure to the point that they would then need $1.3B in revenue to break-even (but they weren't willing to project whether or not they actually raise revenues in the meantime to the $1.3B level)?

Given that not even AMD is willing to be as optimistic as saying they will break even in Q313, I think you are giving them well beyond an optimistic revenue projection in your post there. (unless I missed something?)

Yeah, I'm with the others that take AMD financial forecasts as soviet propaganda. Once you factor Haswell in the value chain and that AMD won't have any significant launch in 2013 quarterly revenues below 900 million for the entire company are not totally out of question.

 

[GreenChile]

Money talks, and GPU isn't enough of a market to save a company the size of AMD. They will have to massively reduce/eliminate basically everything BUT the GPU division just to stand a chance not to go bankrupt. They've been losing money for too long, and have nothing left to fall back on.

I predict many more layoffs in AMD's future. They must shrink the size of the business and focus on niche areas.

 

[ShintaiDK]

With more layoffs rumoured for january. Plus GPU segment is on full retreat arcording to both marketshare numbes and the revenue in AMDs books.

http://allthingsd.com/20121116/amd-prepares-for-january-reorganization-including-more-job-cuts/

The GPU segment can barely stand on its own feet. And might not even be able to do that soon.

Unless AMD management is willing to do what it takes. Then its just more of the same. Right now AMD is headed into the abyss at full speed.

 

[inf64]

AMD is an irrelevant company.

Fanboys are hanging on to a 10 year old legacy. AMD has not been relevant since 2003.

Wow,just wow. 10 years? Where have you been during Athlon and A64 era? Under a rock probably?

 

[Greenlepricon]

I really wish the management would pull themselves together. People always poke at AMD for making bad products, but their products are usually not too bad. A little ahead of what Intel offered in the previous generation and a little behind what Intel's current offerings are at the moment, for a reduced price. That's not always the norm but a lot of times they're competitive for price/performance. I hate to see them in the shape they're in, especially with their awesome gpu's. If they can make it through their next few products they might have a fighting chance, but their future is pretty iffy right now.

 

[amenx]

AMD was good when they came out with the first dual core CPU.

http://www.techspot.com/article/599-amd-rise-and-fall/

:whiste:

Not really. AMD's big days in the sun were with their single core Athlon 64's (K8). When they came out with x2 duals in 2005, they fell from grace in my eyes with their near rip-off pricing. Until Intels Conroe pulled the rug from under their feet a year later.

 

[WhoBeDaPlaya]

amd is an irrelevant company.
Fanboys are hanging on to a 10 year old legacy. Amd has not been relevant since 2003.

yadttotil

 

[Siberian]

Agreed and I believe their GPU division is the last bastion of their stronghold.

Isn't their GPU division bleeding marketshare and revenue?

 

[AnandThenMan]

Isn't their GPU division bleeding marketshare and revenue?

Why don't you answer that question.

 

[mrmt]

That's not always the norm but a lot of times they're competitive for price/performance

One of the most annoying myths of tech forums is price/performance as a redeeming factor for AMD lackluster products. Let me tell you once and for all: It isn't, not anymore.

There are two kinds of cheap sellers.

One is the producer whom structures his entire operation around lower costs. This means no-frills and often lower quality products, but as their cost structure is so lean they can offer sizable advantages in prices. Think about Toyota when arriving in the US, or Samsung TVs in the 70/80's or Southwest Airlines, or Walmart... you get the picture. AMD until Athlon 64 was one of those companies.

The other is the producer who hasn't a compelling product so they must eat into their margins in order to be able to sell the product. Examples would be GM pre-bankruptcy, Nokia, and AMD after Athlon 64.

AMD didn't design 315mm^2 chips to sell for 100USD, much less 246^2mm chips for 50. Every time you see a Bulldozer/Trinity deal, it isn't the result of a conscious effort to bring to the market a cheaper product (like Brazos), but AMD screaming "hey, we know our competitor's product is better, but we'll take a lot less profits to make our product salable".

 

[phenomkid7]

Wow,just wow. 10 years? Where have you been during Athlon and A64 era? Under a rock probably?

Can you do the maths? Athlon 64 came before or after 2003?