AMD “Ignoring” Netbook Market

Terry Olaes

Terry Olaes

I Used to be the [H] News Guy
Joined
Nov 27, 2006
Messages
4,646
In case you were wondering if AMD plans on competing with Intel’s Atom in the netbook arena, wonder no more. AMD’s CEO Dirk Meyer told reporters that they are “ignoring the Netbook phenomenon.” Director of notebook product marketing Bahr Mahony offered his own insight, saying “people that are not satisfied with the experience they’re getting on these mininotebook platforms.” Do you hate or love your netbook? What do you think of AMD’s stance?

In an effort to underscore his doubts about Netbooks, Mahony added that the dissatisfaction with Netbooks "has been exhibited by the high return rates that have been seen on these mininotebooks" in Europe. Asus or Acer may have something to say about that, but at the very least, this offers a fresh perspective on this possibly overhyped category.
Click to expand...
 
This argument kind of makes sense if the market isn't particularly profitable. Since AMD's goal right now is to get back on track and make money, not explore newer markets with certain uncertainty.

It makes more sense to concentrate on their current priorities (CPU+GPU) products.

Plus I do know quite a few people who have these Asus EEE, and the Acer netbooks, they all don't find them to be powerful enough. Maybe good for your grandma or parents, but the screen is too small for their eyes. Maybe suitable for children < 13 as their first computer? But then it can't play any games so they won't like it either ...

Maybe it makes a good stool-top e-reader? For like pr0n ... I mean information super highway surfing.
 
I have mixed feelings about AMD's decision. On one hand, I kinda agree with AMD's stance... A lot of people are attracted by these netbooks because of the price. Then they come home and discover the thing does not have a CD or DVD drive, that the hard drive is small not to mention the screen resolution.

Also, because of poor performance of the Atom processor, Intel get associated with poor performance as well. Most people who buy these cheap pc's don't know the difference between an Atom or a Core processor... Bad publicity is the last thing they need.

However, netbooks do have their merits, but they should be aimed at the blackberry crowd, not at the avarage computer user. AMD could really miss the train by not paying more attention to the (professional) netbook market.
 
Sadly, I see this more as AMD not having anything to compete with Intel's offerings in the market, so they're shunning it.

I loved my EEE 701, other than the low resolution (which bugged me more than the small screen). I'd love an EEE 1000H that wasn't glossy.

But an AMD/ATI product that would have excellent battery life would be appealing to me as well. But, I've never known an AMD product to compete with intel on battery life, and that's something I would demand far more than speed from a netbook.
 
chanchan said:
This argument kind of makes sense if the market isn't particularly profitable. Since AMD's goal right now is to get back on track and make money, not explore newer markets with certain uncertainty.

It makes more sense to concentrate on their current priorities (CPU+GPU) products.

Plus I do know quite a few people who have these Asus EEE, and the Acer netbooks, they all don't find them to be powerful enough. Maybe good for your grandma or parents, but the screen is too small for their eyes. Maybe suitable for children < 13 as their first computer? But then it can't play any games so they won't like it either ...

Maybe it makes a good stool-top e-reader? For like pr0n ... I mean information super highway surfing.
Click to expand...

the damn things are selling like hotcakes. really the only thing they are good for are a 2nd computer that you don't need to do EVERYTHING on. internet, email, media (music and vids), and the occasional game all run very well on these things. and it also saves a person like me from taking his 10 lb 17in gaming laptop to class to take notes with. absolutely great for students and professionals who don't need a whole lot out of a computer while doing work. thats the reason they sell well. i think they could have took a risk in competing with intel on this. as the only competition in the netbook arena is the different casing designs for the same Atom platform with really no difference in features (besides the asus N10 with the 9300GS). so i want to see AMD get in on this. :)
 
batteriesnotincluded said:
Sadly, I see this more as AMD not having anything to compete with Intel's offerings in the market, so they're shunning it.

I loved my EEE 701, other than the low resolution (which bugged me more than the small screen). I'd love an EEE 1000H that wasn't glossy.

But an AMD/ATI product that would have excellent battery life would be appealing to me as well. But, I've never known an AMD product to compete with intel on battery life, and that's something I would demand far more than speed from a netbook.
Click to expand...

a number of quick and dirty benchmarks have shown amd already has a plausable answer to netbook solutions from a CPU GPU standpoint. one better then intels. a 1ghz athlon chip can smack around the atom chips not to mention amd has the far supior option of a video solution. Frankly iam glad AMD isnt being pulle dinto the lets sompete for everything game.
netbooks are a fad imo the world was fine 12 months ago without them and it will be fine in 24 months when somthing more plausible occurs.. maybe a better tablet type solution.

point is AMD seems content to concentrate on the few main markets it needs to return its investors to profitable relations. hit the GPU market hard while nvidia has had a slight hickup with some bad parts ( notebook, intergrated boards) and the real money maker the server market. Looking forward to a full review of Shanghai. while its only a evolutionary upgrade it will hopefully restore some faith and if priced right will do well in a cash crunch market.
 
Maybe they mean they're ignoring it for now?? B/c I don't think they'll be able to ignore it forever. Notebooks with 10-13" (eee to Macbook Air) are the ideal size for A LOT of people. As of right now, a single core Atom seems to be underpowered for a netbook, at least for me. Now a dual core Atom @ 2Ghz should be fast enough for nearly everyone (me).

I'd think when Netbooks are refined a little more, they're really going to exploded popularity wise. ie: longer battery lifes & even thinner & lighter.

They're already a fast growing niche. I can only imagine it getting a lot bigger.

When Intel does a die shrink on Atom down to 32nm and they upgrade the graphics/NB for it, or possibly incorporate it on to the die then AMD won't be able to ignore it. By then it will be fast enough for nearly everything and probably blow away everything on battery performance.
 
it sucks since for AMD cuz I'll be buying a netbook and I know a number of ppl who will
 
Sounds right to me. If I want a laptop I'll buy a laptop, if I want a mini computer I'll buy a iPhone/Blackberry. Why buy a "netbook" and get the worst of both worlds?

There really isn't enough demand for these types of processors. Atom and Nano are already saturating the market.
 
unless corporate america picks up on the idea of the netbook over hte laptop, netbook will just remain a small market..

it seems the laptop + the blackberry etc.. is the way to go and will be a for a while.
 
I already have a desktop for most tasks, so all I need is something light for travel; the lighter the better. In that regards a netbook beats my current laptop. And if they would have had a good selection of inexpensive netbooks out last year I would have gotten one of those instead of my current 12" laptop.
 
need edit button lol basically amd is fighting intel with platforms for the time being till they can regain some financial stability and be profitable again then they as a lean design firm will create the next big thing since x86-64 / opteron
 
AMD is ignoring the market because they cant compete in it...

netbooks rock, i bought my girlfriend a 1000h and it runs win vista beautifully, well enough for it to be her sole notebook, and primary computer. it is snappy as hell, with an awesome keyboard (we're both lefties), and does everything she needs a computer to do...

AMD fails...
 
brucedeluxe169 said:
AMD is ignoring the market because they cant compete in it...

netbooks rock, i bought my girlfriend a 1000h and it runs win vista beautifully, well enough for it to be her sole notebook, and primary computer. it is snappy as hell, with an awesome keyboard (we're both lefties), and does everything she needs a computer to do...

AMD fails...
Click to expand...

umm see above linkage amd has a platform that addresses the netbook space no point in designing a new chip for a market segment when you can shrink an old one that outperforms the atom platform watt for watt http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/Atom-Athlon-Efficient,1997-2.html
 
AMD has reason to avoid the netbook market because they need somewhat of a stable market to sell their products and make money, how much I cannot tell you. However, an Athlon X2 2100+ BE and a HD3300 chipset would be amazing in a netbook, would be low on power consumption and pwn any atom or dualcore atom made. After all, AMD is most competitive in the cpu "Bang for the Buck category", even from the times of the K6 cpu's.
 
maxius said:
umm see above linkage amd has a platform that addresses the netbook space no point in designing a new chip for a market segment when you can shrink an old one that outperforms the atom platform watt for watt http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/Atom-Athlon-Efficient,1997-2.html
Click to expand...

performance per watt, while important, kinda is a moot point when the athlon draws double the wattage of the atom in the article you just linked. a few watts difference has major drawbacks at such low levels.. even if you gain major performance increases, like I said, for 99% of everyone out there, the existing atom processors offer *more* than enough performance.

dont forget, this is just intel's first crack at it... the poulsbo chipset will lower atom's power draw dramatically, leaving AMD even further behind in the low power game.

oh yea... the athlon processor is about 10x the size of the atom .... good luck competing on price when your product costs a few times as much to produce...

sure, AMD has this "new" platform coming out, but Intel isnt just sitting around... the next generation atom platform will feature vastly improved performance and graphics, making, even the poulsbo atom seem like a power hog....
 
Meyer made a deliberate choice when he took over as CEO earier in the year that AMD could no longer go toe to toe with Intel on *every* front.

He is at least being realistic enough to see that AMD does not have anything in the 1-2W area now, and won't have anything to match what Intel will have in 2009 (x86 system on a chip, including graphics) or beyond with anything made by AMD on 65nm or 45nm.

The Shrike platform based on a Fusion CPU was supposed to be competitive with Atom or Nano (at least as much as it could in 9"-10" netbook models), but it's gone the way of the dodo. If anyone is intererested in "MacBook Air sized form factors," AMD will have K8-based single or dual core chips available for you later in 2009. :p Oh boy, I can see the puddles of drool forming already.
 
AMD got caught flat footed. The last time AMD has done *anything* innovative was when the Athlon64 was released. Shortly after they released that there were content to play feature catchup with intel. When core2 released they were caught flat footed. Took them forever to respond with phenom which was 6+ months late to maket.

Same here. AMD, just like Microsoft, was content with the market the way it was. They totally misread and misunderstood what customers want and intel basically carved out the netbook market entirely for themselves. What's sad is that there's nothing magical about this market.

CPUs have been progressing from the old hugely complex single core beasts into the modern multi core era, where a higher number of simpler cores are more appropriate. With atom, intel basically gets to "prototype" their multicore building block of the future and have customers pay for the R&D. Which makes AMD even more screwed.
 
The Yukon Platform platform that is directed at the ultra portable/mini notebook market that is dropping in the 1h 2009 powered by a Conesus BGA cpu source pg 32 and page 39 RandyAllenAMD2008AnalystDay11-13-2008.pdf link above
 
brucedeluxe169 said:
oh yea... the athlon processor is about 10x the size of the atom ....
Click to expand...
It's not that bad. ;) Atom is 25mm^2. A 65nm, the Brisbane core (which is the single or dual core G2 model) is about 4-5 times bigger.

"Conesus... is a 65nm, dual-core CPU with 1MB of cache" smells like Brisbane. Huron sounds like the newer "single core" G2 Brisbane with one core disabled. Congo should make some people happy since it uses the HD 3200 integrated core. I don't see the point. Slow is still slow. Yukon is the lower cost platform and uses the x1250 integrated graphics, which will probably make people a bit less happy. ;)

Neither are going into a netbook format, and pricing is going to determine how attractive it is vs other ultraportable (4lb) form factor laptops. I can see how nvidia's new 9400 chipset may be appealing in the same segment.
 
I forgot to mention above: the popular 1.6GHz single core Atom models used mostly in netbooks and mini ITX boards costs $30-$50 including the chipset. That still allows Intel to make over 50% gross margin on the Atom line.
 
I don't think AMD is ignoring the market because they can't compete. As you can see in the Tomshardware article, an Athlon64 2000+ is faster and the system as a whole uses less power. Sure, the Atom itself uses very little power, but it has an extremely low IPC and it uses a power guzzling IO chip and chipset. A ~1 GHz Athlon even at 65nm, at a very low voltage combined with a tweaked chipset would really give the Atom a run for its money.

The high return rate for Netbooks is probably because many come with Linux. To prevent problems and support calls, most versions are extremely dumbed-down, not allowing the user to install programs or even change the desktop wallpaper by default. This makes the machine perhaps a bit too limited for many users, who might have some favorite Windows app that they can't live without. Trying to work around those limitations to customize the system and install software requires at least some basic knowledge of how Linux works, something the average user doesn't have. This problem is starting to disappear now as Netbooks are becoming powerful enough to run WinXP.

An Atom-powered netbook is powerful enough for everyday tasks like writing emails, updating your blog, checking facebook, typing documents... A lot of people only use their computer only for such tasks. People did word processing and emailed each other even back in 2000-2001 when the typical mainstream desktop system was comparable to current netbooks. Modern desktop and notebook systems are totally overkill for most users.

As for the screen size being to small for your eyes - the dot pitch of my Aspire One is not very different from that of my old 14" notebook. The only drawback is that you have to scroll more vertically (but almost never horizontally). The keyboard is nearly as good as a normal laptop, unlike the EeePC range with their tiny keys.

It's a new market and people still don't fully understand what a Netbook is and what it isn't. Personally, I think the market will continue to grow.
 
JimmiG said:
I don't think AMD is ignoring the market because they can't compete. As you can see in the Tomshardware article, an Athlon64 2000+ is faster and the system as a whole uses less power.
Click to expand...
Don't confuse the netbook segment (~5 million mobile Atoms sold last quarter) with the niche mini ITX segment which uses the low cost 945GC chipset. The platforms are very different for power consumption.

A low cost netbook using 1.6GHz Atom N270 paired with a 945GSE + ICH7M chipset is very low power with a maximum TDP of a little over 11W for all three, including graphics, and much lower typical power consumption. The smaller form factor version (e.g. handheld) with the US15W chipset has a maximum TDP of 4.4W including the 1.83GHz Atom Z540 CPU, chipset and graphics, and even less for lower clocked Atom Z5 series CPUs.
 
pxc said:
It's not that bad. ;) Atom is 25mm^2. A 65nm, the Brisbane core (which is the single or dual core G2 model) is about 4-5 times bigger.
Click to expand...


ok, so you are being sarcastic (i hope? im bad at detecting it on forums...) because 5 times bigger... ummm ... yea, that *sucks*

bears repeating: netbooks are selling like spinners in a poor black neighborhood, AMD would be competing if they could, and despite what tomshardware would have you believe, the athlon simply *cannot* compete in the netbook space
 
JimmiG said:
I don't think AMD is ignoring the market because they can't compete. As you can see in the Tomshardware article, an Athlon64 2000+ is faster and the system as a whole uses less power. Sure, the Atom itself uses very little power, but it has an extremely low IPC and it uses a power guzzling IO chip and chipset. A ~1 GHz Athlon even at 65nm, at a very low voltage combined with a tweaked chipset would really give the Atom a run for its money.

The high return rate for Netbooks is probably because many come with Linux. To prevent problems and support calls, most versions are extremely dumbed-down, not allowing the user to install programs or even change the desktop wallpaper by default. This makes the machine perhaps a bit too limited for many users, who might have some favorite Windows app that they can't live without. Trying to work around those limitations to customize the system and install software requires at least some basic knowledge of how Linux works, something the average user doesn't have. This problem is starting to disappear now as Netbooks are becoming powerful enough to run WinXP.

An Atom-powered netbook is powerful enough for everyday tasks like writing emails, updating your blog, checking facebook, typing documents... A lot of people only use their computer only for such tasks. People did word processing and emailed each other even back in 2000-2001 when the typical mainstream desktop system was comparable to current netbooks. Modern desktop and notebook systems are totally overkill for most users.

As for the screen size being to small for your eyes - the dot pitch of my Aspire One is not very different from that of my old 14" notebook. The only drawback is that you have to scroll more vertically (but almost never horizontally). The keyboard is nearly as good as a normal laptop, unlike the EeePC range with their tiny keys.

It's a new market and people still don't fully understand what a Netbook is and what it isn't. Personally, I think the market will continue to grow.
Click to expand...

the thing is they need to price the netbooks at 100 - 200 bux that is as much as i would pay for one. they need to really remake the netbook concept and make it different from a low cost laptop that can be had for 400 - 499
 
This is definitely in AMD's best interest. There really isn't any room with Atom and Nano dominating the market right now.
 
@maxius

You'd be getting some pretty serious crap for just 100-200. For that price I would expect a return to 7" screens with 800x480 res, which is really unusable on most websites today since most sites are configured for 1024x768.

Regarding AMD's decision, I think it is the correct business choice for their company right now. It's more important for them to solidify a revenue base in their chipset, GPU, CPU business and advance those areas than it is to invest in netbooks. However, I don't agree with his sentiment that netbooks are a passing fancy. I run two systems, my netbook and my desktop. Both of them accomplish their tasks perfectly. Netbook for on-the-go browsing, word processing, spreadsheet, IM, etc. Desktop for coding, gaming, and movie watching.
 
The market for the Atom based netbooks includes, don't forget, business folks who need a easily carry-able information device that is able to drive software apps (like a blackberry or palm on steroids). It also includes airline pilots who are looking to fill a spot in their electronic flight bags (and toss out 50+lbs of required flight manuals). It is also a very viable alternative for contractors of all types in every field to have a small, portable machine for whipping up on-the-spot invoices or even interfacing with proprietary electronic systems.

The netbook is DEFINITELY not a good replacement for your average Joe who wants something to browse youtube, look at his grandkids' pictures, or play movies. It doesn't give the power or versatility of a notebook with a DVD drive, large screen, full motion full screen playback, and flash/java powered applications which have become very popular.
 
I'm not a fan of the Atom platform right now. I might have already bought a netbook if they using the Nano.
 
Zoogle said:
@maxius

You'd be getting some pretty serious crap for just 100-200. For that price I would expect a return to 7" screens with 800x480 res, which is really unusable on most websites today since most sites are configured for 1024x768.

Regarding AMD's decision, I think it is the correct business choice for their company right now. It's more important for them to solidify a revenue base in their chipset, GPU, CPU business and advance those areas than it is to invest in netbooks. However, I don't agree with his sentiment that netbooks are a passing fancy. I run two systems, my netbook and my desktop. Both of them accomplish their tasks perfectly. Netbook for on-the-go browsing, word processing, spreadsheet, IM, etc. Desktop for coding, gaming, and movie watching.
Click to expand...

look at one laptop perchild program that is a true netbook 8 -10 inches with 1024/768 display most old 15.4 laptops can be had for under 300 that support that display resolution with a bunch of crap you do not need so dont tell me it can not be done it can be

Furthermore AMD is not ignoreing they have a platform for ultra portialbes that if manufactures want to toss it into a netbook design more power to them
 
maxius said:
Links, etc...
Click to expand...

And what point is that? My quotes come directly from the CEO, who said that they are "ignoring the Netbook phenomenon." If you read the linked article, they talk about the Congo and Yukon being alternatives but CNet feels that they are going for the ultraportable market and not the Netbook/MID area.

Argue with CNet, where the opinions come from. You're wasting your keystrokes here.
 
I agree with AMD. The netbooks phenomenon will end. I've used them before and don't see what the advantage is besides the price. But for a few hundred dollars more, you could get a much fast 14.1" widescreen notebook that is MUCH faster and almost as light.
 
SixtyWattMan said:
I'm not a fan of the Atom platform right now. I might have already bought a netbook if they using the Nano.
Click to expand...

i think one manufacturer was going to use the Nano...and the netbook still hasn't come out yet. i won't hold my breath for the Nano the way things are going.
 
markt435 said:
i think one manufacturer was going to use the Nano...and the netbook still hasn't come out yet. i won't hold my breath for the Nano the way things are going.
Click to expand...

Intel wins at marketing again I suppose. Reminds of so many companies using the P4 over the Athlon 64 or X2.
 
the zdnet article is a response up to the cnet one http://blogs.zdnet.com/BTL/?p=10862 and its true tehy are not directly aiming for the atom but providing compelling solutions and if they end up in a netbook so be it if not eh its not what they where aiming for in the 1st place
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top