![[H]ard|Forum](/styles/hardforum/xenforo/logo_dark.png){kind=logo}
AMD, Please Don't Die
- Thread starter Banana King
- Start date
Manny Calavera
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Jun 10, 2004
- Messages
- 3,986
Thats what I would like to know.I dont want more ' TLB erratum type' suprises popping up after I buy the BE.
It may have been Dan who mentioned something about that, possibly in another thread. Anyway, the more I look at the present situation, the more I'm thinking that the 45nm chips will be make or break. I won't purchase anything earlier than the 45nm parts because I am planning a 4S system late next year, possibly Q1 '09. Can't afford to take enormous risks with the 65nm processors.
X2 6000+ vs E6550: http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/intel/showdoc.aspx?i=3137&p=8
The E6550 is the overall winner, winning 13 out of 19 benchmarks.
Yes, I realize you are talking stock speeds, but so was I.
Read what I said again - I said an E4600 would be competitive with the X2 6000+, costs $10 less, and uses half the power. I never mentioned overclocking.
- Joined
- Jun 25, 2007
- Messages
- 7,268
X2 6000+ vs E6550: http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/intel/showdoc.aspx?i=3137&p=8
The E6550 is the overall winner, winning 13 out of 19 benchmarks.
Yes, I realize you are talking stock speeds, but so was I.
Read what I said again - I said an E4600 would be competitive with the X2 6000+, costs $10 less, and uses half the power. I never mentioned overclocking.
Not when it comes to gaming (except SupCom...). Hell, even a 5600+ pwns a E6320 in most all gaming disciplines...
Do you even have any idea what you are talking about? What does the E6320 have to do with the E4600? The E6320 is 1.86GHz / 4MB L2, the E4600 is 2.4GHz / 2MB L2. The E4600 would beat the E6320 in the virtually all benchmarks, the larger cache isn't nearly enough to bridge the clockspeed gap.
http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=3112&p=11
The E4500 at 'only' 2.2GHz beats an X2 5000+ at 2.6GHz in gaming. It's not an exaggeration to think a 2.4GHz E4600 can hold it's own against a 3GHz X2 6000+.
Well supposedly AMD will be releasing a B4 stepping sometime in Q1 2008. That's the rumor anyway, I don't know if I read something official on that. I don't know anything else on the subject. AMD really needs to get fixed versions of the CPU out the door. They are already hurting bad enough from the L3 errata issue.
B3 samples are due in January and will undergo re-re-re-validation for Q1 quad core shipments, so I doubt a B4 will be out in any meaningful way in Q1.
If the worst happens, AMD still won't disappear as there are many other companies that would likely be interested in acquiring them.
AM3 is just around the corner too, so there still may be hope for the company. AM3 processors will be usable not only in AM3 motherboards but also in AM2 & AM2+ as well. That's because the AM3 procs will have memory controllers for both DDR2 & DDR3 memory.
That means a potential larger market for AM3 processor sales.
The AM3 chipset (or certain chipsets?) also integrates some stuff from their ATI acquisition. I'm not exactly sure of all the details or the benefits of this - but I believe this will result in more $ coming in for AMD with the ATI components going into the AM3 motherboards.
Hypertransport 3.0 is also on the way with AM3, so is just another nice bonus for these systems. If I'm not mistaken, HT 3.0 will make it to market significantly sooner than Intel's proprietary competitor to HT 3.0 which I believe is slated for summer 2008.
All in all, it's hard to tell what will happen - but it looks to me like AMD has some good fight left in them.
AM3 is just around the corner too, so there still may be hope for the company. AM3 processors will be usable not only in AM3 motherboards but also in AM2 & AM2+ as well. That's because the AM3 procs will have memory controllers for both DDR2 & DDR3 memory.
That means a potential larger market for AM3 processor sales.
The AM3 chipset (or certain chipsets?) also integrates some stuff from their ATI acquisition. I'm not exactly sure of all the details or the benefits of this - but I believe this will result in more $ coming in for AMD with the ATI components going into the AM3 motherboards.
Hypertransport 3.0 is also on the way with AM3, so is just another nice bonus for these systems. If I'm not mistaken, HT 3.0 will make it to market significantly sooner than Intel's proprietary competitor to HT 3.0 which I believe is slated for summer 2008.
All in all, it's hard to tell what will happen - but it looks to me like AMD has some good fight left in them.
I hope not. Even AMD isn't getting samples of those until January.
MemoryInAGarden
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Oct 26, 2003
- Messages
- 4,067
That's really dependent on if the hype pans out. So far AMD hasn't proven that they can deliver.
There is a poison pill in that situation: AMD's x86 license isn't transferrable to the buyer.
That doesn't mean someone can't buy AMD, but anyone who does would need to renegotiate a license with Intel. It's not a question whether Intel would, but the terms may not be as favorable. Also, the US may not let a foreign company purchase AMD, limiting the number of potential buyers.
BTW, AMD is taking a big write down this quarter on the ATI purchase. It's hard to imagine what someone would pay for AMD in it's current shape. Besides intangibles, with all the current debt AMD's worth is around a negative value. And the buyer would need to be someone willing to throw billions into competing with Intel.
Ok I read this thread and at first it was funny, then it was serious, and now its just sad.
AMD fans gloated, bragged, laughed, called names, and pretty much celebrated when AMD was good.
All I ever heard was OC this and OC that, for every "Well stock for stock AMD is better" post I seen on boards there were 100 on "AMD OC > Intel OC"............
I hate to be the harbringer of death, I dont even want to talk trash but all kidding aside..........
AMD is hurt, AMD is down, AMD is getting kicked in the gut and for all their past Glory the best OC people have on the latest CPUS < Intel OC!!!!!
AMD fans gloated, bragged, laughed, called names, and pretty much celebrated when AMD was good.
All I ever heard was OC this and OC that, for every "Well stock for stock AMD is better" post I seen on boards there were 100 on "AMD OC > Intel OC"............
I hate to be the harbringer of death, I dont even want to talk trash but all kidding aside..........
AMD is hurt, AMD is down, AMD is getting kicked in the gut and for all their past Glory the best OC people have on the latest CPUS < Intel OC!!!!!
R
ring.of.steel
Guest
so this must make you an intel fan and if you take a look in the intel forum the exact same is happening now except the other way round.
Faster (AMD/INTEL) > Slower (AMD/INTEL) doesnt matter which way it is it will allways happen.
and if you take a look in the intel forum the exact same is happening now except the other way round. Faster (AMD/INTEL) > Slower (AMD/INTEL) doesnt matter which way it is it will allways happen.
Very true, and this is quite apparent now with the Opteron-Iran situation, but for a totally different reason of course. In the event of a buy-out, Intel might have no choice but to transfer the license or face the FTC. I'm not certain how that would play out, but there would not be any effective competition left in the x86 market otherwise.
I can only think of IBM as a corporation that might satisfy everything you mentioned in your post except the will to do so.BTW, AMD is taking a big write down this quarter on the ATI purchase. It's hard to imagine what someone would pay for AMD in it's current shape. Besides intangibles, with all the current debt AMD's worth is around a negative value. And the buyer would need to be someone willing to throw billions into competing with Intel.
I wouldn't either.
Manny Calavera
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Jun 10, 2004
- Messages
- 3,986
There is a poison pill in that situation: AMD's x86 license isn't transferrable to the buyer.
That doesn't mean someone can't buy AMD, but anyone who does would need to renegotiate a license with Intel. It's not a question whether Intel would, but the terms may not be as favorable. Also, the US may not let a foreign company purchase AMD, limiting the number of potential buyers.
BTW, AMD is taking a big write down this quarter on the ATI purchase. It's hard to imagine what someone would pay for AMD in it's current shape. Besides intangibles, with all the current debt AMD's worth is around a negative value. And the buyer would need to be someone willing to throw billions into competing with Intel.
Big is right,and it may get bigger.
http://money.cnn.com/2007/12/12/technology/amd_charge.ap/index.htm?source=yahoo_quote
http://bigtech.blogs.fortune.cnn.com/2007/12/12/has-intel-crushed-amd/?source=yahoo_quote
http://www.thestreet.com/video/inde...trategy&cm_ven=YAHOO&cm_cat=&cm_ite=#10394243
http://www.thestreet.com/video/inde...=Market+Strategy&cm_ven=YAHOO&cm_cat=&cm_ite=
Mostly bad,a bit of good,all worth a look.
At this point, the acquisition of ATI is the only good thing coming out of amd imo. Their products are snapping up market share and proving to be decent products. I'm sure they're not huge money makers at this point - but at least it gives the company something to say.. "Hey, look, not everything's a disaster."
- Joined
- Aug 3, 2004
- Messages
- 24,354
AMD ISN'T GOING TO DIE FROM A BAD CPU RELEASE
jesus christ-mas!! it wont happen.
Manny Calavera
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Jun 10, 2004
- Messages
- 3,986
Anything gained so far from the acquisition,may quickly get flushed down the toilet in short order with this.
Of course not !! If it did happen,it would be a culmination of many things,small and large.
You mean like an untimely aquisition of ATi (money-wise)? or the resurgence of Intel in processor cost, performance, and efficiency? or the resulting price war which has left AMD making extremely little money on their processors? or the very late and incredibly bad performance of R600? or the very late and poor performance of Barcelona/Phenom? or Intel's roadmap which appears to leave very little room for AMD to truly compete (except in very low cost situations) until bulldozer [if it's any good, that is]? or the fact that AMD is lagging in the process area? or the fact that all of these things have contributed to AMD having extremely little cash available? I'd say those many things, small and large.
I'm not saying they're going under, but I'm saying they're in quite a shitty place.
Manny Calavera
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Jun 10, 2004
- Messages
- 3,986
Yes,and a laundry list of others.I think the ATI buyout is going to bite them in the ass in a big way soon,and long term.
That isn't very comforting for some reason. I think the processor landscape is completely different now. I believe Intel has learned a few things, damn them, the last few years, especially not to sit on their laurels vs AMD. The 900 lbs gorilla has awakened. They aren't going to just sit around this time and let AMD eat their lunch again. The signs are ominous but hope springs eternal. Oh goodness I hope AMD pulls it together
To be honest, I think the acquisition of ATi will prove to be a fantastic thing in the long term. AMD now has complete control of their own platform, with motherboards, processors, and integrated/discrete graphics chipsets. It will also give them the expertise and engineering brainpower they need for Fusion.
However, I doubt they could have made the purchase at a worse time; not that they necessarily could have known, but it was unlucky none-the-less. Hopefully ATi retains a reasonable amount of profitability to buoy AMD. I look forward to actually having a viable choice between nVidia and ATi discrete parts in the future too...
Manny Calavera
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Jun 10, 2004
- Messages
- 3,986
I hope your right,and that I am wrong
Kyle has said that he thinks Intel is out to kill Nvidia,so it may be down to Intel and 'ATI' if he's right.
When did Kyle say this? I'm assuming he stated this with the assumption that AMD survives the next couple of years intact.
In critically lean times, ATI will be sold off.
Manny Calavera
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Jun 10, 2004
- Messages
- 3,986
He said said it more then a twice at least.He most recently mentioned it yet again in the Phenom review,and possibly again just after that....
Edit : Here is one of a few....
http://www.hardocp.com/article.html?art=MTQyMiwyLCwyMA==
I pay close attention to what he and others in the community at his level say....
But they will surely crumble under the financial pressure if they don't do something fast to cut costs.
When you're not generating enough profits to pay for interest something is very wrong with your business model.
Hornet
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Oct 4, 2005
- Messages
- 6,624
No doubt it look promising when AMD first acquired ATi, with that Fusion thing and all. But then neither us or AMD themself could have seen this coming. They are now in a very difficult situation that whatever innovative things they planned could be dented by their current financial state. Fusion doesn't just comes out of that ATi buy over, but they'll need a huge, constant amount of cash for R&D to not only make Fusion happens, but to actually make one that works great. Just like Phenom now, yes they finally made a quad core CPU, and they also claimed it to be a naive quadcore CPU architecture and stuff, it all sounds good on paper. But the actual product is a screwup.
Only time will tell, fingers crossed that they will get it right. But in the meantime, as interesting as Fusion looks to be, we have to keep it in mind that the actual product of it, how well it will actually be implemented, is still anyone's guess. Something that works is just one thing, it has to actually works effectively with acceptable level of performance.
Yep, it's AMD's MO.
chrispycrunch
Gawd
- Joined
- Feb 25, 2005
- Messages
- 632
ATi might end up to be AMD's saving grace. If you look at someone like NVdia, their profit margins are so high. CPU margins are far lower, and more so for AMD because AMD has to cut prices to compete. If AMD can position its ATi products at a lower price than nvidia to consumers who don't need #1 performing cards, AMD will be able to survive. They might even want to focus on the non pc market (video in phones, pdas, consoles).
I have been an AMD fanboy for a long ass time, AMD X2 5000+ and my x1900GT lasted me a long time...
Back friday rolls along, got me my $200 q6600, right now I'd have a hard time turning back, the ability to take this thing from 2.4GHz to 3.6Ghz with a bit of tweaking is insane, my AMD w/ an expensive Zalman cooler barely broke 40C but it would still lock up if I went just a couple hundred MHz over the stock settings.
I mean I feel with my Intel I'm getting so much more... And the cost difference is not even that much... (And the quad runs circles around the 5000+)
Back friday rolls along, got me my $200 q6600, right now I'd have a hard time turning back, the ability to take this thing from 2.4GHz to 3.6Ghz with a bit of tweaking is insane, my AMD w/ an expensive Zalman cooler barely broke 40C but it would still lock up if I went just a couple hundred MHz over the stock settings
.I mean I feel with my Intel I'm getting so much more... And the cost difference is not even that much... (And the quad runs circles around the 5000+)
Investing in tech stocks is always risky. Especially with AMD.
lol...unless you shorted them a bit more than a year ago.
Manny Calavera
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Jun 10, 2004
- Messages
- 3,986
I feel your pain.My wife and I lost about 1600 earlier this year on AMD
Thats what the smart money would have done weeks ago.As the writing was on the wall quite clearly well before Phenoms launch.Bought in at 13~ or so,and sold at 9~ or lower.
I mentioned this a few times weeks ago.