Dissappointing Year So Far for AMD

Status
Not open for further replies.
R

raine7337

n00b
Joined
Nov 12, 2007
Messages
29
With Spider released today to much dissappointment (and one article I read even questioning the viability of AMD going forward), I had to share this information with you all:

AMD's stock is down 41% so far during 2007 and the company is currently with $6.7 billion.

Compare that to Intel whose stock is up 24% so far during 2007 and the company is now worth $147 billion.

AMD has had a very rough year, I sincerely hope that the upcoming "high end" Phenoms can compete a little better, that quad-crossfire scaling actually works, and the catering purely to the mainstream market as a strategy pays off...Otherwise, intel is just an absolute mammoth company running all over AMD this year and in the future.
 
And they managed to take along a quality GPU company in their downwards spiral...

I'm sure ATI would have been able to release it's new cards sooner were it not for the merger.

I've yet to see any benefits from ATI/AMD synergies in terms of real "results". Lots of talk, and pretty marketing slides, but no "results".

All I see are second rate GPU's and second rate cheap processors. Over one "year" later and the 8800GTX still beats AMD latest products. And it's been about a year since the Q6600 B3 came out... I hear it still beats the very latest Phenoms...

We need a strong AMD to ensure innovation in the market.

But so far, lots of talk... The market punishes companies like this, companies that are unable to prove that they have a sensible strategic gameplan, and whose senior management, who, coincidentally are responsible for the strategic decision making, appear to be leaving (at least some of them).
 
AMD is on the verge of disaster. Remember 3Dfx? Lackluster products running late. One year of that and they were done. Now AMD is a much bigger company, but I don’t see how it can survive unless it either has a killer or unique product. Being Intel and nVidia’s red headed step child can’t work for them much longer, at least not as they are now.

AMD is letting us down right now. Their lack of execution is putting competition at risk. They’ve simply GOT to do better!
 
You have to look at the bright side: the Thanksgiving turkey came early this year. ;)
 
:LOL: @ the turkey comment above.

Just something to ponder... why would a UAE govt owned investment firm purchace $700m of AMD's newly issued stock, days before this release?

AMD has got to have something up their sleeve, and just need cash to get it out.

I hope :(
 
ZXQ said:
:LOL: @ the turkey comment above.

Just something to ponder... why would a UAE govt owned investment firm purchace $700m of AMD's newly issued stock, days before this release?

AMD has got to have something up their sleeve, and just need cash to get it out.

I hope :(
Click to expand...

Maybe they just need a bad debt for tax write offs ;)
 
ZXQ said:
:LOL: @ the turkey comment above.

Just something to ponder... why would a UAE govt owned investment firm purchace $700m of AMD's newly issued stock, days before this release?

AMD has got to have something up their sleeve, and just need cash to get it out.

I hope :(
Click to expand...

Griffin.


But don't hold your breath on that for too long...
 
ZXQ said:
:LOL: @ the turkey comment above.

Just something to ponder... why would a UAE govt owned investment firm purchace $700m of AMD's newly issued stock, days before this release?

AMD has got to have something up their sleeve, and just need cash to get it out.

I hope :(
Click to expand...

Seems like AMD needed that investment to make payroll:p
 
echn111 said:
I've yet to see any benefits from ATI/AMD synergies in terms of real "results". Lots of talk, and pretty marketing slides, but no "results".
Click to expand...

Yep I am sure they consulted "Experts" before the merger.

Take two company's doing pretty well, join them together and loose half the staff that made it all work on both sides, kill morale and productivity and you have the new AMD.

The new AMD is the new poster child for bigger is not always better, now the entire industry is on track for a Intel/Nvidia monopoly.
 
When AMD bought ATi, I though it was a move that shows AMD is heading towards merging GPU into CPU, or probably create an all AMD platform, whatever, it looks like they have some pretty adventurous long term plans. But now it seems like they're struggling to even survive, let alone reaching that long term plan. Spider doesn't look so good atm.

To be honest, I really wish that merge never happened. Even if AMD is going down, at least ATi won't. Heck maybe they both would have remains competitive.

It looks like a little miscalculation of AMD, its like AMD wasn't financially prepared for whatever they was aiming for with the merge.

The thing here is, even if AMD can survive this, until they reach their long term goal, will they have enough resources to actually implement whatever they are aiming for with success? Intel and nVidia has the budget to counter whatever AMD may come up with, so AMD themself needs such resources too to compete against these 2 giants
 
You know, I see a lot of ATI bashing in here. Maybe Im the only person on this forum remotely impressed to see ATI dig itself out of the crapper, release a card that actually performs for once while not creating an oven of heat, also offering a solution for future upgrade ability with their crossfire and xcrossfire solutions. For once I'm actually seeing the vid card side of this forum EXPLODE with the buzz of these cards. And dual GPU solutions right around the corner without a huge 6 month wait? If anyones doing it right here, ATI is.
Also the AMD chip doesn't perform crappy. Lets get real here. it just doesnt perform on par with a product thats seen revisions. Get real guys. Nobody was overclocking the first q6600s to 4 ghz as soon as they were released, and from what I remember, for a while overclockers were SCREAMING stay away from those.
People on the bleeding edge ALWAYS call the shot WAY too early.
All this talk of dissapointment already, we are actually seeing a first release chip from amd thats not only quad core which is a first for AMD, but it does a pretty damn good job of comparing to a similarly clocked counterpart. Granted AMD is a generation behind, but with how these are priced....... I cant see ANYONE screaming about how they arnt comparing to a 1000 dollar chip. They are comparing to a similarly priced chip IE Q6600 and does a pretty good job for a brand new baby. Give it some freakin time.
 
Ace123 said:
You know, I see a lot of ATI bashing in here. Maybe Im the only person on this forum remotely impressed to see ATI dig itself out of the crapper, release a card that actually performs for once while not creating an oven of heat, also offering a solution for future upgrade ability with their crossfire and xcrossfire solutions. For once I'm actually seeing the vid card side of this forum EXPLODE with the buzz of these cards. And dual GPU solutions right around the corner without a huge 6 month wait? If anyones doing it right here, ATI is.
Also the AMD chip doesn't perform crappy. Lets get real here. it just doesnt perform on par with a product thats seen revisions. Get real guys. Nobody was overclocking the first q6600s to 4 ghz as soon as they were released, and from what I remember, for a while overclockers were SCREAMING stay away from those.
People on the bleeding edge ALWAYS call the shot WAY too early.
All this talk of dissapointment already, we are actually seeing a first release chip from amd thats not only quad core which is a first for AMD, but it does a pretty damn good job of comparing to a similarly clocked counterpart. Granted AMD is a generation behind, but with how these are priced....... I cant see ANYONE screaming about how they arnt comparing to a 1000 dollar chip. They are comparing to a similarly priced chip IE Q6600 and does a pretty good job for a brand new baby. Give it some freakin time.
Click to expand...

I was very please to see the new 3850 & 3870 are competitive, good news for all.

AMD no longer have any top end processors like Intel, this means they are always fighting with price and loosing the lucrative top end part of the market. It costs the around same amount of money to manufacture a Q6600 as a QX6850 for example but Intel can charge 3x the amount for the latter which is a massive advantage.

There is a reason why AMD is bleeding cash, there product line is under constant price pressure and these new processors are going to continue the trend.
 
Well if I remember correctly most people said the x2's were crap cause they didnt overclock and the pentinum 4 was a beast. We all saw what ended in that. First generation silicon is never very impressive. To be honest I expect AMD and Intel to be about equal when the new processors arrive from both companies. Plus to be honest Intel can only press their process advantage for so long, the wall on shrinking is coming very soon.
Most of you Intel fan boys that like to bash us Amd users, seem to forget your cheap quad and core 2 duo, came thanks to AMD. Otheriwse we would all be using some crap ball Itanium processor. All in all AMD isnt looking too bad, If they can ramp speeds and they seem very confident about that, then they will be just fine. You all seem to forget there is a giant AMD install base that can just slam these quads in for a easy upgrade, even if they arent the fastest people will buy.
I'm stuck on a 939 machine and I will be skipping this generation of processors, Im looking forward to bulldozer. My fx-60 can keep up just fine for a long while. My crappy 7800gtx on the other hand is not.
So lets keep the doom and gloom away for awhile. If AMD cant deliver on higher clock speeds then yes they may be in trouble. But I seriosuly doubt that is the case. Also last time I checked they sell video cards too and it seems they released a good card this time. Profits are coming just not as high as they would like.
 
It's almost like they went threw a merger or something :rolleyes:
 
Gideon said:
Well if I remember correctly most people said the x2's were crap cause they didnt overclock and the pentinum 4 was a beast. We all saw what ended in that. First generation silicon is never very impressive. To be honest I expect AMD and Intel to be about equal when the new processors arrive from both companies. Plus to be honest Intel can only press their process advantage for so long, the wall on shrinking is coming very soon.
Most of you Intel fan boys that like to bash us Amd users, seem to forget your cheap quad and core 2 duo, came thanks to AMD. Otheriwse we would all be using some crap ball Itanium processor. All in all AMD isnt looking too bad, If they can ramp speeds and they seem very confident about that, then they will be just fine. You all seem to forget there is a giant AMD install base that can just slam these quads in for a easy upgrade, even if they arent the fastest people will buy.
I'm stuck on a 939 machine and I will be skipping this generation of processors, Im looking forward to bulldozer. My fx-60 can keep up just fine for a long while. My crappy 7800gtx on the other hand is not.
So lets keep the doom and gloom away for awhile. If AMD cant deliver on higher clock speeds then yes they may be in trouble. But I seriosuly doubt that is the case. Also last time I checked they sell video cards too and it seems they released a good card this time. Profits are coming just not as high as they would like.
Click to expand...

I think that you are missing the point that some here are making. I'm not bashing AMD. I've bought plenty of their products, as well as ATI's, when they were able to CLEARLY offer me a better product either in terms of cost or performance. This is espcially critical with CPU's and Intel's dominace.

In the real world, AMD is second fidle, without a clear edge, why buy AMD CPU's? Most individuals and companies would be just fine to buy Intel if they offer good products at good prices. It AMD is just equal to Intel in terms of performance and price, they are still a leg down. AMD has to have superior products to battle Intel.

I'm not saying its fair, but when is life fair?

Trust me, I want AMD to execute. When they do, its good for all computer consumers. If Phenom had come out last year we would all be enjoying lower prices, and AMD would have probably made a few more dollars, Intel probably a little less, but not going hungry.
 
simply put, there was no way ATI would've released r600 in better shape than AMD would

AMD was probably the one that pushed 55nm to r600 (aka rv670) and got it out early as the initial projection was for january release. The A11 revision came back bug free.

AMD is struggling, but I believe they have passed the lowest point. The Phenom is not better than INtel offerings but it will make AMD more competitive and raise ASPs. People are still gobbling up 'obsolete' X2s right now as AMD's market share is actually up a little than the previous quarter.

I dont' think AMD saw the merger to benefit them until late 2007/ealry 2008. The release of Spider and RV670 is a huge plus for AMD to give a 'package' to OEMs. AMD has enough moeny to bleed well into 2008. They are not going to go under anytime. The release of bulldozer will hopefully be good.

I will buy a PHenom in the near future once B3 is out. I'm sure I will buy one for all the computers in the house and a spider chipset when it's priced better (value version). AMD will live.
 
Seems to me Brisbane and Barcelona are just proof that AMD needs tinker time with their new 65nm process.

And regarding HD 3850 and 3870, more marketing needs to surround this product. More people need to hear about it. \

Now then I supsect Phenom will end up being considered a moderate failure, and the HD3870 and 3850 and even the R680 a moderate success, but no more.

Where I'm hoping AMD can pull a good hard punch is in R700. The R700 rumors have been lingering and Nvidia doesn't seem to have any real direction. I mean, where are the next high-end part rumors? I cant speak for everyone, I was impressed by the performance/price of the 8800GT but disappointed at the fact that this was going to be the 1Tflop monster (remember that? Of course, Nvidia's retarded naming scheme doesn't help things for them).

And one thing that doesn't seem to be mentioned alot is RD790FX's MRSP: <$200. Umm hi reasonable mobo price, haven't seen you in a while. That basically frees up $100 for whatever part you deem needs it. I mean all enthusiast LGA775 based boards debut at over $300.
 
Battleneter2 said:
The new AMD is the new poster child for bigger is not always better, now the entire industry is on track for a Intel/Nvidia monopoly.
Click to expand...

On the bright side, Intel has hinted at competing on the high-end GPU market for a while now (Larrabee for example).
All we need now is nVidia deciding to start making CPUs :)
 
How is AMD doing badly?

They still are competive in only sector that really matters which is low end.
They finally managed to make great video cards for important 150-200 $ segment.
They have new CPU which greatly reduced the gap beetween X2 and core duo.
But even at current prices they are going to sell them to people who won't need to do platform upgrade (big advantage which AMD has compared to intel and their never ending want a new CPU get a new revision of mobo story).
If they can reduce prices of quads to make them performance to price ratio competitive with intel they are all set for next year.

You guys can keep 1000$ 4 Ghz intel quads with $300 mobos I'll be perfectly happy with Amd quad at 2.6-2.8 if it comes into <150$ price range especially if they can make <100$ good CF mobos.
 
Michaelius said:
They have new CPU which greatly reduced the gap beetween X2 and core duo.
Click to expand...

Did we read the same reviews?
Check the review right here on [H]ardOCP, it includes a 6400+.
In most applications/games it performs closely to the 9600, at a much lower price.
Heck, in some it even outperforms the 9600 and 9700 by a margin, eg Lame.
Video-encoding and certain multithreaded games (but not all, eg Crysis) favour Phenom, but still the 6400+ is so much cheaper that it's just better bang for the buck.
 
LOL

It seems to have taken 1/2-1 day for the shock to wear off before the defensive posts started coming. Sorry to burst your bubble, but AMD's MPU business is a disaster.

The RV670 launch has been a bright spot in an otherwise miserable year. Semi-competitive performance per dollar for the high end (mention that a year ago and you'd get a laugh, today it's somehow viewed as a "good" metric :rolleyes: ) and a real hard launch at last (why should anything less be acceptable?). Speaking of the ATI side of things, in addition to ATI losing massive market share, many senior management have left. In a cola company suits might be easily replaceable, but in a technology driven company, some of those top executives who left were also engineers. Let's hope that Wrector doesn't have any more Motorola cronies to bring in and make more of a mess.
 
Fellas this is not hard to understand.

How is AMD, who not only is a generation already behind Intel and possible rumors of really being two generations behind going to somehow leap over that. How in God's holy name could AMD leap over two generations when their Phenom processors will bring in little to no cash because they have to be price competitive. Moreover they need that money not for R&D but just so they can pay the bloody payroll.

Moreover why would Dell, HP and other vendors choose AMD when all they have to do is see one bloody slide from Intel showing performance details between both camps. I won't even get into the supply side of things where Intel can just destroy AMD in manufacturing to satisfy the likes of Dell and other vendors. So why would Dell and other vendors in their right mind even bother. Remember way back when Dell would even refuse AMD processors even though they were quicker, do you really think he is going to be knocking on their door now?

This whole problem stems from Hector Ruiz and his ruining of AMD. AMD is failing because of management decisions. When ego rich CEO's like Hector throw in the towel its because the writing is all over the bloody wall. This man single handedly stagnated performance, kept prices high by not keeping his company competitive for us enthusiasts. Because with no competition we all get left with the above mentioned.

The only thing that would bring AMD back into the mix is them being bought out by a private party that would alleviate all the debt they currently have and somehow scrape the cash to start all over again for a killer product. Their debt is their undoing and it all can be laid at the feet of Hector Ruiz.
 
Scali2 said:
On the bright side, Intel has hinted at competing on the high-end GPU market for a while now (Larrabee for example).
All we need now is nVidia deciding to start making CPUs :)
Click to expand...

Larrabee is not inteded for the high-end, it's a midrange product?
 
I've read enough reviews to see that Phenom is improvement in per clock performance compared to X2

Wow I wish I had enough cash to not worry about performance per dollar and just buy whatever is "high end" sorry to burst your buble but it always was about performance per buck. Which is why 9700 won against 5900xt becouse it delivered more framerates while being bit cheaper. Or why x800gto/x1800gto was such a huge success and why it's miracle to get 8800gt anywhere (did someone mentioned paper launch? :) )

As for Dell and others they don't care about whoever gets better OC or technology just into how much it will cost them and how much money they can make from people buying computers in your typical supermarket.

And entry level CPUS from AMD perform at similar levels to their price equivalents from Intel as long as you don't take OC into equation (which is exactly how Joe the average uninformed consumer thinks)
 
Michaelius said:
Or why x800gto/x1800gto was such a huge success and why it's miracle to get 8800gt anywhere (did someone mentioned paper launch? :) )

As for Dell and others they don't care about whoever gets better OC or technology just into how much it will cost them and how much money they can make from people buying computers in your typical supermarket.
Click to expand...

ehhh, we're talking about Intel and AMD here, not Nvidia and AMD......

besides, you act like Intel's quad core chips are somehow more expensive than the K10s.... yet the Q6600 is cheaper....

.
.
.
however, i DO agree that absolute performance isn't so important to OEMs. for 99% of most desktop users, anything above the prescott/athlon 64 era meets their needs, and for the small % that processes high definition video (watching/recording), anything from the high end X2s and low end Core 2s will meet their needs. So this next gen is actually an opportunity for AMD......

they just need to get dual core procs out! they would be way easier to supply, and thats what making money for AMD will come down to.... supply..... and fuck it all, making *some* money should be AMD's only priority...
 
You know, I've posted in the AMD forum SEVERAL times about the viability of the company. Before, I made mention that I don't believe AMD is going to be able to recover from this mess. On every occasion, there is some mystical product or excuse why this isn't going to happen. Last time I posted, I had someone tell me he bought up tons of AMD stock because they are going to pull out of this 'dip' and beat the Penryn---:rolleyes: I told him it wasn't a good financial purchase, I hope he sees that now. Don't think I want AMD/ATi to fail - we need them for competition, however I continually return to the forum to read up on the community's perspective on this - and it seems the majority of members are now seeing this to be true. Unfortunately, you can't stay in business without a marketable product. Time and time again Intel brings a better product to the market for cheaper, and AMD just can't compare - it's basic economics, nothing but a good solid product is going to help AMD.. price cuts just don't be effective when practically the entire C2D line outperforms AMD. Are we to a point now that we can agree this is the case, or do we have more excuses?
 
|CR|Constantine said:
Fellas this is not hard to understand.

The only thing that would bring AMD back into the mix is them being bought out by a private party that would alleviate all the debt they currently have and somehow scrape the cash to start all over again for a killer product. Their debt is their undoing and it all can be laid at the feet of Hector Ruiz.
Click to expand...

I have to agree with you there. If they're not simply generating enough cash from the sale of their phenom processors and spider platform to generate enough investment in R&D, then they are going to continually fall behind. And no doubt, AMD is looking like a very attractive turn-around opportunity to private equity firms right now...with the stock dropping almost $6B in value this year, what a great opportunity to buy. This is also supported by the fact that the Saudi, or some private individual I can't remember, has dumped $600M into the stock recently.

Let's just all hope that the turn-around story materializes.
 
Atech said:
Larrabee is not inteded for the high-end, it's a midrange product?
Click to expand...

I think it's going to be high-end, they demonstrated it running at 6 GHz. I can't really imagine such insane clockspeeds only giving midrange results.
Even so, I don't expect Intel to become a competitive high-end GPU-builder overnight.
I meant that Larrabee is an indication that Intel is going to dabble with high-end GPUs (and PPUs), even if it may take another 2 or 3 generations to catch up with nVidia.
But Intel does have a lot of potential for creating great GPUs, considering the resources they have (just imagine if nVidia's 8800s were built on Intels 45 nm process), and the experience they have.
 
*Sigh* Well, I guess we have to just wait and see but it is interesting to follow. I wonder, if amd does go down, where will the graphics chips for the XBox360 come from then?

Joe
 
cerebrex said:
Before, I made mention that I don't believe AMD is going to be able to recover from this mess. On every occasion, there is some mystical product or excuse why this isn't going to happen. Last time I posted, I had someone tell me he bought up tons of AMD stock because they are going to pull out of this 'dip' and beat the Penryn---:rolleyes:
Click to expand...

I know exactly how you feel.
Back in the Pentium 4-days I got a lot of flack because I said "Beware, Pentium 4 may not be delivering a lot of performance, but do you realize what a technological achievement this processor is? Their production technology must be very good".
This seemed to really hurt the fanboys, but I said I had my doubts... Was Athlon64 that good, or was Pentium 4 that bad?
Core2 proved my point. Their 65 nm process delivered incredibly cheap processors that could be overclocked extremely well, and delivered WAY more performance than what AMD offered. So in a way Pentium 4 made AMD look good... Intel was still ahead of AMD in many respects. Just not the most important one for consumers: performance (well related to price ofcourse).

Then I said that it would be hard for AMD to compete with Intel, even on the same process, because Core2 is actually a very good design, instead of Pentium 4, which was a dead-end strategy... And they would probably not even compete on the same process, because by the time AMD has its new CPU out, Intel will be on 45 nm, or close.
The technical improvements that AMD was talking about, didn't strike me as groundbreaking compared to Core2 or K8, so I didn't expect a huge increase in IPC. I even had my doubts about the native design, since Intel's hybrid with shared L2-cache per 2 cores is not that bad, it's a whole lot better than the original Pentium MCM dualcores.

But no, most people thought I was crazy, and insulted me over and over again. They somehow saw it as a law of nature that AMD and Intel would always trade places when it comes to the performance crown.
I was right, it's not a law of nature. AMD was never Intels equal. Intel just had one architecture that made AMD look like it was Intels equal.
So well, at the moment AMD will just have to survive until Intel makes another mistake. Intel didn't make any mistakes this time. In fact, even the much criticized MCM-approach instead of native quadcore isn't a mistake.
 
ManofGod said:
*Sigh* Well, I guess we have to just wait and see but it is interesting to follow. I wonder, if amd does go down, where will the graphics chips for the XBox360 come from then?

Joe
Click to expand...

I wouldn't put it past Microsoft to buy off the graphics division from AMD.
I believe Microsoft is actually looking into designing more of the hardware for their next console.

Since AMD doesn't actually manufacture the chips, all MS really needs is the rights to the chip design. The chips are being made at TSMC's factory. ATi just designed them, ATi is fabless.
 
Scali2 said:
I think it's going to be high-end, they demonstrated it running at 6 GHz. I can't really imagine such insane clockspeeds only giving midrange results.
Even so, I don't expect Intel to become a competitive high-end GPU-builder overnight.
I meant that Larrabee is an indication that Intel is going to dabble with high-end GPUs (and PPUs), even if it may take another 2 or 3 generations to catch up with nVidia.
But Intel does have a lot of potential for creating great GPUs, considering the resources they have (just imagine if nVidia's 8800s were built on Intels 45 nm process), and the experience they have.
Click to expand...

Intel has since the Core 2 Duo(when the chip only was know as Conroe) been very open about their plans/goals.
They havn't altered any statements to indicate anything else but a mid-range product.
It's about more than the process, the architechture means the world, just look at the preformance of AMD's 55nm GPU's

Wanna bet $10 that Larrabee is going to be mid-range? :cool:
 
raine7337 said:
AMD's stock is down 41% so far during 2007 and the company is currently with $6.7 billion.
Click to expand...
With the almost 11% hit since yesterday morning, AMD's market cap is around $6.29B now. AMD is only $900 million away from matching what it paid for ATI last year.

Mubadala Development has already taken a $75 million hit on it's $700 million investment. :p
 
pxc said:
With the almost 11% hit since yesterday morning, AMD's market cap is around $6.29B now. AMD is only $900 million away from matching what it paid for ATI last year.

Mubadala Development has already taken a $75 million hit on it's $700 million investment. :p
Click to expand...

Hahaha, thats hilarious.
 
Atech said:
Intel has since the Core 2 Duo(when the chip only was know as Conroe) been very open about their plans/goals.
They havn't altered any statements to indicate anything else but a mid-range product.
Click to expand...

I've never seen a statement that it will be a mid-range product in the first place. Got a link to a source?
I did see a remark that there may be high-end variations:
http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/pos...e-confusion-over-intels-larrabee-part-ii.html
The number of cores on each chip, as well as the clockspeed, will vary with each product, depending in its target market (mid-range GPU, high-end GPU, HPC add-in board, etc.).
Click to expand...

Atech said:
It's about more than the process, the architechture means the world, just look at the preformance of AMD's 55nm GPU's
Click to expand...

I know.

Atech said:
Wanna bet $10 that Larrabee is going to be mid-range? :cool:
Click to expand...

No.
 
Intel is huge and can afford a mediocre product as they dominate the lions share of the processor market and always have (ie Pentium 4 vs AMD64 for a long time).

AMD do not have this luxury.

AMD cannot pull out of this by under cutting Intel all the time, they are bleeding cash. They need a performance winner (or matcher) so they can make some decent money at the top end of the product range.

Very little money is made by Intel or AMD at the bottom of the range, and this is where AMD is at.

Not looking good.
 
|CR|Constantine said:
Moreover why would Dell, HP and other vendors choose AMD when all they have to do is see one bloody slide from Intel showing performance details between both camps. I won't even get into the supply side of things where Intel can just destroy AMD in manufacturing to satisfy the likes of Dell and other vendors. So why would Dell and other vendors in their right mind even bother. Remember way back when Dell would even refuse AMD processors even though they were quicker, do you really think he is going to be knocking on their door now?
Click to expand...

Well if AMD could supply them a platform at a good price, I don't see why OEM won't choose AMD. If AMD could supply a CPU, chipset and GPU combo to the OEM that cost the same like an Intel CPU, chipset and below average performing GPU combo, I think that OEM would choose the AMD combo. The new spider platform is actually good becuase of the power saving feature. OEM can save a lot in terms of power supply and cooling while still deliver a good performance. Just compare the X38 chipset with the 790FX.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top