AMD Names a New CEO & President

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Status
Not open for further replies.
AMD doesn't need to compete with Intel in the desktop cpu arena. They are moving in other directions, hence the delays.
AMD shipped 12 million APU's in the 2nd Quarter alone. And APU's is just one of the new markets they are breaking into.
They got smart and stopped trying to focus on beating Intel in the dying desktop sector and decided to focus on where they can actually make profit and gain market share.
It's working.
 
[citation][nom]otacon72[/nom]..or in other words. APUs are a made up market because AMD can't compete anymore. Competition drives innovation but when Bulldozer can't compete with Sandybridge it will just continue the downward slide of AMD. There is no competition when the only person you're competing against in yourself. APU benchmarks are just putrid.[/citation]

Pretty much summed up AMD's position. They realized they couldn't win outright against Intel so theey decided to make up a one legged hop competition which Intel is too cool to even compete in.
 
..or in other words. APUs are a made up market because AMD can't compete anymore. Competition drives innovation but when Bulldozer can't compete with Sandybridge it will just continue the downward slide of AMD. There is no competition when the only person you're competing against in yourself. APU benchmarks are just putrid.
Click to expand...

As much as I like AMD GPUs, second that. Though we may see APUs become more useful in the future.
 
Until we actually see how the Bulldozer architecture performs against Intel's newest, there is little to say about how good or how bad AMD's position is against Intel.

Sure you could say the Intel has been eating away at them for the past 2-3 years. But then again Bulldozer has been in development for so long that when it does hit the market, it will be old tech.

And I, for one, hope it keeps up with Sandy Bridge, because it will mean AMD's old tech is just as good as Intel's newest... and that'd be awesome.
 
[citation][nom]GeekApproved[/nom]AMD doesn't need to compete with Intel in the desktop cpu arena. They are moving in other directions, hence the delays.AMD shipped 12 million APU's in the 2nd Quarter alone. And APU's is just one of the new markets they are breaking into.They got smart and stopped trying to focus on beating Intel in the dying desktop sector and decided to focus on where they can actually make profit and gain market share. It's working.[/citation]

Yea sure. But they sure as hell need to compete with Intel in the server and HPC market where the money to be made is, and currently they are not doing so well.

I bet they brought this guy in to help push AMD into other markets that are not even as important as getting a strong server line up is.
 
AMD is in excellent shape and has a bright future from everything I see. Bulldozer, Trinity and many other products are on the way. AMD is two years ahead of Intel on APUs and the system builders are buying them faster than AMD can crank them out at the moment. With the new Bulldozer architecture AMD will be competitive with Intel in all market segments and leading in APUs by a long shot for quite awhile. Intel will feel the pain as consumers vote with their wallets as OEM's are doing on APUs right now.

The new CEO won't need to work too hard for the first few months as AMD has everything under control for the foreseeable future but Read will need to start planning out new products for 2015 and beyond.
 
I would say that in case of AMD what they need is marketing. To be honest AMD wasn't much behind 3-4y ago, and they even where better back in athlon 64 times but still their market share was 15-25%. That is very low considering their competetive pricing. I know that it was/is in part becouse Intel was bribing PC manufacturers, but that is something new CEO should work on.

Fusion is good, but they still need to progress in desktop CPU so that they can later implement this into APU

good luck!
 


System builders buying APUs? Cool story bro. Bulldozer might be good, but it ain't here yet and meanwhile high-end is controlled by Sandy Bridge. Intel doesn't need APUs... if they want to make extra cash, they'll just license nVidia to make them. APUs are good for low-end, that's all.

However, AMD *REAL* graphics kick some real ass. I'd concentrate even more effort there to make sure no one buys nVidia at all :)
 
Jimmysmitty, You do know Amd is the leader in server products right? Amd has destroyed Intel for years with the opteron series. Low power draw better pricing more cores. Intel is great on the desktop side and that's it. Amd destroys the server side dominates the laptop/netbook side and is up and down on the desktop side. I actually run encoding software that has the option to use 6 cores for encoding, If i want to take advantage of that on the intel side i'd be out another $800 having to stick with the extreme cpu side. Also intel just released a "water cooled only" cpu line up, you tell me how that panes out.
 
[citation][nom]iamtheking123[/nom]Pretty much summed up AMD's position. They realized they couldn't win outright against Intel so theey decided to make up a one legged hop competition which Intel is too cool to even compete in.[/citation]

Intel's Core i7 (Sandy Bridge) is essentially a copy cat of AMD's original idea. Some of you, have already forgot the mere fact that Intel didn't have any plans on creating (neither, releasing) a CPU + GPU on die silicon chip.

Watch as AMD releases Bulldozer and Intel, will (most probably) be releasing, yet another copy cat.
 
Jimmysmitty, You do know Amd is the leader in server products right? Amd has destroyed Intel for years with the opteron series. Low power draw better pricing more cores. Intel is great on the desktop side and that's it. Amd destroys the server side dominates the laptop/netbook side and is up and down on the desktop side. I actually run encoding software that has the option to use 6 cores for encoding, If i want to take advantage of that on the intel side i'd be out another $800 having to stick with the extreme cpu side. Also intel just released a "water cooled only" cpu line up, you tell me how that panes out.
Click to expand...

The water cooled only is only a rumor, we don't know yet how a good air heatsink will do. And it's for extreme gamers, that's all. Not for servers. Also, ever heard of HT? If your software can work with 6 cores but not threads, too bad for you.

Somehow all the server setups I've seen go for Xeon and not Opteron. Strange. Don't have any real XP there, but I don't think it's as simple as you put it.

As for AMD dominating netbooks/laptops... there're WAY more SB/Atom laptops/netbooks sold. Though the number of netbooks might have went down (for good - I'd take and AMD solution over Atom any day!), AMD still doesn't have anything for hi-end laptops to compete with i5/i7 mobile series.
 
if nerdy and awkward appearance is to be attributed to business success then AMD just struck a goldmine. hot damn that guy looks geeky!

As has been noted, the portable phone/tablet and All-in-one markets trump any of us system builders by quite a bit. Focusing on that portable market and better APUs should be AMD's primary goal -- from a business standpoint. Of course I'd like to have a blazing fast CPU that competes with intel and is a better price😛erformance buy, but to get there they'll need revenue and more publicity.

Who doesn't want a single chip that draws less power and means I can avoid buying a discrete graphics card and still game at 1080p? Throw in a discrete graphics card if it's not enough and who the hell would buy intel?
 
Dirk helped AMD make Llano and Brazos, which are innovative products that are selling. Bulldozer also seems very innovative from what's known about it thus far, although performance remains to be seen.

Let's hope this isn't another "make a fast buck" corporatist douche businessman who will ignore making good products, and focus on ways to become "profitable" by screwing everybody a la Intel, and otherwise engaging in shady business practices.
 
Lets hope best for AMD. Competition in all aspects is beneficial for the consumer.
Click to expand...


Unless it comes from iCrap, a compnay that thrives on propaganda and deceit for success, not advancement of technology.
 
[citation][nom]GeekApproved[/nom]AMD doesn't need to compete with Intel in the desktop cpu arena. They are moving in other directions, hence the delays.AMD shipped 12 million APU's in the 2nd Quarter alone. And APU's is just one of the new markets they are breaking into.They got smart and stopped trying to focus on beating Intel in the dying desktop sector and decided to focus on where they can actually make profit and gain market share. It's working.[/citation]Here's hoping he can get Lenovo to sell some nice designs powered by Trinity next year!
 
[citation][nom]del35[/nom]Unless it comes from iCrap, a compnay that thrives on propaganda and deceit for success, not advancement of technology.[/citation]
I've never heard of a company called "iCrap" before.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom