AMD Ready To Fight in 2012, Says CEO

[leon2006]

Just shut up and come up with the best product on time... Avoid the broken promises that characterized the company after the 1st 64bit Dual Core Success.

The industry need a successful AMD but the company should just zip its mouth and just produce the right product in a timely manner.

 

[captaincharisma]

[citation][nom]lashabane[/nom]One of the reasons I went with AMD is because they're the underdog.If it's not about Intel VS AMD anymore, then I guess I don't have to feel bad about my next processor.[/citation]

that is interesting. you go with the company that makes a lower quality product. i guess i will follow suit and not buy that new panasonic TV and go for a no name TV even though i know it is going to be crap

 

[alidan]

[citation][nom]SteelCity1981[/nom]But lets look at the demographic where the market is. Is the chip market in the highend segment? No. Is the chip market in the portable and utlra portable segment now? Yes. AMD made a smart move by shifting their focus towards the segments where most consumors are buying. AMD got in a lot of trouble trying to compete with intel in the highend segment where it's a small market and don't have the resoruces to compete. So it was a waste of time and money trying to compete against something that isn't where the market is. In order fro them to survive they had to shift focus and do the most logical thing that they can to compete and make profit from and they are doing just that with their focus on portable and ultra portable devices in the chip segment. It was either doing that or going under.[/citation]

the whole point in makeing a flagship is repurposeing the r&d in it to more mainstream areas.

making the advancements costs money, and amd more or less has their thread solution figured out, its not as bad as intel was when it first had theirs... but its also not good. the refinement needs to be made, and and that's hopefully what pile driver is, refined bulldozer, hopefully with a single core performance between phenom II and the i7 with multicore trading blows with the i7 at a cheaper price point than it. it doesnt need to beat it it just needs to be an alternative.

and amds multi thread soltion could be closer to a true 8 core in multi core performance, i think they stumbled hard on bulldozer, but their version 2's have usually been great.

 

[Guest]

How many times have I heard this from AMD. They have been chasing Intel for how long now? I won't buy second grade because I feel sorry for them or I always root for the underdog. That would be cheating myself. I have bought AMD several times over the years thinking this time they might have it right.
I'll try them again but only for a machine I could care less about. They will not be in a primary machine of mine.

 

[andy5174]

Didn't he state that there will be no "AMD vs Intel" anymore not very long ago? IIRC, there was an News article about this at THG.

 

[jimmysmitty]

[citation][nom]phamhlam[/nom]Really? I think Intel is dominating. Espicially with >60% market share. Just look on the fourms. Even though AMD gives you more core and a cheaper price, many people still recommends Intel. i5 2500k & i7 2600k FTW!!![/citation]

Its actually >80% for Intel right now.

[citation][nom]lashabane[/nom]I currently have a x4 955 because it was in my budget and gave me the best bang for my buck at the time.Now I want an i5-2500k but have been holding off for price drops/special deals.[/citation]

Thats different than what you said at first. First you said because they are the "underdog". And honestly, they are not a "underdog" anymore. They are a very large company and have resources, they just haven't produced a directly competitive product for the past 7 years.

And I find it interesting that AMD is saying this jut after they said they wont be competinng with Intel anymore and are focusing on other markets.

TBH, I don't think AMD will easily take over Intel again like they did with the Athlon 64. Intel is on a roll and will stay on a roll. With IB coming out, they will again increase their process lead (not to even add in the 3D trigates).

I wish AMD luck but they really need to come out with something pretty stellar to catch up with and beat Intel.

 

[Rockdpm]

Cheers to a few more good Years with AMD!

 

[sarcasm]

[citation][nom]otacon72[/nom]Fight for what? The value market? Plain and simple, AMD's R&D division is not as good as intel's which is why they lost the CPU battle. Bulldozer should've never been put to market.[/citation]

No, it's not that its not as good, its because they don't have as much money and resources. And it doesn't look to be changing anytime soon.

 

[captaincharisma]

No, it's not that its not as good, its because they don't have as much money and resources. And it doesn't look to be changing anytime soon.

so according to you the athlon era didn't happen. just because a company is low on resources and money doesn't mean they are always going to be bad. but since intel got back on top it looks like the AMD athlon that was outperfoming the pentium 4 was just a fluke

 

[acadia11]

This CEO sucks and what a quitting attitude imagine if apple quit in2000? This CEO is a loser, period!

 

[acadia11]

It's that bulldozer sucked, it's that bulldozer was 2 years late, the processor would b blazing performance if it had been on time. The CEO is right AMD needs to improve its execution. But the fact that he just gave up on the battle means he's a .....y. get his people in the office and get to work, if dec alpha a tiny company can whip Intels axx, ARM is, but AMD is quitting.

 

[sarcasm]

[citation][nom]captaincharisma[/nom]so according to you the athlon era didn't happen. just because a company is low on resources and money doesn't mean they are always going to be bad. but since intel got back on top it looks like the AMD athlon that was outperfoming the pentium 4 was just a fluke[/citation]

huh? I didn't say they won't make anything good, its just a simple fact. Intel has much more money and resources to pour into R&D. With that said, AMD has done a fantastic job with their resources. In fact, it takes a more creative company like AMD to come up with some "out of the box" type products. As much as people keep thinking Bulldozer is a failure, but from an innovative perspective they have made a unique architecture. And not to mention their GPU division keeps on getting better and better. A Radeon 7970 with 20-25% more power than a GTX 580 with less power consumption? Amazing in my books.

Honestly, AMD is making some good stuff, its just the only lacking point is the higher end competitor to the i7 line. And Intel's Tick Tock strategy is paying dividends for them as it keeps them improving year to year with no signs of slowing down. I cant wait to see what they pull off on their next Tock in 2013.

 

[the_brute]

Yes BD is slower, but its their new architecture and they dont have the funds like Intel to brute force dev process. But they do have an extremely simple product that with small changes is extremely scalable with funds provided.
I think Pile Driver will be near (slightly above) the P2 but they should be able to reduce their TDP another step and create one hell of a thread/watt/performance ratio. This is my thought, and I've been wrong, but it looks like the direction they are going with this product.

If you want AMD to compete with Intel get a group together and buy them out and force feed hundreds of millions of dollars into their R/D. But know that with around 20% of the market share you will lose money anyway, even if you produce a superior product.

 

[triny]

There is very little need for more cpu power ,since the advent of the quad core.
igp needs improving especially at Intel.
The extremist gamers market is small I agree with AMD's road map ,high end market isn't worth an enormous
effort. at this time.
I believe the APU was the most important advent the last couple of years,Today they may be not that astounding to those without vision , but the future belongs the APU .

 

[lashabane]

[citation][nom]jimmysmitty[/nom]Thats different than what you said at first. First you said because they are the "underdog".[/citation]
I said one of the reasons, not the only reason.

 

[SteelCity1981]

[citation][nom]alidan[/nom]the whole point in makeing a flagship is repurposeing the r&d in it to more mainstream areas. making the advancements costs money, and amd more or less has their thread solution figured out, its not as bad as intel was when it first had theirs... but its also not good. the refinement needs to be made, and and that's hopefully what pile driver is, refined bulldozer, hopefully with a single core performance between phenom II and the i7 with multicore trading blows with the i7 at a cheaper price point than it. it doesnt need to beat it it just needs to be an alternative. and amds multi thread soltion could be closer to a true 8 core in multi core performance, i think they stumbled hard on bulldozer, but their version 2's have usually been great.[/citation]


What is your def of flagship? flagship can mean more then one thing then just highend. Flagship can mean other things like AMD's flagship lowprofile chips that are the flagship in that line of chips being made for that segment. Highend means nothing if the market isn't there. Intel sells a lot more core i3's and core i5's to to consumors than they do Core i7's Why? Because that's where the market is due to the vast majority of consumors not needing a highend cpu to do what they do on their pc's. This is another reason why APU's came about for acg consumors in which make up the vast majority of pc sales that don't need a powerful cpu and gpu but need something that's good on battery life that performs decently enoguh to do typical task and media on it.

 

[milktea]

Rory Read says "I'm going to focus on client mobility, thin and light" => That means the Ultrabook market, which is the next big thing in 2012/2013 after the iPad.

 

[akbareshghi]

Please design and doing R&D for manufacture the next-genration of chipset of mb that support the following features:
1- Bluetooth version 4
2- RAM DDR4(samsung recently manufactured these types of ram)
3- 128 bit OS(windows 8 perhaps support )and 128bit CPU
4- PCI-Expresss 3
5- USB 3
6- SATAIII
7- E-SATA III
8- Consumes less power and increase performance(high-speed for vast-demanding programs such as Autocad 2012)
9- Support 802.22 Wireless Communications
10- Support Onboard integrated Graphic that 256bit and 28nm and Directx11

 

[tomfreak]

Just delete the bulldozer already, intro a highly clock/optimized 8 core Phenom II.

 

[ivyanev]

AMD has huge problem with availability ,and diversity here in Bulgaria. When brazos appeared i thought it will dominate netbook segmet. What really happened was that brazos netbooks were only premium ones costing 50 -70% more than atom based netbooks, so they are not able to compete. But that is not all: I see brazos in a 15 inch laptops for price similar to intel Pentium B series laptops(which are like core i3 without hyperthreading ) so again they are poorly competitive. Lyano laptops are being offered only with external graphics, which is insane ,because of the good integrated videos, instead of lowering the prices , weight and power consumption.And the final nail in the coffin is lack of 4 core lyano.

I know it isn't AMD fault of company's import choices of models , but that really hurts them. I can't recommend a single AMD based laptop to a friend right now.

 

[ohim]

I still can`t believe that some guys are plain stupid , if I3 behaves like a P2 in a benchmark is not recommendable at all ... since the 4 cores P2 will obliterate the I3 as soon as you`ll start loading another aplication in the background ... still waiting charts with multitasking .... but this is just like waiting for a real santa it seems ... no one actually takes into consideration multitasking benchmarking ... guess the false impression that an I3 can do shit done is more important.

 

[verbalizer]

I still can`t believe that some guys are plain stupid , if I3 behaves like a P2 in a benchmark is not recommendable at all ... since the 4 cores P2 will obliterate the I3 as soon as you`ll start loading another aplication in the background ... still waiting charts with multitasking .... but this is just like waiting for a real santa it seems ... no one actually takes into consideration multitasking benchmarking ... guess the false impression that an I3 can do *** done is more important.

 

[ohim]

[citation][nom]malmental[/nom][/citation]
-1 AND an emoticon is your ideea of contradictory argument on what i`ve said ? guess you deserve your future i3 at 1000$ price tag ... do crap for more monney.

 

[acerace]

Fanboyism is not good. Keep that in mind guys.

 

[fazers_on_stun]

No, it's not that its not as good, its because they don't have as much money and resources. And it doesn't look to be changing anytime soon.

If AMD had waited maybe 6 months to buy ATI, they probably could have picked them up for half of the $5.4 billion they paid (more like $5.9 Bn after all the ancillary fees added in). Then of course they had the Barcelona fiasco which cost them a ton of money & prestige, due to insisting on 'native' quad-core vs. Intel's MCM approach (which BTW AMD no longer has a problem with - look at their server CPUs).

All that caused them to sell their fabs, and now look at them - having to rely on GloFlo's bad yields and poor execution on 32nm, causing delays in Llano and then Bulldozer.

IMO, AMD's problems are mostly a result of p!ss-poor management decisions by Hector Ruiz, who incidentally nearly killed Motorola before he came to AMD. So he's almost 2 for 2 as company-killing CEO..

Thanks, Hector!