Printable View
"...BURLINGAME, Calif. -- The old AMD is dead. Long live AMD. The Sunnyvale, Calif.-based chip maker once went toe-to-toe with the mightiest manufacturing company on the..."
http://www.forbes.com/2009/10/14/ear...prise-amd.html
this article really puts it down. gr8 read :up:
very well said...Quote:
"The GlobalFoundries fabs spin-off provides AMD with some cash and buys time, but solves none of the product issues that have plagued the company in recent years and saddles shareholders with massive costs that will significantly dilute earnings"
is this true?
i dont recall intel gaining much market share in the last yearQuote:
While Intel has continued to gobble up market share from AMD,
They gained 2% iirc.
Good article. I wish it was a bit longer with more details, but it covered the basics.
This thread is going to hell, by the way.
:rofl:Quote:
Reader Comments
By the way Brian, Stacy is actually a "he," not a "she." Thanks :-) Stacy Rasgon
Posted by srasgon
Thank you for posting a link to forbes. Im sick of people making ill informed statements about the economic status of companies without understanding economics itself.
If AMD is going under, Obama will build them a new chip factory here in the states. theres no worries. we cannot allow cpu advancements come to a screeching halt all the sudden. i actually hope we get closer to merging cpu and gpu so we have 3 companies making everything all in different ways.
AMD, Intel x86 patent fight likely to be long and messy. This came up a few months ago, since Intel thinks Globalfoundries has no rights to produce x86 CPUs. AMD thinks Intel exercises pressure to avoid consequences in the European court. Both cases are open.
Reuters, Wed Sep 16, 2009
Quote:
Audit Integrity has identified the following companies that have the highest probability of declaring bankruptcy among publicly traded firms with more than $1 billion market capitalizations:
* Advanced Micro Devices, Inc.
* Amkor Technology, Inc.
* AMR Corporation
* Apartment Investment and Management Co.
* CBS Corporation
* Continental Airlines, Inc.
* Federal-Mogul Corporation
* Hertz Global Holdings, Inc.
* Interpublic Group of Companies, Inc.
* Las Vegas Sands Corp.
* Liberty Media Corporation (Capital)
* Macy's, Inc.
* Mylan Inc.
* Oshkosh Corporation
* Redwood Trust, Inc.
* Rite Aid Corporation
* Sirius XM Radio Inc.
* Sprint Nextel Corporation
* Textron Inc.
* The Goodyear Tire & Rubber Company
:wth:Quote:
Originally Posted by Manicdan
ok
the report suggested that people who is holding AMD share to dump it now and pick it up when it is below $3?
For all the idiots in the world:
This is great! And you know what? Intel will immediately reduce prices across the board on all cpus!
And you know what? At the same time Intel will pour many more dollars into research and innovation so they can sell more powerful cpu's at LOWER prices to the enthusiast and business community. A win win for everyone!
:rofl:
I am so sick of all the fan boys jumping and down with glee every time there is negative news on AMD. Maybe the best thing would be for AMD to die, so the Dept of Justice can step in and bust Intel up into little pieces. :shakes:
Declare that x86 license null and void, so that anyone can start designing and building processors, and you will see real innovation.
.....this is not news, it is a hit piece and a stupid article! mod shut this down please to avoid flame and retartedness.
Quote:
Originally Posted by trueblue
QFT
Since 2006, AMD has been steadily losing share to Intel. There is some noise in the data, and some quarters where AMD went up, then down next quarter. Plotting out the last 12 quarters, the trend line is down for AMD.Quote:
Originally Posted by Manicdan
They were at a high of 25% in late 2006 and are down in the 18% - 19% range today.
The biggest loss though has been in servers, where they held a high of almost 27%, and are around 11% today.
http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/cpu/dis...822235044.html
http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/cpu/dis..._to_Intel.html
While server may represent only 10% of the total volume, it also represents a much larger % of revenue, 30% or more -- you may wish not to take my word on these % numbers, I am pulling from memory from what I can recall.
In 2008 (last year) AMD was still losing share overall.
http://www.itfacts.biz/cpu-market-sh...-amd-209/10801
Prior to 2006 (Core 2 introduction) AMD was gang busters on increasing market share, they went from basically 0% in server in 2003 to > 25% in 2006, when AMD introduced K8 they had about 14 consecutive quarters of gaining marketshare from Intel.
http://www.crn.com/hardware/19920006...PCKHWATMY32JVN
I hope this is sarcasm :shrug:Quote:
Originally Posted by Manicdan
well saidQuote:
Originally Posted by trueblue
Oh really, I haven't seen a post where someone was happy that AMD is losing money at such a crazy rate. Everyone, I mean everyone knows if AMD was not around, prices would increase and development would slow.Quote:
Originally Posted by trueblue
I haven't seen one post of people jumping for glee when AMD fails, especially in the CPU chip part. Vastly disappointed maybe, but never happy.
The only thing I see that might be mistaken as something like this, is when someone corrects an AMD fanboys, overly mistaken optimism about AMD situation financially. E.g AMD going to make a killing selling their GPU, but in actuality they have made them a net profit of 8 million in quarter 3 09.
People might appreciate additionally AMD low prices on their processors, but then again, if you know anything about finances, AMD doesn't make money because their profit margins are so low compared to the competition.
The key to AMD making money is making better chips so they can increase their margins and raise their prices in respect to the competition.
AMD needs to see black eventually or they are screwed additionally sooner than later. This is fact for any company that has been losing money for so long.
The same thing cannot be said for NV, people always get happy when bad things happen to them. Strangely enough, if NV wasn't around, AMD would raise prices and slow development. The current price of the 5870 are a reflection of that.
Right, Tajoh111.
There's a vast difference between agreeing with what is reported, and rejoicing over what is reported.
Those who choose to ignore what they don't want to see, do so at their own peril.
I have also noticed a lot of well known AMD fanboys get super happy any time that Nv has some bad news, The same folk that get all emo any time someone interjects some reality about AMD, Bloody hypocrites.Quote:
Originally Posted by tajoh111
Don't fret people, your moderators are standing by to take your call...
I already have a feeling this thread isn't going to end well, so just let it be known that after I shake off my hang-over tomorrow that I'm sure to get from going out with the lady tonight I'll be in a grumpy mood. I don't think I'll feel like being nice.
Keep it clean guys, don't make me regret leaving this thread running.
AMD will not fail.
I am not a fan boy. I currently have product from Nvidia, Intel, AMD, and ATI in my machines at home.
Intel cannot allow AMD to fail.
Just as Microsoft cannot allow Apple to fail.
If AMD looks to be going completly out of business Intel will step in and just give AMD money to stay in business.
Here is the senario (sp?) AMD closes. DOJ/FTC step in and break Intel into little pieces because they are a monoply now, being the only Desktop CPU manufacturer left.
Intel will not let that happen.
Long live AMD keep building new CPUs to push Intel to build new CPUs. Competition is good for every consumer on the planet.
this is what i was thinking..Quote:
Originally Posted by nlancaster
i really doubt that amd will go down, when intel is in such a monopolistic position as they are now
Quote:
Originally Posted by trueblue
DoJ never cares about what happening in business of individual company.
FTC never cares, why DoJ bothers?
x86 license null and void? no way
in this way, other companies outside USA could build x86 chips and directly slashed the revenue of USA gov on export tax on chips.
yo. Bro you're rightQuote:
Originally Posted by tajoh111
if AMD doesn't come out with good processor that could fight neck to neck with Intel's offer. I think the last processor that AMD make would be BullDozer...and since then end users could only choose Intel or VIA.
Those who critic other who moan about AMD bad news, if Intel were the only choice, see what would they do?
You guys do not see what happened today? i7 and i5 are staying firmly on pricing. Isn't it lack of pressure from AMD and caused Intel to price higher than it should be? wake up man.
Competition is good, but a government can let a business fail and go bankrupt because it is not the end all be all for the company. Look at the automakers. The government although helped them out, let them go bankrupt.Quote:
Originally Posted by nlancaster
Letting a automaker go bankrupt has much worse repercussion than a CPU maker.
Not only are many, many more jobs lost, more money go into international economies since their are competing international automakers. Intel and AMD are both USA based companies so, even if Intel was only around, they would just split it up into multiple companies and be pumping money back into the US economy.
They could still let AMD go bankrupt and have them be restructured by a bankruptcy company which might do them some good in a way. Not saying I want them to go bankrupt, but I sense there is alot of fat in how AMD runs things. I still can't understand how their 48xx series sells so well and they come out with pathetic income. You can blame the economy, but we know the 4xxx series has sold well, they are getting money from wii sales, and xbox 360 sales, but where is all that money?
I think one more key for them to make money is lower infrastructure cost(e.g how did Hector Ruiz(AMD ceo) get paid more than Intel ceo) and reduce overhead which why being run by a bankruptcy company might do them good. I have a feeling that is why NV is able to make more money than them. Apple and NV has paid their ceo's badly when the company underperforms, this is something AMD should adopt.
I think AMD needs to change how it is run(not necessarily their product designs), especially when you look at their long-term finances. They can't make a few hundred million 1 year and then loses hundreds of millions to billions for the most part in other years. Its not a good long term business model obviously, and I think the company can use some remodeling which AMD can't do themselves, someone needs to step in, whether it is a genius finance wiz team or the government. A good product even something like the original athlon(which was just as big as core 2 duo back in the day) is enough to save AMD for the long term, they need to be run differently.
Altough this goes a little beyond me, when we here at XS start to bench Gulftown deep below -100°C (perhaps as low as LN2 can get us), aside from Intel itself, we may also thank AMD for that.
While that might theoretically be the case, your post makes it sound as if it IS the case, and that would simply be not true. The only thing the people at Intel are trying to do is hold AMD's head underwater as long as possible, and get absolutely NO credit for AMD's success. That is laughable at best. They've been charged under anti competition laws for crying out loud. lol Saying AMD owes any of it's success to Intel is a ludicrous assertion. AMD is a tough competitor, making top notch products, and that's why they'll survive, in the most difficult and scrutinized industry there is.Quote:
Originally Posted by nlancaster
I don't think anyone buys the sort of reasoning that says Intel is responsible for AMD surviving as a company. Save for a few with questionable motives...
I think you misunderstood my post, or I was not completly clear. I did not mean to say that intel has saved, but would probably do it sometime in the future if AMD looks to be going completly out of business.Quote:
Originally Posted by flippin_waffles
Ah yes, I did misunderstand, my apologies. Although I don't see AMD going anywhere for the forseeable future, with or without Intel's 'help'. :DQuote:
Originally Posted by nlancaster
Right, I own a computer store and AMD does sell slower then Intel. But I am sure that we sell more then 20% of the time AMD. probably more like 30-40%. But $ wise we probably sell more like 90% Intel 10% AMD.Quote:
Originally Posted by flippin_waffles
Yeah, I can believe that. It's been that way for many many years. I think having to compete with Intel, AMD has evolved into a company that is very streamlined and very efficient and can survive with alot lower numbers than Intel can. So while Intel appears to be using a brute force tactic, AMD seems to be focused on being extremely efficient.Quote:
Originally Posted by nlancaster
bulldozer wont be amd's last cpu.... there's now way it could end like that...