Forbes: "AMD about to be irrelevant..." !!!

I'm definitely starting to think they're going to be purchased by a larger company. If it hits $4 I'm buying.
 
Hasn't had any major effect on the stock price yet though. Yesterday they were up like 2.5%, today they've been down -1.5% but seem to have stabilized now at like -1% or so.
 
While bulldozer may be dissapointing, a walk through best buy will show you that their zacate, brazos, and llano chips are extremely popular. I am amazed at how many machines there use these chips.
 
Sad and true. I wish they can pull through but I doubt it.

This is the beginning of the single CPU manufacturer era for us PC enthusiasts, its been looking this way for awhile but Bulldozer just sealed the deal. It is evident that AMD has no idea how to design a CPU anymore.
Hopefully ARM can catch up and start competing in the high performance arena.

With AMD gone, the hope is for Intel to stagnate, so companies like nVidia and others can catch up with their ARM designs. Time to support nVidia I guess.
 
How do you people figure? AMD was already starting to make a profit even before Bulldozer?
 
sirmo said:
Sad and true. I wish they can pull through but I doubt it.

This is the beginning of the single CPU manufacturer era for us PC enthusiasts, its been looking this way for awhile but Bulldozer just sealed the deal. It is evident that AMD has no idea how to design a CPU anymore.
Hopefully ARM can catch up and start competing in the high performance arena.

With AMD gone, the hope is for Intel to stagnate, so companies like nVidia and others can catch up with their ARM designs. Time to support nVidia I guess.
Click to expand...

ARM? That's hilarious.

I'd be the first to admit BD is somewhat underwhelming but the comments in this thread are just pure hyperbole.
 
wEvil said:
ARM? That's hilarious.

I'd be the first to admit BD is somewhat underwhelming but the comments in this thread are just pure hyperbole.
Click to expand...

I think you underestimate the track ARM is on, ARM CPUs double their performance every 12 months. ARM is becoming more profitable than the PC market by the day. Thanks to tablets and smart phones.

Windows 8 announced ARM support. I think this is where Apple is going with their ultra notebooks.

With AMD gone from this market, there is no competition. Intel's only competitor is now ARM.

With some major players backing it who are much more powerful than Intel when put together. Apple, Google, Samsung.. to name a few.

I am talking 4-5 years down the road.
 
Last edited:
All of AMD including ATI is worth barely $3 billion. That's chicken scratch in this industry. AMD could have been a nice takeover target but the good friend of the guy that just got 11 years for insider trading sucked that last asset away when he split off GloFo. I don't see why Raj got 11 years while he (Ruiz) walks. But anyway... AMD is now... just about nothing. Not even worth a hostile takeover. It's an Intel monopoly now whether it's "official" or not!
 
I'm still failing to see why BD is disappointing. Synthetic benchmarks aside, BD seems to perform rather well in real-world testing right about where us reasonable people expected it to be. Top-end BD is between 2500K and 2600K in most things, where AMD's synthetic test champ 1100T is not. It rocks just as hard in games as SB does for the most part, too. So... tell me guys, how is doing 200,000 commonly used calculations in a massive excel spreadsheet 1 second slower than the competition a disappointment? Protip: Anybody that can rationalize the loss of a few seconds per year of productivity is insane.
 
wEvil said:
ARM? That's hilarious.

I'd be the first to admit BD is somewhat underwhelming but the comments in this thread are just pure hyperbole.
Click to expand...

This.

I highly doubt AMD is going to sink anytime soon.
 
People aren't confident that AMD can perform well since they keep having product delays and shortages. Remember that markets are run by fear and confidence.

They still have good server/laptop stuff but they just can't keep up in the desktop market.
 
sirmo said:
I think you underestimate the track ARM is on, ARM CPUs double their performance every 12 months. ARM is becoming more profitable than the PC market by the day. Thanks to tablets and smart phones.

Windows 8 announced ARM support. I think this is where Apple is going with their ultra notebooks.

With AMD gone from this market, there is no competition. Intel's only competitor is now ARM.

With some major players backing it who are much more powerful than Intel when put together. Apple, Google, Samsung.. to name a few.

I am talking 4-5 years down the road.
Click to expand...

And that is my point, AMD will not be "gone from this market" - they're tiny compared to Intel but they aren't a small company either.

I feel everyone is drastically overvaluing tablets (smartphones, less so) as a long-term driving factor in the marketplace, but I'm perfectly willing to say I may well be wrong there, also.

ARM will likely hit exactly the same roadblock as everyone else, at about the same level, and from there on their performance improvements will be in line with the x86 leaders - they might even get ahead by a few % - but outside of their focused marketplace I really don't see them snapping up the desktop and server spaces unless they suddenly come out with a super-stellar product that causes these very conservative markets to throw their existing platforms out of the window.

I remember when Windows also had Alpha and MIPS ports, too. Where are they now?
 
LAiN_OfTheWired said:
I'm still failing to see why BD is disappointing. Synthetic benchmarks aside, BD seems to perform rather well in real-world testing right about where us reasonable people expected it to be. Top-end BD is between 2500K and 2600K in most things, where AMD's synthetic test champ 1100T is not. It rocks just as hard in games as SB does for the most part, too. So... tell me guys, how is doing 200,000 commonly used calculations in a massive excel spreadsheet 1 second slower than the competition a disappointment? Protip: Anybody that can rationalize the loss of a few seconds per year of productivity is insane.
Click to expand...

You need to look at all the factors to see if an architecture is viable. Those are:

- Cost to manufacture. This determines cost strategy and amount of profit a product can generate.
- Relative performance.
- Power consumption. More power efficient the design, more flexible it is. There is more room to grow.

Well, BD fails in all of these categories.

- ~ 2 billion transistors, means they are expensive to make, AMD won't be able to lower the price by much and make enough profit.

- Relative performance. In multithreaded tasks it barely beats AMD's previous gen Thuban

- Power consumption. It is way worse than Thuban. By a lot.

http://snipurl.com/sadsx

And Thuban was built on the old 45nm process, there is no excuse for that, whatsoever. Thuban sucks compared to Sandy Bridge to begin with, and bulldozer can't even beat it, with a fab process advantage.

This CPU was designed with servers in mind, but even for servers it sucks.

AMD had one chance, and they blew it. They were already hemorrhaging market share. Now they are dead.
 
mzs_biteme said:
From what I've seen, ATI is the reason AMD is sinking... They've sucked up most of AMD's R&D resources....:rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Indeed their graphics division lost money last quarter and has been losing market share. The spent way too much buying ATI (they even admitted as much).
 
Is everyone a hater and a troll now? :D

Seriously Llano and Trinity is the most exiting thing on laptops since laptops were released imo. Bad thing is Bulldozer is supposed to be integrated WITH Trinity :eek: Can you say blow the f!#*% up?

They might have to stick with phenom 2 architecture on Trinity cause I just can't see this being real now.

OMG AMD is in somuch trouble their graphics devision will have to keep them afloat, but if they have no cash for CPU R&D cuz it's all in GFX R&D. I think it's time to mourn PC and just go get an XBOX 360 with Kinnect and say f%*#! this! because pricing is gonna get retarded soon.
 
PRIME1 said:
Indeed their graphics division lost money last quarter and has been losing market share. The spent way too much buying ATI (they even admitted as much).
Click to expand...

I think it was mostly to do with the FUSION of two different comanies, with some overlapping products already, different design teams, different fabs, different design tools (not to mention AMD, at the time, was about to replace their ~60man A64 design team with ~200 engineers using automated design tools). That, and someone up top decided to merge the two together... AMD and ATi were both smaller companies (vs Intel and nVidia) before the merger. Now people expect them to produce GPU, CPU, APU, chipset and mantain the lead. IMO, AMD is spread thin...
 
This guy doesn't know shit, also if you search, forbes was predicting amd would go to $10 per share by the end of the year. Then the stock took a nose dive when amd said revenue would be up 6% instead of the predicted 10%, due to production issues with global foundries. Since bulldozers release the stock has actually gone up a little.
 
sirmo said:
AMD had one chance, and they blew it. They were already hemorrhaging market share. Now they are dead.
Click to expand...

Again, enough with the amateur dramatics. Did AMD murder your grandmother or something?

Seriously, it's not like posting this kind of stuff is going to light a fire under AMD and suddenly make them competitive, and it certainly wont be an improvement in the case of you getting your wish and having them out of the market.
 
I did a double check looks like Trinity will be released in 2 and 4 cores in 2012, let's hope these have better power consumption than the 4 core FX 4000 line. AMD has to start showing they can make a cool running Bulldozer eventually don't you guys think?

2013 is when Bulldozer is "supposed" to go to 22nm. I hope it doesn't take AMD this long to get their power consumption in check...then again their power consumption only goes "off the charts" when BD is OC'd correct? Who knows with AMD they just drag things out haha.
 
AMD isnt going anywhere for less then $15-20 bucks a share. ( more likely require over 20)

They have a long term approach going that has had hiccups. If they can survive the transition and start hitting deadlines they will be fine.. No one will shell out the money needed to get an approval anytime soon.

The GPU's are rocking the fusion chips are selling fast. They have enough of that business to survive this imo.
 
teletran8 said:
I hope it doesn't take AMD this long to get their power consumption in check...then again their power consumption only goes "off the charts" when BD is OC'd correct?
Click to expand...

I wanted to bring that up too. I also thought the only issue with their power consumption was when its OC'd as well. That means its only an issue for the very small enthusiast market. For OEM's and the Server market its the same as Thuban correct? Making it not that big of a deal for the majority their anticipated sales, or am I wrong here?
 
wEvil said:
Again, enough with the amateur dramatics. Did AMD murder your grandmother or something?

Seriously, it's not like posting this kind of stuff is going to light a fire under AMD and suddenly make them competitive, and it certainly wont be an improvement in the case of you getting your wish and having them out of the market.
Click to expand...

Sorry for expressing my opinion, on a forum. Was I attacking you? I think AMD is dead, as far as CPU market is concerned. You don't have to agree with me. But if you don't think AMD is sinking you're definitely in the minority.
 
He only attacked you after you attacked his grandmother... or something. Wait, what?
 
I don't know , bulldozer didn't set the world on fire but bobcat and llano have. Trinity will only get a better gpu and a piledriver core.

I thik if anything amd is in a good postion right now leading into windows 8 launch
 
eastmen said:
I don't know , bulldozer didn't set the world on fire but bobcat and llano have. Trinity will only get a better gpu and a piledriver core.

I thik if anything amd is in a good postion right now leading into windows 8 launch
Click to expand...

<sarcasm>
How dare you use reasonable logic here? You know that since Bulldozer can barely beat a 980X and tries to burn your house down that there is no reason to want AMD to continue, right?
</sarcasm>

(I included <sarcasm> tags for those who have no sense of humor, and those that are too busy raging against AMD.)
 
will there be a bulldozer cpu on 22nm process when it becomes available in few months from now?
 
JMccovery said:
<sarcasm>
How dare you use reasonable logic here? You know that since Bulldozer can barely beat a 980X and tries to burn your house down that there is no reason to want AMD to continue, right?
</sarcasm>

(I included <sarcasm> tags for those who have no sense of humor, and those that are too busy raging against AMD.)
Click to expand...

Yea well

<reasonable logic> over the coming months GF will continue to improve the 32nm process . As this happens power draw of the bulldozer line will drop and so will heat production from the chips. This will allow bulldozer clock higher and higher.

Pile driver comes out which amd claims has a 10-15% performance increase outside of clock speed increases . So it will be faster clock for clock and perform better

When Pile driver hits windows 8 will hit shortly after . In gaming we already see up to a 10% increase in performance due ot the imrpoved schedualer.

Buldlozer itself while being hot and power hungry competes with the i5 2500k which is currently intel's most popular chip. This is the first time since intel introduced the core 2 chips that amd can say this .
 
AntiSocialMunky said:
They still have good server/laptop stuff but they just can't keep up in the desktop market.
Click to expand...

And since there's money in server and volume in laptop, they are going to do just fine without a decent desktop offering. They honestly haven't had much in the way of desktop offerings for a couple years already.

BD will make profit for them under the Opteron name. The FX stuff is really just trying to skim some extra cream off, as BD is priced favorably (for AMD) compared to a larger Thuban die. If they can pull some sales from low profit chips to higher profit chips, why not, right?

AMD is not sinking. Llano and Opteron will keep them afloat regardless of the FX line. At least until Intel decides to price for the throat.
 
typical scare tactics from an analyst who regularly pulls shit out of his ass.

AMD will do ok as long as they don't mess up the budget products.
 
As someone who used to work in the financial sector, one of the first things I would tell you is to never listen to an analyst (they might even be on the opposite side of the trade).

Do your own research and decide what you think is most likely to be true.
 
AMD has been hammering on virtualization in the server world for a while.

Intel currently only has 6 CPU (not counting the Hyperthreading) for the server world.

AMD now has 8.

In virtualization, the more cores I can get into the same chassis, the BETTER.

For the desktop and gaming, No fan fare, no hoopla.

For the virtualized server world, This is actually a pretty damn big deal. Now I can have 16 cores (If dual socket) instead of just 12 which means more resource availability for the virtual machines (of course as long as there is no bottle neck for memory etc).
 
figgie said:
AMD has been hammering on virtualization in the server world for a while.

Intel currently only has 6 CPU (not counting the Hyperthreading) for the server world.

AMD now has 8.

In virtualization, the more cores I can get into the same chassis, the BETTER.

For the desktop and gaming, No fan fare, no hoopla.

For the virtualized server world, This is actually a pretty damn big deal. Now I can have 16 cores (If dual socket) instead of just 12 which means more resource availability for the virtual machines (of course as long as there is no bottle neck for memory etc).
Click to expand...

Umm, I think you forgot about the Westmere-EX Xeon E7 series:http://www.anandtech.com/show/4285/westmereex-intels-flagship-benchmarked 10 cores/20 threads...
 
JMccovery said:
Umm, I think you forgot about the Westmere-EX Xeon E7 series: 10 cores/20 threads...
Click to expand...


yikes,

I did. That was early march.

Funny thing though. look at the graphs from Intel themselves for server market share.

AMD has been growing at the cost of mainframe chunks. Though Intel continues its growth there too.

Funny what they (both Intel and AMD and to some extent RISC is actually upping there ante) have coming to the server world. Makes this desktop stuff boring. :)
 
figgie said:
yikes,

I did. That was early march.

Funny thing though. look at the graphs from Intel themselves for server market share.

AMD has been growing at the cost of mainframe chunks. Though Intel continues its growth there too.

Funny what they (both Intel and AMD and to some extent RISC is actually upping there ante) have coming to the server world. Makes this desktop stuff boring. :)
Click to expand...

lol, Intel did have the 45nm Becktons (Nehalem) before the Westmere-EX chips :p Those 45nm giants were 8 core, 16 threads each :eek:
 
jeremyshaw said:
lol, Intel did have the 45nm Becktons (Nehalem) before the Westmere-EX chips :p Those 45nm giants were 8 core, 16 threads each :eek:
Click to expand...


That I do remember. but AMD had the 12 core CPU at that time.

With this release, the BD for the server world will have 16 core the question of when is important. So now it has gone from Hz race to the Core count race. Back and forth. back and forth.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top