AMD Lays Off 500 Employees

Status
Not open for further replies.

nekatreven

Distinguished
Feb 20, 2007
415
0
18,780
0
I really hope AMD keeps making progress...even with all of the foreign investor crap going on. Competition is needed, and I just like the company. In a fan boy sort of way but more towards the business side than the products side. :)

Intel probably spends in 1 quarter on R&D what AMD makes in a year. Even if the numbers aren't that drastic...for their size and being in the position they are...to still be holding 20% of the market, I have to say hats off to that.
 

TwoDigital

Distinguished
Jan 2, 2008
285
0
18,810
6
AMD may want to try their hand in the multi-multi-core motherboard chipset business... since the i7 and Core2Quad/Xeon chips have been running so much faster, what's to stop AMD/ATI from making a new motherboard chipset that will let them build a mainboard with, say, 4 inexpensive quad-core phenoms?
 

cl_spdhax1

Distinguished
Sep 23, 2008
81
0
18,630
0
When Intel with their P4s/P-Ds was suffering from sales, they survived and came out punching back hard. What did AMD do with all the funds and fame they earned?? IMO their current cpus aren't revolutionary, based on the same or very similar architecture for years. Intel truly did "Leap Ahead!"
 

ajcroteau

Distinguished
Jun 18, 2008
276
0
18,780
0
I'm sure these cuts were most likely from the bottom, like the people who really need the jobs. Rather than the underworked, overpaid executives who around the desk all day improving their golf scores... :(
 

falchard

Distinguished
Jun 13, 2008
2,360
0
19,790
4
I keep saying, AMD should move out of Sunnyvale. Those Vampires and end of the world phenomena that keeps happening in that town cannot be good for productivity.
 

smalltime0

Distinguished
Apr 29, 2008
309
0
18,780
0
[citation][nom]cl_spdhax1[/nom]When Intel with their P4s/P-Ds was suffering from sales, they survived and came out punching back hard. What did AMD do with all the funds and fame they earned?? IMO their current cpus aren't revolutionary, based on the same or very similar architecture for years. Intel truly did "Leap Ahead!"[/citation]
AMD had the technological innovation in their current CPUs, they screwed up its implementation. Not to mention still being in 65nm land.

Intel on the other hand didn't have the technological innovation, but they did implement what they had better, and had the advantage of 45nm
 

Pei-chen

Distinguished
Jul 3, 2007
1,254
0
19,280
0
[citation][nom]TwoDigital[/nom]AMD may want to try their hand in the multi-multi-core motherboard chipset business... since the i7 and Core2Quad/Xeon chips have been running so much faster, what's to stop AMD/ATI from making a new motherboard chipset that will let them build a mainboard with, say, 4 inexpensive quad-core phenoms?[/citation]
It is called an AMD Quad FX platform and it performed worse than a single Q6700.
 

redraider89

Distinguished
Feb 4, 2009
109
0
18,680
0
[citation][nom]Pei-chen[/nom]It is called an AMD Quad FX platform and it performed worse than a single Q6700.[/citation]

The AMD Quad FX was slower due to using legacy CPUs, the Athlon 64s as compared to the 2Core Duo, or is it, DuoCore 2 or is it 2Duo Core, or CoreQuad...whatever the Q6700 is. Anyway, they weren't Phenoms or Phenom IIs that AMD was using on the Quad FX.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS