that being said, as a stockholder, I never want to hear that anyone in management is conceding or discounting 5-10% of the market. That's a huge percentage in terms of sales.
![[H]ard|Forum](/styles/hardforum/xenforo/logo_dark.png){kind=logo}
Bulldozer Possibly Pushed back till October
- Thread starter kinjo
- Start date
that being said, as a stockholder, I never want to hear that anyone in management is conceding or discounting 5-10% of the market. That's a huge percentage in terms of sales.
Digital Viper-X-
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Dec 9, 2000
- Messages
- 15,133
pretty sure no one is discounting the 5-10% as you still see enthusiast products on the market.
and as a Stockholder, I'd rather see the company push more resources at the 90-95% than concentrate on the 5-10% and go broke
CaptNumbNutz
Fully [H]
- Joined
- Apr 11, 2007
- Messages
- 25,134
That would be a fine tactic if they actually advertised to that 90-95% of the market, but they don't. As I pointed out earlier, there are zero television ads for AMD in the United States, and the only television ad they have run in over 5 years was run in India. Therefore, other than the banner ads on enthusiast websites and magazines, their main form of advertisement comes from word of mouth from enthusiasts in the lower 5-10% of the market. Since they have been shitting on enthusiasts in the CPU sector, it will affect that large piece of the pie (90-95% average joes) also.and as a Stockholder, I'd rather see the company push more resources at the 90-95% than concentrate on the 5-10% and go broke
There is an old saying... one happy customer equals 5 positive referrals. One unhappy customer equals 15 negative referrals. Right now AMD isn't giving the enthusiasts much of what they desire, and we enthusiasts can turn those 5 positive referrals or 15 negative referrals into millions by means of the internet and the businesses we work at. I believe the AMD marketing guys need to remember this a little bit and try to drive the point home with the bean counters so they can get some decent advertising for their CPU's.
MacLeod
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Jul 28, 2009
- Messages
- 8,300
I've wondered this too. I dont understand why there aren't any AMD ads on tv cause you certainly see plenty from Intel. As a result, even the receptionist at my work who can barely use a mouse knows who Intel is but nobody at my work has heard of AMD.
This has never made since to me as AMD has always been the "budget cpu" which I would think would be right up John Q Consumer's alley. Even more so now since Fusion is aimed at the entry level and mobile audience which would be the more mainstream consumers.
sorry, i thought the point was the 90-95% we were saying were not processor driven, and thus unaffected by processor ads?
also, you don't need to be heavy into advertising to be a market leader. Look at a company like EMC. At least 2 years ahead of their closest competitor, a majority of the market %, and almost no advertising. Most people never even heard of the company. Yet companies like HP, IBM, Hitachi etc all chasing behind trying to catch up and very recognizable brands. You bring the best to market, advertising is not needed as much imo.
Richneerd
Gawd
- Joined
- Jan 17, 2010
- Messages
- 642
I also jumped on the 2600k bandwagon
, it's a remarkable CPU . But of course when Bulldozer comes out I will also be purchasing one to replace my 1075T x6
.Digital Viper-X-
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Dec 9, 2000
- Messages
- 15,133
Michaelius
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Sep 8, 2003
- Messages
- 4,684
That's only possible in bussiness to bussiness highly specialized market and even then only if you are top dog in that market.
The numbers on "processor unaware" have been tossed out at ~80%. Could be higher. These are people who might be aware of the brands, but don't really consider it when buying a PC.
Even being "processor aware", that other 20% doesn't mean that you are going to choose performance over all else. Most likely, you are going to choose price/performance over raw performance. ~5% of the market buys top bin processors. I would be willing to bet that less than 1% of all of intel's desktop are those $1000 vanity SKUs that nobody buys.
Most of the market, when buing a PC, is going to look at memory and HD size (plus display on notebook) to make their decision.
AMD advertising will not help that situation. End user advertising on an ingredient brand has very low ROI. You guys are out of the mainstream because you buy CPUs. End user purchases of CPUs is ~5-6% if I remember correctly. Vast majority are built into systems, and people start with their budget and see how much RAM and HD they can get. Hate to say it but you guys are not representative of how the processor market works.
I drive an infiniti, I have no idea what kind of engine I have. But somewhere there is a car enthusiast that could tell me. And all of the engine advertising in the world wouldn't swing me one way or the other.
Wonder what AMD will say when they finally try to get that 10-20% of the market and find they all left cause AMD can't get its act together.
The cpu most likely performs badly against intel's offerings and AMD is just trying to push it back as far as they can so they can minimise the amount and duration of bad press before they can get Trinity out the door .
The cpu most likely performs badly against intel's offerings and AMD is just trying to push it back as far as they can so they can minimise the amount and duration of bad press before they can get Trinity out the door .
well, using your analogy it would appear dodge was wasting money when advertising the hemi. my wife's mom bought a new dodge because it had a hemi, she doesn't have a clue what it means or what it is. she didn't even know it was an engine.
i just asked my wife what amd is, she didn't know. i asked here what intel was and she responded " a computer"
seeing as most wifes will have a good say in what is purchased id say your missing the mark on this one.
i just asked my wife what amd is, she didn't know. i asked here what intel was and she responded " a computer"
seeing as most wifes will have a good say in what is purchased id say your missing the mark on this one.
What? You do know that Trinity is a 4-core/2-module 'enhanced' version of Zambezi with a 480+ shader 'Northern Islands' based IGP (simplistic view).
Delaying something to minimize 'bad press' creates more 'bad press'. The most likely scenario is supply related.
Nordic is saying they are shipping next week
http://www.nordichardware.com/news/...tcom+(www.nordichardware.com+News+&+Articles)
http://www.nordichardware.com/news/...tcom+(www.nordichardware.com+News+&+Articles)
They will want to get something out after the flop that wil lbe bulldozer (judging by all the delays) and Trinity will be that. It will be faster than Llano and will get huge orders and share holders will be happy
Nordic is saying they are shipping next week
http://www.nordichardware.com/news/...tcom+(www.nordichardware.com+News+&+Articles)
Ha! I'll believe it when I see it.
CaptNumbNutz
Fully [H]
- Joined
- Apr 11, 2007
- Messages
- 25,134
I will concede to your point since you are a marketing director, and have the numbers to back that up.
However, how do you guys factor in the old adage I mentioned above? I will repeat it below:
One happy customer equals 5 positive referrals. One unhappy customer equals 15 negative referrals. Right now AMD isn't giving the enthusiasts much of what they desire, and we enthusiasts can turn those 5 positive referrals or 15 negative referrals into millions by means of the internet and the businesses we work at.
You guys don't advertise to the larger portion of the market who are not processor aware, thus they don't care. But what happens when all the people who work on the machines with your hardware in them see the performance first hand and begin to NOT recommend your products to co-workers, bosses, and average joes? They do tend to notice, and even average joe might start to ponder "maybe I should go Intel since I have heard more about them." Enthusiasts are only a small chunk, but I think everyone tends to forget about the system builders and admins that also have to work with the hardware on a daily basis. If you guys aren't going to advertise heavily, you are relying heavily on word-of-mouth advertising. Word-of-mouth advertising can work well, but there is very little room for error when a product isn't up to par. Contrast that with the likes of Intel, who can make monumental fuckups (e.g. Netburst, Pentium FDIV bug, H67 chipset flaws, etc. etc. ad nauseum) and still recover with ease.
Not sure I follow. Why would would I recommend an average joe go Intel over AMD, particularly when they likely won't notice the difference? The only people I care to provide such info to are people who are into high-end products. The average joe is likely trying to save-a-buck. Me recommending Intel would be fruitless. Unless my aim is to get them to spend more money on something they don't need.
Same here. It's BS as far as I'm concerned.
Huh? Wouldn't it make more sense to release it earlier and recoup loses if it's a fail? As opposed to delaying it until the release of a better product, which requires a new socket and will likely overshadow it; thus preventing a failed product from stagnating on store shelves?
Last edited:
soulsavior
Limp Gawd
- Joined
- Jun 16, 2011
- Messages
- 200
I'm still thinking early to mid September launch. Realistic retail availability in October. We'll see. It's honestly quite stunning just how quiet things have been kept. You'd expect much more major leaks, good or bad, this late in the game.
AMD on that Men in Black status.
Anyway, I didn't read the entire article. He said launch would be mid/late Sept. which sounds more believable.
Exactly!
Why hold on to a product because it performs poorly compared to the competition, just to replace it a few months later with something completely different? Because you like inventory clearing fire sales?
Which is precisely what people buy.
And most, however, dial in the "price" portion of price/performance far more than the performance side of things.
I am a huge mountain biker, and I do obsess about the components on my bike. If someone asks about forks, I am a dyed in the wool Fox guy, that is what I recommend. I have plenty of friends who have asked my opinion on forks, I tell them Fox, but many have ended up with marzocchi or rock shox or others, because, while I have certain beliefs about the product, they may have seen other things that were more important to their decision.
If you sit the average person, running average applications, in front of 2 PCs with different speed processors, the odds that they can see the actual difference surfing the web or running office is negligible at best. More likely a faster HD or more RAM will have a bigger impact.
CPU might matter to gamers more, but I would contend that in the general population it matters less. And when I guy in the CPU business says that it matters less, it is a pretty good indication that it is probably true.
The volume market is where you will impact market share. It's not glamorous, but it is what it is.
And most, however, dial in the "price" portion of price/performance far more than the performance side of things.
I am a huge mountain biker, and I do obsess about the components on my bike. If someone asks about forks, I am a dyed in the wool Fox guy, that is what I recommend. I have plenty of friends who have asked my opinion on forks, I tell them Fox, but many have ended up with marzocchi or rock shox or others, because, while I have certain beliefs about the product, they may have seen other things that were more important to their decision.
If you sit the average person, running average applications, in front of 2 PCs with different speed processors, the odds that they can see the actual difference surfing the web or running office is negligible at best. More likely a faster HD or more RAM will have a bigger impact.
CPU might matter to gamers more, but I would contend that in the general population it matters less. And when I guy in the CPU business says that it matters less, it is a pretty good indication that it is probably true.
The volume market is where you will impact market share. It's not glamorous, but it is what it is.
He's been registered on the forums for less than a week. Not really an excuse, because a smart person would search for posts JF-AMD has made in the past before saying things like:
While the enthusiast market is nice (I'm still wanting an enthusiast-level Socket G34 platform), John is right, the money is in the volume market. A market where buyers really don't care what's in the desktop/laptop, as long as it allows them to e-mail, watch Youtube/Netflix/Hulu, play their Facebook games better than their old computer.
The problem with advertising is that it takes a lot of money (which AMD doesn't have in spades) to run a successful marketing campaign. Examples: Buying air time for your commercials, paying a company to produce the commercials, paying OEMs to directly market your products more, etc...
Last edited:
Monkey God
Mangina Full of Sand
- Joined
- May 7, 2007
- Messages
- 6,723
Its true, most people don't care about what CPU is in their PC, but when they are buying new PC's, they tend to ask the advice of people who do care about which parts are in there: enthusiasts.
It is near impossible to explain the intrinsic details of AMD vs Intel to the common person, as long as it runs Windows and the programs they use, that is where their train of thought usually ends. Only those that say, "You're telling me to get an AMD system, but I thought Intel was better?" is where you can explain to them, and there is a high chance they won't truly understand.
It goes back to what they can afford, and what meets their needs. If you have similarly equipped AMD and Intel systems at the same price and quantity, it is a tossup. It also depends on the place where people will buy their systems: I've seen more AMD-based systems sell at Walmart than at Best Buy.
I'm an enthusiast myself, but I'll tell people that are buying a whole system to go for what fits their needs and is cheaper. For a desktop, it is either or; for laptops, now that there are sizable quantities of E- and A-series machines, I recommend more of those.
![Zarathustra[H]](https://cdn.hardforum.com/data/avatars/m/9/9298.jpg?1715876891){kind=avatar}
Zarathustra[H]
Extremely [H]
- Joined
- Oct 29, 2000
- Messages
- 39,218
Couldn't agree more...
But aren't you leaving out the Server market here? They kind of care about performance too (but it's usually more performance per watt or performance per dollar investment than it is raw performance, as they are often building farms)
Actually, in the server market, ~5% buy the fastest processors, most buy mid-bin.
Performance in the server world is about throughput, not speed. Price performance and performance per watt trump raw performance 95% of the time (as measured by SKU distribution.)
Raw performance is more often used by fanboys (on both sides) to argue their points than it is used by real businesses. You hit the nail on the head that it is price/perf and perf/watt. And in the case of the cloud, price/perf/watt/square foot.
Performance in the server world is about throughput, not speed. Price performance and performance per watt trump raw performance 95% of the time (as measured by SKU distribution.)
Raw performance is more often used by fanboys (on both sides) to argue their points than it is used by real businesses. You hit the nail on the head that it is price/perf and perf/watt. And in the case of the cloud, price/perf/watt/square foot.
Zarathustra[H]
Extremely [H]
- Joined
- Oct 29, 2000
- Messages
- 39,218
Yep, I picture this being done as a system of cash flows, with initial investment, and future flows based on predicted electricity costs.
In the end, the highest NPV wins
If you told a CIO you could give them 10% more performance or 5% lower power, the vast majority would take the 5% lower power because most of the time (rendering, HPC and a few others notwithstanding) the 5% lower power is seen at the bottom line, the performance is much harder to quantify in most cases.
Imagine that you database query returns results in .9 seconds instead of 1 second. Or your email message is sent in a half second instead of .55 seconds.
Massively parallel tasks can be helped, but most of what happens in a data center is random and relies on so other process step or human interaction.
Think of it as making MS word run 10% faster. What is the value for 99% of the people out there?
Imagine that you database query returns results in .9 seconds instead of 1 second. Or your email message is sent in a half second instead of .55 seconds.
Massively parallel tasks can be helped, but most of what happens in a data center is random and relies on so other process step or human interaction.
Think of it as making MS word run 10% faster. What is the value for 99% of the people out there?
I'd think that a CIO would want an actual product to buy and not keep getting told the release time is pushed back monthly .
I know you have to push the company line and make it sound like these delays are a good thing and everything is fine but anyone with a half a brain know that not having a product to sell is a bad thing for any company . The longer it takes for the product to come the more sales you will loose to intel
I know you have to push the company line and make it sound like these delays are a good thing and everything is fine but anyone with a half a brain know that not having a product to sell is a bad thing for any company . The longer it takes for the product to come the more sales you will loose to intel
Monkey God
Mangina Full of Sand
- Joined
- May 7, 2007
- Messages
- 6,723
CIO's dont give a shit about CPU vs CPU performance, they care about bigger picture things like support, software compatibility, jamming more software onto fewer and fewer VM's, and cutting head count, total cost of ownership, etc.
Since when is the SB chipset a monumental fuckup? Nobody reported an issue with the chipset, and only Intel managed to reproduce it in their testing department, with an estimated THREE YEARS before the ports would start slowing down due to the errors. They also replaced all motherboards for free.
I'd say you're the one missing the mark. If that's what your wife knows about computers, no one would be asking her for advice about them and you wouldn't let her influence your decision about buying one together.
My wife hardly knows anything about computers. Two of her sisters were buying laptops, my wife asked me for advice and I recommended AMD E350s.
SolidSnakeUS
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- May 29, 2008
- Messages
- 1,282
If only there was an emoticon for head smashing into desk.
should have recommended a i3 380um, well unless they want to knock out a game of wow between loads of laundry. nearly the same power usage but you get the power of a 4 core processor. playing games is the only advantage the e350 has, and even than most games on a 15.6" screen wont be playable.
I have never said delays are a good thing, I want the product out more than you guys.
Ding ding ding! We have a winner. When I talk to CIOs I rarely get into technology discussions, it is mostly business discussions about ROI, lowering costs, IT flexibility, cloud deployments, IT trends. I would be willing to be that I have probably shown benchmark charts no more than 10% of the time - and they get glossed over.