AMD: You'll be pleasantly surprised

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FischOderAal

I really hope AMD surprises us :D The HD-4870 was a great card. It even took over place #1 from the 6800 GT as the graphic card I liked the most.



That would mean Apple need to use AMD's processors as well. Seeing most of Apple's products use mobile chips this would be a dumb choice. AMD imho is not an option for mobile devices.

Plus I don't think AMD could be as good as a partner as Intel is. Me thinks Intel gives Apple more than one helping hand... Remember the C2Ds with the small package that Apple used for their MacBook Air? (I don't think Intel solely did this for Apple, but it surely shows that Apple has some weight on Intel's decisions.) Do you think AMD would or even could have done something like that?

---

Yes, it would be very dumb and that's NOT what I or we were talking about. We were talking about AMD Motherboards with integrated AMD Graphics. Remember, ATI was supplying Intel with both.

Second point. What Really would be dumb, counter productive, bad business and etc.. is for AMD to miss out on shipping AMD platforms that supported Intel Processors if they were asked. So what they lost out on the processors and JUST Intel compat limited AMD platforms for Apple is better than NOTHING or just video cards. NO, I don't think Apple or Intel sees AMD (Processors) as a threat any time soon.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by trinibwoy

I'm not projecting anything into the future. But based on several market analysis reports and stuff like the steam survey AMD has been clawing back CPU marketshare in the last few quarters. Nothing to do with wishing, just facts on the ground.

---

Quote:

---

JohnZS AuthenticAMD
34.22% 33.84% 33.51% 32.80%

GenuineIntel
65.77% 66.16% 66.48% 67.19%

---

Both of these are misleading. If the computer processor market drops from 260 million to 235 million per year, it will hurt High Volume Intel more than very low Volume AMD. A 10% drop for both means AMD gains market share. Do I need to explain why? 10% drop at Intel is over 33% of AMD's inventory.
The economy warps any view of AMD gaining market share. When the markets pick back up, AMD share will drop again.

its a ratio, if amd has 10, and intel has 100, and they both lose 10%, then amd has 9 and intel has 90, its the same ratio. i fail to see how market share changes if both are feeling a decline of the same percent. the only way amd would gain market share, is if one company takes a bigger % hit than the other.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Manicdan

its a ratio, if amd has 10, and intel has 100, and they both lose 10%, then amd has 9 and intel has 90, its the same ratio. i fail to see how market share changes if both are feeling a decline of the same percent. the only way amd would gain market share, is if one company takes a bigger % hit than the other.

---

Yeah I don't get Donnie's math. But he's probably right that the higher margin products that Intel is pushing will suffer more in a downturn where price is king. But it's pure guesswork without actual numbers.

I wonder how much heat dump the next generation of ATI cards will produce? I can already heat my apartment in the winter with a watercooled 4870x2 :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Manicdan

its a ratio, if amd has 10, and intel has 100, and they both lose 10%, then amd has 9 and intel has 90, its the same ratio. i fail to see how market share changes if both are feeling a decline of the same percent. the only way amd would gain market share, is if one company takes a bigger % hit than the other.

---

Not quite! But AMD sales haven't fallen 10% I made two different assuptions, not just one. If AMD stays flat for slightly lower and Intel ships lower volume, it looks like AMD is gaining market share when they're still flat to slightly lower. .19 (19%) X 260 processors = 49.4 million. .25 (25%) X 189 = 47.25. Tell me, which market share % you think AMD would rather have?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by trinibwoy

Yeah I don't get Donnie's math. But he's probably right that the higher margin products that Intel is pushing will suffer more in a downturn where price is king. But it's pure guesswork without actual numbers.

---

You don't get anything you take out of context:rofl::ROTF:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Donnie27

Both of these are misleading. If the computer processor market drops from 260 million to 235 million per year, it will hurt High Volume Intel more than very low Volume AMD. A 10% drop for both means AMD gains market share. Do I need to explain why? 10% drop at Intel is over 33% of AMD's inventory.
The economy warps any view of AMD gaining market share. When the markets pick back up, AMD share will drop again.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Donnie27

Not quite! But AMD sales haven't fallen 10% I made two different assuptions, not just one. If AMD stays flat for slightly lower and Intel ships lower volume, it looks like AMD is gaining market share when they're still flat to slightly lower.

---

i bolded the part where you contradicted yourself and confused many of us. glad we could clear that up peacefully.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Manicdan

i bolded the part where you contradicted yourself and confused many of us. glad we could clear that up peacefully.

---

OK!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Donnie27

You don't get anything you take out of context:rofl::ROTF:

---

Wow, I didn't know the laws of math were based on context. What new age school did you go to? :ROTF:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by trinibwoy

Wow, I didn't know the laws of math were based on context. What new age school did you go to? :ROTF:

---

But there are a lot of things you don't know, your posts pretty much proves that. Answer the simple question I asked?

Tell me, which market share % you think AMD would rather have?

Intel's profits don't always jive with the Products shiped. 10% fall in products doesn't always mean 10% of Profits.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Donnie27

But there are a lot of things you don't know, your posts pretty much proves that. Answer the simple question I asked?

Tell me, which market share % you think AMD would rather have?

Intel's profits don't always jive with the Products shiped. 10% fall in products doesn't always mean 10% of Profits.

---

Speculating about market share and spamming incomprehensible posts is just pointless.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by halo112358

Speculating about market share and spamming incomprehensible posts is just pointless.

---

Oh geesh!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Donnie27

Tell me, which market share % you think AMD would rather have?

---

No company has control over the total market size so obviously they want the biggest % share possible regardless. So is it really a serious question to ask if a company would prefer a bigger slice of a smaller market especially when those allocations are based on arbitrary assumptions that you made? Just trying to understand the point of your fictitious scenario.....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by trinibwoy

Ok, let's put aside your incomprehensible algebra for a second. No company has control over the total market size so obviously they want the biggest % share possible regardless. So is it really a serious question to ask if a company would prefer a bigger slice of a smaller market especially when those allocations are based on arbitrary assumptions that you made? Just trying to understand the point of your fictitious scenario.....

---

Nice side step:up:

There you go trying to use a word you don't understand.:ROTF: The last time AMD was in the black, meaning they weren't in the hole, is when they only had 15% of the market. No fiction at all. That's not funny math and not incomprehensible except for someone like you. A larger share of a smaller market or due to lower ASP's is why they're in the red, sheesh guys. You're talking about funny math and algebra, you need to learn how to simply add and subtract:rolleyes:

Please, continue to dig a deeper has hole just as AMD is when they're sacrificing profits for market share.:rofl: I'll be pleasantly surprised if they turn a profit:D

Heh, you're amusing. Is it that hard to just get over your little math mistake?

Turning back to your economics theory there - you've taken one empirical data point and extrapolated it into a causation effect. No my friend, just because AMD was making money when they had a smaller market share it doesn't mean that a smaller market share would lead to a return to profitability. Your analysis (if it can be called that) is so naive it's not even funny.

their future chip designs show AMD are aiming to make better profit margins by trying to stick with a simple chip that scales to fit the needs from low power to high performance depending on how many cores they use. not only that, they offer their own IGP to help put them into the fusion market for HTPCs which are becoming ever more popular, next they need to really get into the laptop industry again, as we saw how much that is booming compared to the decline (death, lol) of desktops.

AMD does not need to have the best chip to gain market share. if they can put out the best product from 20$-200$ cpus, they can easily take up 80+% of the marketshare without ever being competitive above 200$, cause as we all know, i7 make up a jokingly 1% of intels sales.

Regardless of market share, AMD has done much better lately then in the recent past. Neither of their product lines (CPU, GPU) may be the absolute fastest. But they have a solid price/performance ratio. They have been interfacing with the enthusiast community better, garnering quite a bit of good will and positive press. And they have been better at keeping a lid on the unrealistic rumors that only serve to let people down. They will need significant architectural changes before they can reclaim the absolute performance crown, but at least they have moved in the right direction on the business side of things.

As for market share, it's kinda pointless to argue about. Even if AMD had the totally superior platform in every respect Intel would still have more market share.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Solus Corvus

Regardless of market share, AMD has done much better lately then in the recent past. Neither of their product lines (CPU, GPU) may be the absolute fastest. But they have a solid price/performance ratio. They have been interfacing with the enthusiast community better, garnering quite a bit of good will and positive press. And they have been better at keeping a lid on the unrealistic rumors that only serve to let people down. They will need significant architectural changes before they can reclaim the absolute performance crown, but at least they have moved in the right direction on the business side of things.

---

Yeah precisely, AMD is attacking this exactly how they should. Shedding the manufacturing arm was probably a good move as that's one less headache to worry about. Their gross margins aren't that bad but their operating expenses are out of control and then they have the significant interest burden as a result of the ATI acquisition. So they have a ways to go before they're out of the woods.

But IMO the biggest problem facing AMD is that they have absolutely no pricing power. Intel's chips are clocked very conservatively and they still have a significant advantage in manufacturing. So while Phenom II is putting on a good show vs Penryn I fear that will be all for nought once Nehalem makes its way into lower price brackets.

Phenom II is barely scaring intel and hardly making a dent in the market. The proof, intel barely let any price drops go in the duo chip market. The e8400 has been priced the same for the longest time as with much of the duo core market. For the money AMD is better for the dollar in this market, but the intel name is beating AMD to the punch. The scary thing is much of AMD chip cost more to make than intel's, but will always have to sell for a lower price because the AMD name still means junk to the public.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by W1zzard

yes thats what they said. evergreen is a single gpu. dont expect a full range of cards. the whole "hd 5xxx" series will probably be launched by q4 2010

---

Hoping to see the "value" high-end come out first... I want an upgrade from my GTX 280 already! Hoping nVidia has a top-end card at least if ATI won't.

P.S. Is DirectX 11 coming to Vista still or just Windows 7?

DX11 is coming to Vista and Windows 7

Here's Huddy talking a bit more about DX11 and the compute shader in particular for use in post processing effects such as SSAO.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KqLVmiFO2LA

It's funny that he's gushing over the LDS considering that's what gives Nvidia its edge in the first place (LDS = Shared Memory).

Thanks for the video, and the Nvidia trivia. ;)