1) Amd's fastest current desktop processor (Phenom II) is based directly off around 10yr old single core athlon tech.
2) Amd's total R&D funding per year has been (averagely) only 1/6th of Intel's R&D costs.
3) After purchasing Ati graphics for an insane $5.4 billion in 2006, disappointing product releases and diminishing sales dropped the total estimated worth of Amd to $5 billion in 2007. Amd as a whole became worth significantly less than what they purchased the Ati graphics segment for.
4) In 2008 Amd were forced to sell off their fab plants so they could afford to cover normal operating costs and stay as the Amd we know today.
5) During periods of financial difficulty (purchase of Ati) the tech we know as Bulldozer today was given a lower internal priority which includes less money/man power/slower development cycle. Which no doubt delayed this unreleased tech, putting them further behind their $160+ billion rival Intel.
6) When Amd lead all cpu players with a faster, more efficient/attractive product, Intel paid many companies to not use Amd products.
Here's 6 pretty good reasons Amd shouldn't ever have rivaled intel and why if Bulldozer comes within 50% of SB it should be a miracle. We all know that's not how it works, but tbh Amd look like they've been unbelievably disadvantaged in almost every way since day 1.
I wonder if BD will come close to SB in the end?
2) Amd's total R&D funding per year has been (averagely) only 1/6th of Intel's R&D costs.
3) After purchasing Ati graphics for an insane $5.4 billion in 2006, disappointing product releases and diminishing sales dropped the total estimated worth of Amd to $5 billion in 2007. Amd as a whole became worth significantly less than what they purchased the Ati graphics segment for.
4) In 2008 Amd were forced to sell off their fab plants so they could afford to cover normal operating costs and stay as the Amd we know today.
5) During periods of financial difficulty (purchase of Ati) the tech we know as Bulldozer today was given a lower internal priority which includes less money/man power/slower development cycle. Which no doubt delayed this unreleased tech, putting them further behind their $160+ billion rival Intel.
6) When Amd lead all cpu players with a faster, more efficient/attractive product, Intel paid many companies to not use Amd products.
Here's 6 pretty good reasons Amd shouldn't ever have rivaled intel and why if Bulldozer comes within 50% of SB it should be a miracle. We all know that's not how it works, but tbh Amd look like they've been unbelievably disadvantaged in almost every way since day 1.
I wonder if BD will come close to SB in the end?