The Rise and Fall of AMD.

Page 12 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

krumme

Diamond Member
Oct 9, 2009
5,956
1,595
136
What would you have them do?

There is probably obligations to GF, that never in this world can make AMD profitable. If that is the case, they should shut down now.
Thats a difficult job to do properly.

If they can manage to navigate out of the ownership mess and GF obligations, they should focus all the best ressources on ARM +gpu projects - only. It gives no sense to stay in a x86 market, where monopoly situations means you will never earn your own money. AMD never had but a few years. Cut 90% of workworce, and only keep IP and devepment competences. Let HP, Samsung others use your brand. The same way as fx. Zeiss.
 

AtenRa

Lifer
Feb 2, 2009
14,003
3,361
136
"Quite possibly, the claim was made to debunk rumours about AMD’s plans to halt development of high-performance x86 chips in a bid to concentrate on low-power products."

Heh, seriously? So they are NOT conceding defeat by Intel and backing off high end? Sounds like misinformation at work.

AMD have said they will not compete against Intel in the High End DESKTOP, they have said they will continue to compete in SERVER.
All i get from this is that they will not compete above the $200-250 mark in Desktop.
 

ShintaiDK

Lifer
Apr 22, 2012
20,378
145
106
AMD have said they will not compete against Intel in the High End DESKTOP, they have said they will continue to compete in SERVER.
All i get from this is that they will not compete above the $200-250 mark in Desktop.

The hunt for the fabled server segment will and is what are killing AMD. Was it 200000 server CPUs sold? Thats something like 1% of AMDs shipped CPUs.
 
Last edited:

mrmt

Diamond Member
Aug 18, 2012
3,974
0
76
"Quite possibly, the claim was made to debunk rumours about AMD’s plans to halt development of high-performance x86 chips in a bid to concentrate on low-power products."

It seems that xbitlabs hired the most idiotic journalists and editor ever or they became AMD PR fodder, because this is the only two possibilities I see for them to distort AMD's own official statements to paint a nicer picture than the statements do.

Take for example the statement about the 2013 forecast. What Rory Read said is that they expect the pain to continue in 2013 and by Q3 they expect the market to slowly improve. That's a very cautiously statement, more in line with what the analysts at Credit Suisse thinks about the macro environment and more important, he recognizes that. He doesn't say anything about improving sales right now, but this is an honest forecast from what they expect for the next year using macro environment trends.

But what does xbitlabs puts as headline?

"Chief Exec of AMD Happy with Thanksgiving Weekend Sales, Has Positive Expectations for 2013"

And now this one.

What the analysts from cresui asked from AMD is was related to how they plan to segment the market, when and where to use ARM cores, when and where to use x86 cores, to which Rory answered what xbitlabs transcribed but he added a lot more, which xbitlabs didn't transcribe. To him instruction set should not matter, IP blocks should (on his dreams, but that's another topic).

But what's in the xbitlabs story?

"Quite possibly, the claim was made to debunk rumours about AMD’s plans to halt development of high-performance x86 chips in a bid to concentrate on low-power products."

This is no simple mistake, they are deliberating drawing false conclusions from Rory's statements. There is no transcript of this conference, they cannot even claim they saw the quote somewhere and drew conclusions, they has to listen through the entire audio to get the quote, so they KNEW what they were saying in the story isn't true.

Something is very fishy.
 

mrmt

Diamond Member
Aug 18, 2012
3,974
0
76
AMD have said they will not compete against Intel in the High End DESKTOP, they have said they will continue to compete in SERVER.
All i get from this is that they will not compete above the $200-250 mark in Desktop.

You still have no clue do you?

To say that they won't compete on high end desktops, which is a segment of the desktop market, isn't the same thing of saying that they won't compete on servers, which is a market on itself with lots of segments inside.

They may just field Seamicro microservers or still try to take on Intel EP line as they were trying until Bulldozer, in both cases they can correctly claim they are competing against Intel, but the nature of the competition is very, very different in both cases.
 

mikeymikec

Lifer
May 19, 2011
18,053
10,234
136
AMD`s demise has consequences.



Wow, that should screw up the market good and proper. Want an Intel Celeron? You'll have to take it with a board that has the cheapest parts and you'll be lucky if it runs for three years. You'll need a Core i7 if you want a board that lasts, and if you're an average user, you'll be lucky if your needs test that processor out by the time the rest of your computer needs replacing, and you'll have paid through the nose for such massive overkill. Triple NICs anyone?

It would be nice to know what AMD's plans for the future of x86 really are, right about now (or at least, as soon as they've made some).

(for the record - I'm not an AMD or Intel fanboy, my own PC has a PhII in, the computers I'm building currently have Intel processors in)
 
Last edited:

krumme

Diamond Member
Oct 9, 2009
5,956
1,595
136
There seems to be some very selective hearing in this forum.
Why the should Intel not go the BGA way?, its cheaper and technically more efficient - its the way it goes.
Probably jaguar - kabini - and the new Atom, will show x86 is still superior to high-end arm, but it will not last forever. Its a question of time. Saying 25-30 years here, is just pure bs. Just look 25 years back - a time when x86 taking over the server space was hardly imaginable. Things changes far faster.
What we do know is, that we dont know the future, except it will not be as it is now.
 

ShintaiDK

Lifer
Apr 22, 2012
20,378
145
106
There seems to be some very selective hearing in this forum.
Why the should Intel not go the BGA way?, its cheaper and technically more efficient - its the way it goes.
Probably jaguar - kabini - and the new Atom, will show x86 is still superior to high-end arm, but it will not last forever. Its a question of time. Saying 25-30 years here, is just pure bs. Just look 25 years back - a time when x86 taking over the server space was hardly imaginable. Things changes far faster.
What we do know is, that we dont know the future, except it will not be as it is now.

People want the BGA drama. And we get the same nonsense each time. LGA1156 doesnt overclock, Intel will kill off the overclocking community with LGA1155 and so on. We also had the ondie VRMs with LGA1150 will kill overclocking yet again. The original PCwatch article that everyone now quotes as trouth even wrote they aint sure and its only a rumour. The 2 feathers became 5 chickens again.

Intel most likely will make more money selling LGA based desktop chips. Where it makes sense to change to BGA is in the laptop segment that uses both BGA and PGA today. Also it makes zero sense for Intel to change in the middle of a platform. Plus they already show that LGA1150 supports 2013 and 2014 CPUs.

Had this discussion been about Skylake there could potentialle be something into it. But certainly not with Broadwell.
 
Last edited:

Insert_Nickname

Diamond Member
May 6, 2012
4,971
1,692
136
People want the BGA drama. And we get the same nonsense each time. LGA1156 doesnt overclock, Intel will kill off the overclocking community with LGA1155 and so on. We also had the ondie VRMs with LGA1150 will kill overclocking yet again. The original PCwatch article that everyone now quotes as trouth even wrote they aint sure and its only a rumour. The 2 feathers became 5 chickens again.

More like 10 chickens and a rooster... :\

Though personally I'm looking forward to seeing those on-die VRM's in action.

Intel most likely will make more money selling LGA based desktop chips. Where it makes sense to change to BGA is in the laptop segment that uses both BGA and PGA today. Also it makes zero sense for Intel to change in the middle of a platform. Plus they already show that LGA1150 supports 2013 and 2014 CPUs.

Had this discussion been about Skylake there could potentialle be something into it. But certainly not with Broadwell.

Well put... :thumbsup:
 
sale-70-410-exam    | Exam-200-125-pdf    | we-sale-70-410-exam    | hot-sale-70-410-exam    | Latest-exam-700-603-Dumps    | Dumps-98-363-exams-date    | Certs-200-125-date    | Dumps-300-075-exams-date    | hot-sale-book-C8010-726-book    | Hot-Sale-200-310-Exam    | Exam-Description-200-310-dumps?    | hot-sale-book-200-125-book    | Latest-Updated-300-209-Exam    | Dumps-210-260-exams-date    | Download-200-125-Exam-PDF    | Exam-Description-300-101-dumps    | Certs-300-101-date    | Hot-Sale-300-075-Exam    | Latest-exam-200-125-Dumps    | Exam-Description-200-125-dumps    | Latest-Updated-300-075-Exam    | hot-sale-book-210-260-book    | Dumps-200-901-exams-date    | Certs-200-901-date    | Latest-exam-1Z0-062-Dumps    | Hot-Sale-1Z0-062-Exam    | Certs-CSSLP-date    | 100%-Pass-70-383-Exams    | Latest-JN0-360-real-exam-questions    | 100%-Pass-4A0-100-Real-Exam-Questions    | Dumps-300-135-exams-date    | Passed-200-105-Tech-Exams    | Latest-Updated-200-310-Exam    | Download-300-070-Exam-PDF    | Hot-Sale-JN0-360-Exam    | 100%-Pass-JN0-360-Exams    | 100%-Pass-JN0-360-Real-Exam-Questions    | Dumps-JN0-360-exams-date    | Exam-Description-1Z0-876-dumps    | Latest-exam-1Z0-876-Dumps    | Dumps-HPE0-Y53-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-HPE0-Y53-Exam    | 100%-Pass-HPE0-Y53-Real-Exam-Questions    | Pass-4A0-100-Exam    | Latest-4A0-100-Questions    | Dumps-98-365-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-98-365-Exam    | 100%-Pass-VCS-254-Exams    | 2017-Latest-VCS-273-Exam    | Dumps-200-355-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-300-320-Exam    | Pass-300-101-Exam    | 100%-Pass-300-115-Exams    |
http://www.portvapes.co.uk/    | http://www.portvapes.co.uk/    |