• 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.

Early Tri Core look

Snowdog said:
That would be one way to implode AMD faster. Sell big fat expensive dies downmarket for the low price of duals. Do you really think that is the way to reverse multi-hundred million dollar losses? It isn't.
Click to expand...

So what you suggest they sell a hotter, slower, more expensive product instead? Dual-core vs dual-core isnt exactly a winning strategy for them at this time. Am I realistically expecting amd to cut out dual-core at this point in time? Of course not. But it probably would have served them better to have changed their marketing strategy to have pitted dual vs single, tri vs dual, and quad vs quad. At least then they'd have a valid argument for price vs performance b/c as it stands now they dont.

AMD needs to sell smaller dies for higher prices, not larger dies for lower prices.
Click to expand...

No insult, but how exactly do you expect them to magically pull out a marketing plan for smaller die, higher prices? Theres nothing they can do about the die size. Theres nothing they can do about the current generation cpu ipc. These two things are set in stone until a die shrink and a new generation of cpu. They can wish for a die shrink all they want, its not just going to "poof" appear magically out of thin air. Even if they could then what? Now they can double the number of crummy price/performance cpu's that they can currently make?
 
Snowdog said:
That would be one way to implode AMD faster. Sell big fat expensive dies downmarket for the low price of duals. Do you really think that is the way to reverse multi-hundred million dollar losses? It isn't.
Click to expand...
It’s not like they have much choice in the matter given the current level of Phenom performance. What do you think AMD should proceed with as a marketing strategy? From everything I’ve read in your posts here suggests that AMD should simply dump the idea of tri-cores, and sell only duals and quads. What will become of the bad processors then? Keychains? It would incur more losses for AMD to throw away the bad or poorly-performing products than to remarket them as saleable, mid-range ‘salvage’ offerings. Many agree that the salvage strategy is the best one for the next few quarters given the current level of Phenom performance/yields/pricing scenarios, etc…

AMD needs to sell smaller dies for higher prices, not larger dies for lower prices.
Click to expand...
That is extremely easy to say, but now the die is cast (no pun). AMD must make the best of an unfavorable situation. Tri-core processors are one such avenue to recover potential losses. AFAIK, their current dual cores are based on the K8. The older microarchitecture is not as competitive in today’s market. If AMD was to design a new architecture with two high-performance cores, that would entail a lot of R&D expenditures they cannot afford presently. Anyway you slice it, quads are the future not duals. Intel decided that for us when they released the first x86 quad-core last year. There’s no turning back now, irrespective how useless four cores are for the average desktop user…

TBH, you’re barking up the wrong tree. Unlike other long-time AMD customers, I was badly hoping AMD would decide to move ahead with MCM for Barcelona when I first heard of problems with the monolithic architecture, and the inevitable delays several quarters ago. It’s too late now. They have to make do with their decisions however discouraging.
 
I never said triples were a bad idea, it is a great way to handle bad cores. I just pointed out that the supply is based on bad cores and creating extras is a very bad idea. If you follow that line of reasoning you see there will be less triples available than quads unless something is seriously wrong. You can't build a business strategy on cast-offs.

There is no quick fix, but the solution is certainly not to go in the opposite direction and push an even more mismatched fight against smaller cores with the big dies.

My strategy for now. Hunker down in survival mode, try to avoid a price war, sell cheap duals for the market share to keep the platform in play. They lose less money on each of those. Keep selling X2, X3 and X4 and single cores if they can. Longer term AMD needs either another K8 like breakthrough or sink back to smaller market share they had before K8. Or a very small die where they can push a price advantage and still make money (look at RV670 vs G92).

You certainly don't destroy the dual market at this point. This is a crazy price war move that will end with Intel losing some profits as it shifts everything to quads (which is easy for intel) and AMD filing chapter 11. Realize that every thing Intel makes right now is a potential quad. Suddenty those cheapo 2140s are low end quads.

The triples replace duals strategy wonts seem so smart when intel starts pumping out $120 quads by the truckload.

AMD is in a delicate balance right now. Crazy shit like abandoning 2duals for triples would destroy the company. Hopefully the reasons are clear.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top