A Rough Week: AMD Gets Six F Grades From Investors

[Guest]

I am not jealous. I would not want to be Rory Read this week.

A Rough Week: AMD Gets Six F Grades From Investors : Read more

 

[vilenjan]

This is terrible, if AMD goes, than it back Intel/Nvidia monopoly

 

[Raid3r]

Don't get caught up in the reindeer games.

 

[Guest]

lol... a sell now... they just need to look at Tom's preview of trinity on desktop..... piledriver will be even faster 0.0!
XD

retake speed crown... not sure, be able to beat all i5 CPU's from intel... probably

 

[wiinippongamer]

If piledriver fails, they should quit the CPU bussiness and stick to GPU's, where they've actually done a good job so far.

 

[mamailo]

The situation of AMD is getting worse with Rory Read as CEO than when was CEO-less.
Bad desicions followed by a worst.

Gimme a LIKE if you wanna see Rory removed.

 

[Guest]

it needs to drop to $1 then i can go buy some shares and wait for it to go up again. I dont see them going under anytime soon.

 

[K2N hater]

Investor news are meant to mislead the masses so the elite may get higher margins.

AMD isn't in a good shape right now but we know that's got to be a window of opportunity to the gamblers out there.

 

[whimseh]

None of my parts are from AMD thankfully.

 

[debs3759]

"investors do not seem to have not much confidence"

I always liked AMD in the past. I hope they can recover from their recent problems and start innovating again with new technologies that others will want to follow.

 

[nforce4max]

I hope that the company does not fail, I would gladly support if they decided to team up with VIA to get some of their IP and try to make something better than the two have to offer alone.

AMD is being mismanaged intentionally so that maybe it could be bought up or go under leaving Intel with almost total market share while it is anyone's guess what will happen to the graphics division. I hope that Intel or Nvidia doesn't get to buy it like what happened to 3DFX.

Going and doing everything half ass in the IT world doesn't work very well if at all for long.

 

[akamrcrack]

Inb4 government bailout


This is a buyers market, if AMD goes under there will be no choices E.G. Intel would monopolize E.G. we don't let things like that happen.

Albeit that the choices we have aren't very different, especially considering the gpu market.


When did the world turn into a place where everything has competition, but still manages to look/feel/walk/quack like a duck I already own.

AMD vs Nividia arguement used to be "AMD has eyefinity, Nvidia has 3D" now its "AMD has 3 games, Nvidia has better pricing" lol they went from innovation to price fixing..

Honestly, I think the whole pc market just needs a catalyst to really kick start innovation again. The catalyst being a 3rd CPU manu (perhaps IBM) and a 3rd GPU manu.

 

[aicom]

AMD is not being mismanaged. It is generally not the direction I would like to see it going, but I would argue that the management is doing the best with what AMD has. Keep in mind that Intel has a massive R&D department that has functioning silicon with features that a production CPU won't get for at least 2 years. AMD doesn't have nearly the R&D (in the CPU department), so it's going to play the roll of the company that will design a custom APU/CPU/SoC that will meet certain needs using either an x86 or ARM core. It will take advantage of the Radeon IP it has and integrate a Radeon core in the APU/SoC. Intel will be ahead in the CPU performance game, but AMD has decided to play the SoC designer game in the long run and it seems to be profitable for companies like Qualcomm

 

[sinfulpotato]

I would buy AMD stock if it tanked. I remember when AMD was much much cheaper.. Ups and downs.

 

[southernshark]

[citation][nom]vilenjan[/nom]This is terrible, if AMD goes, than it back Intel/Nvidia monopoly[/citation]

Na if AMD goes under the ATI component will be sold off. The CPU division will get bought up too, hopefully by Nvidia.

 

[southernshark]

[citation][nom]aicom[/nom]AMD is not being mismanaged.... It will take advantage of the Radeon IP it has and integrate a Radeon core in the APU/SoC. Intel will be ahead in the CPU performance game, but AMD has decided to play the SoC designer game in the long run and it seems to be profitable for companies like Qualcomm[/citation]

Totally disagree. On its current track Intel will destroy AMD in 1 or 2 gens. There is no way Trinity can compete with Haswel. Even if the GPU ends up being a little better, the superiority of the Intel CPU will still crush it.

AMD needs to think about selling the company now while they can still get 10 bucks a share (in a sale) versus nothing on the courthouse steps.

And hey I'm actually a big AMD fan, use its chips in all my comps, but I just don't see how it can survive, especially since R&D was cut in favor of a "middle path" which is never going to pan out.

 

[jimmysmitty]

[citation][nom]K2N hater[/nom]Investor news are meant to mislead the masses so the elite may get higher margins.AMD isn't in a good shape right now but we know that's got to be a window of opportunity to the gamblers out there.[/citation]

But the sad thing is that AMD as a company to invest in is not in the best position right now, they have also gone through most of the team of people who have made them what they are in many areas.

I fear that AMD losing its upper management might lead AMD into a direction where Intel has no true competition and we wont see the same innovation but instead just a stagnating CPU market that Intel will dominate.

 

[Guest]

AMD should diversify into smartphone processors

 

[Guest]

Well, Putting the name FX on the Bulldozer cpu is or would be like Ford Motor Co. putting the name Cobra or Boss on the Pinto.

 

[f-14]

in the era of mobile how mobile are those i5's and i7's?
amd is going the most profitable route as non mobile is shrinking faster than the titanic sank, it just happens to be a much bigger ship that holds more than 10's of millions of people, that takes time to sink.
AMD decided not to compete for the high power market that will shrink considerably and not show growth like mobile. i agree with [citation][nom]K2N hater[/nom]Investor news are meant to mislead the masses so the elite may get higher margins.AMD isn't in a good shape right now but we know that's got to be a window of opportunity to the gamblers out there.[/citation]
AMD is competing with ARM
if Intel represents germany( the techonological leaders) and AMD represents america (get-r-done) and ARM is the russians (limitless low cost and expense) and this is world war 2 how do you think this is going to go down? (locations of this analogy are ironic)

 

[joejamesatou]

This is what happens when you can't sell a single desktop CPU for over $200. Until they can they will continue to lose money. It's sad but true. And when investors stop investing it only gets harder. They don't have the R&D budget. They fall another process behind Intel. Unless they can pull a rabbit out of the hat it is going to be a slow death for their CPU business.

That said I love the 7870 I picked up! At least they can still make a good return on the 78xx and 79xx. It's sad when they have 4 graphics cards that are more expensive than their highest desktop enthusiast CPU. They just need to focus on what they do best. Maybe they can still save the GPU biz.

 

[madjimms]

When stock prices are low, BUY BUY BUY!!!! EVERYONE BUY AMD STOCK!

(not even joking actually)

 

[NuclearShadow]

Intel has been slaughtering AMD performance wise in CPU's for pretty much the entire time the two have been competing. The only time AMD has ever beat Intel is back in the Athlon 64 days and that's only because Intel made a immense blunder in that generation. Still AMD had a place in the market as he cheaper alternative and the price/performance ratio but with hardware prices dropping so much compared to the past there is little point in going with a AMD CPU.

If AMD can at-least get back a large enough price/performance ratio while maintaining a decent profit then this will lure in more sales and do wonders for them. But with prices so low already is that even possible anymore?

 

[megamanx00]

[citation][nom]NuclearShadow[/nom]Intel has been slaughtering AMD performance wise in CPU's for pretty much the entire time the two have been competing. The only time AMD has ever beat Intel is back in the Athlon 64 days and that's only because Intel made a immense blunder in that generation. Still AMD had a place in the market as he cheaper alternative and the price/performance ratio but with hardware prices dropping so much compared to the past there is little point in going with a AMD CPU.If AMD can at-least get back a large enough price/performance ratio while maintaining a decent profit then this will lure in more sales and do wonders for them. But with prices so low already is that even possible anymore?[/citation]

You obviously forget the K7. The original Athlon was always just ahead of the P3 when using SDR RAM, and significantly ahead with DDR. It also did well against the P4, though at times AMD was a bit optimistic in their processor rating. And who brought us the K7, which also led the the K8 (Athlon 64)? That's right Dirk Meyer and the board booted him out.

AMD isn't going in the right direction. I don't think AMD will go away completely that soon, but might just go down the path of VIA. You may have forgotten about VIA but they are still around. Of course they don't matter much now.

 

[teh_chem]

What strikes me as odd is that at the moment, even AMD's "poor" bulldozer CPU performance is more CPU performance than the average user would ever need. Unless we're talking multi-GPU purposes, it really doesn't matter. Same thing with AMDs APUs vs. Intel's most recent mobile Ivy Bridge processors. It's a bunch of CPU performance that whomever buys laptops/devices will never need all of that power.

So it strikes me as odd that any of these company performance metrics/projections have anything to do with actual processor performance metrics. Yields and margins and such, sure, I get that. But then we have techies jump in forums like this and discuss AMDs company performance being a reflection of Bulldozer or Brazos performance, which is a tough logic to follow.

There's no point in trying to be the winner of the fastest desktop CPU (AMD has said as much, though most people mock this statement as a testament to their failure to do so, but whatever).

I have faith that despite these reduction in evals from analysts, AMD will be fine. It's these same analysts that 3-5 months ago had utmost faith in AMD to further secure its place in the CPU market.

Meaning that these analysts--like most tech analysts--have no idea what they're talking about. It doesn't mean that they're wrong, it doesn't mean that AMD CAN'T fail, it just means that they're guessing on what the outcome might be.