But they've never been closer than now. Every year, they're bleeding money more than the previous year. They've had very few positive upswings in recent years. I believe the writing is on the wall, its my opinion, we'll see in the next 3-5 years though.
![[H]ard|Forum](/styles/hardforum/xenforo/logo_dark.png){kind=logo}
-
Some users have recently had their accounts hijacked. It seems that the now defunct EVGA forums might have compromised your password there and seems many are using the same PW here. We would suggest you UPDATE YOUR PASSWORD and TURN ON 2FA for your account here to further secure it. None of the compromised accounts had 2FA turned on.
Once you have enabled 2FA, your account will be updated soon to show a badge, letting other members know that you use 2FA to protect your account. This should be beneficial for everyone that uses FSFT.
AMD quits
- Thread starter fightingfi
- Start date
But they've never been closer than now. Every year, they're bleeding money more than the previous year. They've had very few positive upswings in recent years. I believe the writing is on the wall, its my opinion, we'll see in the next 3-5 years though.
What about pre-K8 days where AMD was ALWAYS in the red? It took the Athlon/XP and Athlon64 lines for AMD to break even.
They didn't sell enough chips. Even during the XP/64 days when they had better chips, OEMs were siding with Intel money despite AMD's performance crown.
They're not in a good position now. dGPU sales are slowly falling and as are desktops for the first time since 2001. That's AMD's bread and butter. They've only got a ~5% server market share. Their product line is still focused heavily on desktop/server/laptop with the market for those products, in particular AMD's chips, sliding further behind.
No idea man, but all I can say is that AMD was known for being the budget/value CPU before the Athlon series, then shortly after they finally caught Intel in the high end market, they went back to being the budget/value CPU, then they got so far behind Intel with Conroe that now they aren't even the value CPU anymore. Now Intel has CPU's in the bottom dollar range that are noticably faster, cooler running and more efficient and still almost as cheap. The problem AMD faces now is that they're so far behind Intel in every segment and they likely don't have the capital for R&D to get caught up again. They've never really been in this position before.
That's BS and serious BS at that.
FX6100 costs less than an overpriced i3 cpu..guess which is better (by far) for anything heavy threaded like video. FX pulls the i3 apart at the seams. It costs less than half of an i5 processor yet it's performance is way more than 50% of that chip.
One of the best bang per buck processors on the market. Let's stop this Intel fanboy nonsense..get a life..for AMD users I'm standing firm..stop bitchin and moaning all the time. I put my cash into AMD..and you couldn't pay me to use Intel.
FX6100 costs less than an overpriced i3 cpu..guess which is better (by far) for anything heavy threaded like video. FX pulls the i3 apart at the seams. It costs less than half of an i5 processor yet it's performance is way more than 50% of that chip.
One of the best bang per buck processors on the market. Let's stop this Intel fanboy nonsense..get a life..for AMD users I'm standing firm..stop bitchin and moaning all the time. I put my cash into AMD..and you couldn't pay me to use Intel.
The FX6100 is also twice as large as the Ivy i3. This means AMD gets fewer per wafer and they operate on lower margins.
The chip only costs as much as it does because it struggles to perform well in the current market. AMD certainly didn't plan on selling them at those prices, but because of weak demand and competition, they have to.
Hagrid
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Nov 23, 2006
- Messages
- 9,167
The difference for me switching from my 1045t oc to 3.2 as my main to the 4.8 2500K was.........! not really noticeable. I guess I dont use anything really CPU bound or that taxed out the X6.
For the most, thats been said all over, unless you really need the extra horsepower, most of the time there isnt much of a difference. OC really brings the AMD side up and extends the usefulness of the CPU.
Your love for AMD doesn't change the fact they are and have been for the majority of their existence in the CPU market, a budget brand. That's the truth weather or not you want to believe it. If you think it's BS, you either don't know what you're talking about or are simply trying too hard to fool yourself. You certainly aren't fooling anyone else.
Acer_Sheep
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- May 18, 2007
- Messages
- 1,201
Yes that's true, but what I don't understand is why people always see it as wrong, what's wrong with being budget brand, We have budget mobos, cars, cases, monitor, audio-video hardware and more, so why not CPUs. Although honestly intel for a while already overtakes AMD on the low end segment as well.
Hagrid
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Nov 23, 2006
- Messages
- 9,167
Yet it still gets the job done most of the time.
Not sure why you're quoting me with that reply. The guy was calling BS on AMD being a budged oriented brand and that's what I was replying to. Not wether or not it gets the job done most of the time.
Because people want AMD to be more than it is in the CPU market. Many people also cling to the era in which AMD had the performance crown and hope they'll one day return to that position and that it wasn't a fluke.
Perhaps, but the existing IP agreements and AMD's almost empty IP portfolio, coupled with their lack of capital assets, make it an un-interesting takeover target.
At least put up a fight. I didn't expect BD to take back the crown, but I did expect it to keep up with SB.
The overclocking fiasco didn't help either.
- Joined
- Mar 18, 2010
- Messages
- 14,435
AMD did rehire one of the leading engineers of the Athlon processors.
I think you had lofty expectations for Bulldozer then. I had no illusions that it would be anything other than it turned out to be. Simply put at the time Phenom II was often behind the 45nm Core 2 Quad CPUs. They didn't favor well against Nehalem or Gulftown. At best I thought Bulldozer would match Nehalem or at least trade blows with it. I doubted it would match Gulftown much less Sandy Bridge. You can't just leap frog that large a gap in technology in one generation.
I'm fooling nobody I think the FX6100 is probably the best bang per buck AMD and general processor price v performance. I've built a number of machines for cost effective photo/video work and everyone is very please, it's a good chip for the money. Intel's i3 can't compete for that type of work..it's well behind in performance.
Call that BS if you want..I call it as I see it.
Like most I was let down with FX, but the let down was more the prices AMD were charging at first release. They've come down a lot (and rightly so IMO) so you have to call it as you see it "now"
I'm perfectly fine with AMD being a bang per buck CPU maker, they've done well in this segment even since Duron days. FX4 series too close to the FX6 range IMO. FX8120 worth a look if you want the extra module. Again the prices are much more appealing now. I picked the FX6100 because it's a good performer (in most real world results) it cost about the same as my old PhII 840 and is quite a lot faster. That's good value. I've been building AMD pc's for years and nobody has complained or been unhappy. Not everyone spends hours reading benchmarks with itunes as an example of one that favours Intel (who cares itunes is lousy software for threaded work) FX6100 punches near to the i5's for video work..for quite a lot less outlay, a damn good bargain if you ask me.
Intel are good nobody denies that i5 and up, i3 IMO just doesn't have enough threaded power to make it a good buy for this type of work, at least not at the prices Intel are asking for it. Ivy Bridge didn't change much for that range either very modest improvement in performance.
So who is fooling who? Simply saying buy Intel across the range isn't IMO sound advice.
That wasn't what you said before. You implied AMD is not a budget brand, now you're saying you're fine with it being a budget brand. Thats great, I'm fine with it being a budget brand too. I'm glad we both agree which segment they're in.
Yes you can, AMD and intel have done it before.
But yes my expectations were too high, I'll give you that. But BD was supposed to be revolutionary. I do think BD architecture is the future, and once they sort all the problems, well who knows...
Spoken like a true AMD fan.
None of the existing 11,700 employees are a genius?
Acer_Sheep
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- May 18, 2007
- Messages
- 1,201
I'm sure alot of them are geniuses, but it's not longer about a hero saving the whole story from down up. Current situation at AMD has roots in history in fact.
octoberasian
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Oct 13, 2007
- Messages
- 4,081
This is one of many sentiments I'll agree with users here. However, when you look at Intel's trend from tick to tock, or even from one tick to the next tick, their architectures have changed completely. In some cases they retained certain parts from the older architecture in the newer one, or improved it completely. AMD would have to do something similar post-Piledriver to beat Intel-- take the best parts of K10 and the best parts of their module design (Bulldozer, Piledriver, and later). That, in of itself, would need some talented engineers to do and a lot of money.
I think if AMD did that, it'd perform very well in both single and multithreaded applications by combining the best parts of two different architectures.
I believe the biggest improvements we'll see will be coming from Steamroller next year for APUs and two years from now for non-APUs:
- micro-OP cache
- two 4-wide decoders per core per module (versus 4-wide shared in Bulldozer/Piledriver)
- redesigned cache and dynamic L2 cache
By Excavator, we'll probably see something entirely different especially when they move from 32nm currently to probably 28nm or 22nm. AMD hasn't shed much light on it yet.
Technically Intel began by improving the P6 Microarchitecture introduced with the Pentium Pro. However Intel needed Netburst and lessons learned from the development of Tejas and possibly other failures we don't know about to make those improvements. At the time they took P6 as far as they could. They needed a new approach and when that didn't work they returned to P6 as a base. But manufacturing technology had changed and the Pentium M didn't really resemble P6 all that closely when it launched. And the Pentium M was weak in some areas where Netburst was stronger. It was weaker in some desktop areas but became the basis for the Core 2 microarchitecture. Do also keep in mind that Nehalem brought back Hyperthreading. One of the few things good about Northwood and Prescott based Pentium 4's.
Engineering is as much of a creative process as it is technical. At some point you can only go so far with a design. A fresh perspective is needed. Sometimes you can revisit something older and improve upon it greatly, but often times that leads to something that has little resemblence to where it started. AMD may have hit the wall with Phenom II and went in another direction. Lesson's learned from Bulldozer and it's descendents may be added into the Phenom II as a base and create a very successful architecture as Intel did with Conroe. The issue will become whether or not AMD can live long enough to do that and whether or not AMD employs enough talented engineers to accomplish such a task. With their shoestring R&D budget I wouldn't get my hopes up. Intel succeeds because it has enough money to give engineers what they need during the R&D phases for a product and more importantly, they have the money to hire the best talent the world has to offer.
octoberasian
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Oct 13, 2007
- Messages
- 4,081
Yeah, it's like Intel, "Here's the cash for your budget, R&D guys, have at it!" Probably figuratively and literally. A year or two later, we see those R&D guys bring it in the next tick or tock cycle.
AMD doesn't have the money to do that year-after-year. It's probably equivalent to: "Here's $500, try to last a month with it" whereas Intel is "Here's $5000, do whatever you want with it for the month and show me something promising."
Baloney. Your title says it all. AMD is not folding up in any of its sectors. It will continue to produce graphics cards, APU's, server processors, cpus for the desktop, tablet apu's etc. This whole thread is following the garbage that OBR has manufactured on behalf of Intel. AMD has enough financing lined up for the next fiscal year. By that time they will have started their turnaround with a bright new future. They will producing the lion's share of processors for the console market as well.
OBR's testing was flawed and Tom's Hardware testing , which was far more extensive, and balanced shows performance improvement over the FX-8150 of 10-15% overall. They commended AMD for producing the cpu with the best performance for the buck.
OBR's testing was flawed and Tom's Hardware testing , which was far more extensive, and balanced shows performance improvement over the FX-8150 of 10-15% overall. They commended AMD for producing the cpu with the best performance for the buck.
- Joined
- Mar 18, 2010
- Messages
- 14,435
Steamroller will be on 28nm. Of course, by the time Steamroller is out, Intel will have Haswell on 22nm.
You're setting yourself up for major dissapointment I'm afraid.
- Joined
- Aug 15, 2005
- Messages
- 9,086
AMD is doing the graphics for all three next gen consoles. This should be enough to float them for awhile until they can figure out something to regain their footing.
They provide a decent cash flow, but it's generally over the life of the console. It also relies heavily on volume, as the profit margins are very very slim. Essentially it should provide AMD okay money but only if they survive a 2-3 year period where it won't make them anything at all.
If they're looking to get over a rough slump now then, no, the console cash won't do it.
err, I might be wrong:
The above statement is based on how AMD did with the Wii and the small royalties it made from each sale. They added up to a pretty penny over the life of the console, but with the Xbox GPU AMD only made a relatively small one-time cash lump sum.
If they get a bigger payment this time around from all 3 companies, AMD can potentially make a decent bit of cash. Assuming it's royalties, then it would take significantly longer
Last edited:
i just read another article on Bloomberg
AMD sounds so fucked. They will explain themselves next monday, probably to investors' dismay.
you can't help feeling urgency for them. The shitty intel atom is getting used in tablets, while amd has virtually nothing.
ipad came out 2.5 years ago. What has taken amd so long...
AMD sounds so fucked. They will explain themselves next monday, probably to investors' dismay.
you can't help feeling urgency for them. The shitty intel atom is getting used in tablets, while amd has virtually nothing.
ipad came out 2.5 years ago. What has taken amd so long...
- Joined
- Nov 22, 2008
- Messages
- 6,617
lol, was searching for something else and came across this.
My how times have changed!
My how times have changed!
- Joined
- Nov 22, 2008
- Messages
- 6,617
It was still $2 in 2016 went I bought in. lmao!
I setup a email reminder at $2 promptly got notified. LOL, Finally jumped in at $12.
- Joined
- Nov 22, 2008
- Messages
- 6,617
At least you got in. I told my family to buy in, no one listened lol. Some casual acquaintances listened though and bought in at 7 bucks. They sent me gifts when it hit 30. This is how I'm paying for kids college. I should have bought moar!
You can still buy more.. sold on the drop last Jan. , got back in @ 17 because all the "Expert Analysts" told everyone a recession was coming and I knew they full of crap.. Bought more at 29. Buy the dips until we see what Keller can come up with at Intel. Until then, there's nothing stopping AMD. They can basically tread water until then, but as we all know - they aren't taking their foot off the gas.
defaultluser
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Jan 14, 2006
- Messages
- 14,398
Also, AMD took advantage of the rumors driving stock buyers. They released more stock, allowing them to pay off enough of their outstanding debt to have until 2025 to pay it off! At the time, AMD had major debt due in 2018 and 2019!
Now that they're making a profit, that shouldn't be an issue. But Lisa Su bought then the breathing room 4 years back by making the right call,