AMD faces more setbacks

Z

Zachstar

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Sep 27, 2005
Messages
1,407
I saw this article posted in a topic at overclock.net

source is http://techreport.com/discussions.x/17654

Last we heard, the foundry's roadmap called for its new 32-nm silicon-on-insulator process to reach "risk production," or early production, in the first quarter of next year. However, EE Times says that phase has been pushed back until the third quarter—a move that could cause AMD to fall behind Intel even more. AMD's own roadmap calls for the introduction of 32-nm processors some time in 2011, but Intel will have 32-nm processors on retail shelves early next year.
Click to expand...

This is going to cost AMD dearly in sales in my opinion. This is not 2008 where Intel was just throwing 45nm left and right at expensive cores before AMD arrived with Phenom II at the end of the year. Intel is striking back HARD with 32 nm CPUs in the 87 USD range and up. They are covering almost the entire ground with 32nm parts.

2010 is going to see AMD selling CPUs at major discounts just to get through the year. The video card success is going to be dulled a bit by Nvidia's resonce and their ultra low power market has completely failed. Even VIA is doing better against Atom.

Some are trying to beat around the bush saying its not a "Delay" but just a "Correction" Well a 6 month "Correction" would get many other companies in large amounts of trouble with the SEC eh?
 
Last edited:
AMD seems to have a steady rate of progression and leadership that I don't think will be hindered in the long run.

Great competition for our enjoyment. :)
 
SonDa5 said:
AMD seems to have a steady rate of progression and leadership that I don't think will be hindered in the long run.

Great competition for our enjoyment. :)
Click to expand...

If this was 2008 there was little AMD needed to fear from Intel's lower end line up.

But just look at the plans for the 32nm stuff! Things from i9 all the way down to i3 and even a Pentium at 87USD...
 
hows this really a setback when AMD had no plans to beat intel with 32nm.. hell AMD said they wouldnt have 32nm til 2011 a long time ago.. so no its not really a setback at all.. intel has their road map.. and AMD as their own road map... while intel tries to stick with the enthusiast market.. AMD is sticking to the middle class/low end market.. it works out for both of them..

as much as everyone wants AMD to be profitable.. you cant make a company profitable over night.. if things keep going the way they are with the phenom II/athlon II/sempron's they should become quite profitable in the end.. never the same level as intel.. but AMD doesnt even spend half the money intel spends on R&D..


Zachstar said:
If this was 2008 there was little AMD needed to fear from Intel's lower end line up.

But just look at the plans for the 32nm stuff! Things from i9 all the way down to i3 and even a Pentium at 87USD...
Click to expand...


to bad the motherboards for those will still be around 150-400 dollars.. while AMD boards continue to drop in price making it quite affordable for people that dont need a high end processor..
 
The mobos are expensive for now. Until Intel starts putting the pressure on them to reduce prices which I am sure they will by next year.

But more importantly is the OEM market. Now they will have even more excuse to go with Intel 32nm over AMD 45nm.
 
Intel shows no intention of slowing down.

http://www.fudzilla.com/content/view/15719/1/

15nm in Q4 2013 Seems Globalfoundries might be able to do the same perhaps sometime in 2015..

AMD in my view is increasingly in trouble. Nvidia wants the steal the 5 series thunder and Intel 32nm set to hit the market big time in 2010.

I will continue to buy AMD until it becomes insanely stupid to do so. I am already planning another PC with A phenom II X4 with C3 stepping when they get those out. But C3 is going to be AMDs big cores throughout 2010 and even the 87 dollar Pentium will cause large losses in sales for Athlons if they dont get out some seriously good cores to compete (With the 45nm handicap)
 
Thuban is revision D so although C3 will be the main seller I think that D would be considered the "flagship" for the desktop market (for folders, not gamers obviously).
 
Wow, another AMD is in trouble and going to going to die post by Zachstar.

Look either AMD is going to do fine, or they aren't, its nothing im going to lose sleep over

So im going to keep using their products until the price/performance is no longer justifiable
 
Last edited:
Zachstar said:
Intel shows no intention of slowing down.

http://www.fudzilla.com/content/view/15719/1/

15nm in Q4 2013 Seems Globalfoundries might be able to do the same perhaps sometime in 2015..

AMD in my view is increasingly in trouble. Nvidia wants the steal the 5 series thunder and Intel 32nm set to hit the market big time in 2010.

I will continue to buy AMD until it becomes insanely stupid to do so. I am already planning another PC with A phenom II X4 with C3 stepping when they get those out. But C3 is going to be AMDs big cores throughout 2010 and even the 87 dollar Pentium will cause large losses in sales for Athlons if they dont get out some seriously good cores to compete (With the 45nm handicap)
Click to expand...

still waiting for the AMD is in trouble part.. big deal.. intels going 32nm.. how many people are actually going to fork over a grand for it after they just forked over 200-300 or more for an i7 920.. sorry to say but AMD isnt in trouble.. no one really gives a shit at this point about intels 32nm and its not going to fly off the shelf on release day.. AMD will hold the price to performance mark for a long time to come.. intel screwed up with the i5 release being late..

and how the bloody hell is nvidia going to steal the 5 series thunder? THEY HAVE RELEASED NOTHING ABOUT THE GT300 SERIES.. NOTHING! every thing we know about the GT300 series is from leak documents over 4 months ago.. so unless nvidia decides to release something soon.. they will always be a step behind the 5 series..

AMD is not trying to compete with intel.. they quit trying after the phenom I's failure.. all they are doing now is trying to control the middle class and OEM market and thats exactly what they are doing.. the i5 is still way to expensive for the middle class and OEM market..

also explain to me how any of those cores are going to cause profit losses? they are all based off the same phenom II 955 core with borked features disabled.. all they are doing is selling the dead loss.. something intel attempted way to late with the core 2 quad 8000 series and failed.. the only problem i see with their current plan is that everything is priced way to closely.. it could hurt them or benefit them by people seeing that one processor is only 10 dollars more with an added feature.. so they spend the extra 10 dollars..
 
I love how people keep trying to wish away AMDs falling behind with the same ole "They arent trying to compete with such and such nonsence"

That may have worked when Intel was content to hold the expensive core market. Not anymore. The motherboard issue will fade as their built in graphics take away more of the excuses to keep mobo prices high. And again the OEM market that does not have to deal with expensive mobos.

Pentium = Well known nice low price and at 32nm with on core graphics that blow away the old chipset that used to be the stable of budget OEM PCs. Runs cooler no need to seriously cool a chipset anymore (Some boards show heat fins less than an inch high on these boards)

Shall I go on?
 
And they love how you wish to down and out AMD...without AMD, theres no competition and some VERY expensive Intel CPUs...
 
Angry said:
And they love how you wish to down and out AMD...without AMD, theres no competition and some VERY expensive Intel CPUs...
Click to expand...

AMD is no saint...I still remember their $1000 desktop CPU's...
 
i love these posts, not just by the users here, but by the news agencies. Shows A LOT of ignorance. Of course AMD is way worse off than Intel, but "another round of setbacks" for something most [H] users have known about for months is just dumb to put up.

This thread, and the associated article, are full of 'meh.'
 
Atech said:
AMD is no saint...I still remember their $1000 desktop CPU's...
Click to expand...

Thanks to the Core 2 series I haven't had to buy another Intel or AMD processor nearly as expensive as my previous AMD FX-53 to have great performance and overclockability.

Sure the Core i7 mobos are rediculously expensive, it still doesn't stop me from wanting one. :p
 
Oh noe the sky is falling. Everyone it's the end of the world. Intel going to 32nm before AMD and Nvidia coming out with a card nobody knows anything about isn't a surprise.
 
sirmonkey1985 said:
still waiting for the AMD is in trouble part.. big deal.. intels going 32nm.. how many people are actually going to fork over a grand for it after they just forked over 200-300 or more for an i7 920.. sorry to say but AMD isnt in trouble.. no one really gives a shit at this point about intels 32nm and its not going to fly off the shelf on release day.. AMD will hold the price to performance mark for a long time to come.. intel screwed up with the i5 release being late..
Click to expand...

And that's fine... certainly a lot better than not throwing out a competitive product at any price level.
But that means to they really need a low cost per die since they don't sell the high margin chips, and they don't sell the sheer volume of lower cost chips intel does.
Good dies per wafer is a key part of a good long term business in the mid-low end market space. When you're introducing a ~350 ^2mm die like Thuban....

AMD will probably be OK, they're diversifying with the ATI acquisition, they're spinning off things that are in their best interest to be left to specialized management. They're positioning themselves back to a lower cost alternative it will just take time for them to sort out their position, and some partners to help them outside their core business (read: the foundry to produce their CPUs at cost that lets them be competitive at their new price points).
 
sirmonkey1985 said:
still waiting for the AMD is in trouble part.. big deal.. intels going 32nm.. how many people are actually going to fork over a grand for it after they just forked over 200-300 or more for an i7 920.. sorry to say but AMD isnt in trouble.. no one really gives a shit at this point about intels 32nm and its not going to fly off the shelf on release day.. AMD will hold the price to performance mark for a long time to come.. intel screwed up with the i5 release being late..

and how the bloody hell is nvidia going to steal the 5 series thunder? THEY HAVE RELEASED NOTHING ABOUT THE GT300 SERIES.. NOTHING! every thing we know about the GT300 series is from leak documents over 4 months ago.. so unless nvidia decides to release something soon.. they will always be a step behind the 5 series..

AMD is not trying to compete with intel.. they quit trying after the phenom I's failure.. all they are doing now is trying to control the middle class and OEM market and thats exactly what they are doing.. the i5 is still way to expensive for the middle class and OEM market..

also explain to me how any of those cores are going to cause profit losses? they are all based off the same phenom II 955 core with borked features disabled.. all they are doing is selling the dead loss.. something intel attempted way to late with the core 2 quad 8000 series and failed.. the only problem i see with their current plan is that everything is priced way to closely.. it could hurt them or benefit them by people seeing that one processor is only 10 dollars more with an added feature.. so they spend the extra 10 dollars..
Click to expand...

AMD is not controlling the OEM market....
 
Kenjiwing said:
AMD is not controlling the OEM market....
Click to expand...

amd has many oem wins... oem's have been very cold to amd even when they had the performence lead... this fact is the reason why intel is defending its self in antitrust suits on every major contient in the world.
-
not another amd is in trouble flamewar look right now amd is doing its best and has a win on the graphics front by releasing dx11 hardware 1st with a real multi monitor scailing solution. the small problem is on the cpu front sure it is not up to an i5 in performence but it is at least 90% of an i5/i7's performence for 50%+ less in cost i can toss together a crossfire board 4gb of ddr3 and a x3 720 for under 300 where is intel they are over $420. amd is fine and NOT going anywhere so what 32nm is delayed?! this thread is uselsess
 
Last edited:
Intel currently has a vested interest in keeping their main competitor alive and functional, but not dominating in the market. The competition has spurred innovation on both sides and resulted in huge profits for all. AMD doesn't need Intel's help to stay alive, but they definitely don't want to stay idle while Intel is making such rapid advances.
 
I could care less about 32nm at this point. I am more interested in price/perf and so far AMD has done that for me.

I don't see this as a setback at all.

Once Intel releases a $100 chip that performs better then a $100 AMD chip then maybe I will also claim the AMD sky is falling.
 
Go ask your mm or sister the nm tech that is in thier computer, they won't be able to tell you. As long as it "works" they don't care. It could be 180nm, and the same rules apply.
 
drescherjm said:
i3 should provide that.
Click to expand...

should... but when.. and only if the prices on the 1156 boards drop under 150 dollars..

with amd 250 bucks can buy you a full system almost..

athlon II x4 620 - 99 dollars
785G motherboard less then 100 bucks..
1066 ddr2 ram.. 40-50 dollars..

until intel can get prices down to that level.. AMD will stay as the price to performance king..
 
and only if the prices on the 1156 boards drop under 150 dollars..
Click to expand...

There are several good 1156 boards for around $115 at newegg. At least there were some last week when I posted links on this forum about their existence.

should... but when..
Click to expand...
Next year when Intel starts producing 32nm chips.
 
Cr4ckm0nk3y said:
I could care less about 32nm at this point. I am more interested in price/perf and so far AMD has done that for me.

I don't see this as a setback at all.

Once Intel releases a $100 chip that performs better then a $100 AMD chip then maybe I will also claim the AMD sky is falling.
Click to expand...

Chip with smaller die sizes cost less to manufacture. While you may not personally see this as a setback, failing to meet expected die shrinks can cause large financial issues.
 
Cr4ckm0nk3y said:
I could care less about 32nm at this point. I am more interested in price/perf and so far AMD has done that for me.

I don't see this as a setback at all.

Once Intel releases a $100 chip that performs better then a $100 AMD chip then maybe I will also claim the AMD sky is falling.
Click to expand...

Chip with smaller die sizes cost less to manufacture. While you may not personally see this as a setback, failing to meet expected die shrinks can cause large financial issues. AMD is just hanging around at this point through the generosity of Intel choosing not to compete at all price points.
 
ocellaris said:
AMD is just hanging around at this point through the generosity of Intel choosing not to compete at all price points.
Click to expand...

You are a moron. AMD just hanging around? Intel's generosity?? You act as if Intel could just flip a switch and AMD would be done.

Intel wants AMD around since it gives Intel a comparative sales tool.This actually allows Intel to sell chips at higher margins while keeping the consumer happy.
 
Cr4ckm0nk3y said:
You are a moron. AMD just hanging around? Intel's generosity?? You act as if Intel could just flip a switch and AMD would be done.
Click to expand...

Pretty much. Intel could afford to simply lower prices in areas where AMD has attractive CPU offerings and put a huge dent in AMD sales or force AMD to sell chips at a loss.

Intel wants AMD around since it gives Intel a comparative sales tool.This actually allows Intel to sell chips at higher margins while keeping the consumer happy.
Click to expand...

You said it yourself right there, "Intel wants AMD around". Intel has a multiple series of Core iX chips coming out fairly soon and a proven history of meeting their roadmap, while AMD has a poor recent history of delivering new chips and technologies and is steadily falling more behind.
 
I must say that I am baffled by the fact that a nearly 2-page discussion has gone on about this, and only one person has mentioned the anti-trust suits (and that person was summarily ignored).

These issues play a HUGE factor into this discussion. AMD is currently riding the waves of a very bad ripple effect.

Intel's underhanded business tactics have been costing AMD sales ever since the Athlon 64 days came to an end. When your sales hurt, then your budget suffers, and so does your R&D. When you fall behind on R&D, then your sales fall further, and etcetera.

Was AMD in a bad situation after the Phenom debacle? Certainly. Are they in a bad situation now? I wouldn't necessarily call it a good one... but given the circumstances, I think it is acceptable.

After getting sold down the river by distributors (that Intel bought/bribed off) for several years, it shouldn't really have been a surprise that AMD fell behind to some extent.

With that stage having been set: then on top of that we have a disruptive re-organizing of some of the company's higher-ups, an expensive acquisition of the ATI graphics company, and then a strong nation-wide economic downturn during a time that a small company was already in a compromised position.

With all of that in mind, we now have ATI's 5870 GPU clocking in at the fastest single card on the market, and the Phenom II chips (although admittedly not "high-end") are still selling. ATI(/AMD) is also still pulling some money for their graphics chips in the WII and xbox360, and Intel is finally starting to get blasted for their anti-trust breaches. I think AMD will recover - although it WILL take some time (ATI will have to help carry them for now).

To support my hypothesis: September 30th's NYSE close was $5.78USD. It has been fluctuating around $6 for the last two or three weeks. The $6 (+/-) mark is the highest the AMD stock has been since the economy slowed down over a year ago.

Barring any further setbacks, if AMD is still bumping around like this in 2 or 3 years, then I might buy into the "sky is falling" mantra.

However, as things currently sit, I think AMD/ATI is in spot that is both expectable (given recent history), and acceptable.
 
I love how every thread in the AMD section turns into an "Intel is better because I need to use extenze" thread, unless it involves an ANCIENT socket (939 or 754, what about my Socket A??).

Seriously, who cares? It's old. AMD isn't 'down and out' and isn't facing 'setbacks' any more than we've already been aware. Deal with it.
 
LAiN_OfTheWired said:
I love how every thread in the AMD section turns into an "Intel is better because I need to use extenze" thread, unless it involves an ANCIENT socket (939 or 754, what about my Socket A??).

Seriously, who cares? It's old. AMD isn't 'down and out' and isn't facing 'setbacks' any more than we've already been aware. Deal with it.
Click to expand...

+1 ^
 
LAiN_OfTheWired said:
Seriously, who cares? It's old. AMD isn't 'down and out' and isn't facing 'setbacks' any more than we've already been aware. Deal with it.
Click to expand...

Wow really? you were aware that AMD had to push back early production of 32nm chips two quarters? What crystal ball were you using?
 
This has been all over the internet for months, and speculated for over a year... crystal ball? You mean search engine? That would be google.
 
While waiting for i5 AMD has revamped for AM3 on low-cost mobos.

While waiting for i3 we can expect price drops and new chips.

I'm not sure why Intel would be the "fast" progress brand, i7 came out last year and i5 last month on a completely different socket plus the 1156 i7s. Last year AMD had, what, the 6000 and Phenom I line? They've totally redone it.

If the i7 920 weren't subsidized by Micro Center, what then? And why not unlock with AMD?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top