AMD Reports Quarterly Earnings for Q2 2011

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Status
Not open for further replies.
AMD still going the wrong direction. I just sold a AMD Fusion based small Notebook with a E350 APU. Sure it had good graphic performance but what it gained in graphics it lost in CPU performance. Its like getting a bionic leg and still missing the other leg? Not many are being fooled by AMD's remaining its lineup to Fusion. Its sounds catchy but says nothing about how that helps the user? I don't see that AMD is really advancing and basically has just gone to combining chips (graphics and CPU) into one which has lowed the power consumption. But really has not helped either do better against Intel in real world use.
 
The future is low power cpu/gpu and AMD trumps Intel by far in GPU. Expect cpu/gpu/arm on some upcoming AMD chips. This is the right direction. The right direction is not taking on Intel high end cpu's, but take it to them in the emerging markets, smartphones, pda's, tablets, etc.
Desktop is dying fast.
 
Actually, the Llanos are perfect for real world use. The majority of PC's owners mostly use their systems to browse the web, email, word processing, tasks that really don't need a high end CPU. They do not play the newest games at the highest settings or convert video files 24/7. It's a decent CPU with the best integrated GPU on the market right now. Considering you can now buy a $400 to 500 computer (desktop or laptop) that can double as a light gaming system or a great HTPC, I say AMD is going in the right direction. Personally, for my next laptop I'm looking at the Llano's for all I do is word processing, watch online videos, and play mp3's. You can't get more real world usage than that.
 
For the masses, AMD is going all in the right direction. I have to hope that Bulldozer is the success it's hyped up to be so that Trinity can be all that it's hyped up to be. Plus, it's good for competition and that's something sorely needed these days.

My next laptop will probably have trinity in it, which is supposed to be 50% faster than Llano, and if I ever getting around to building a HTPC it will have the non-mobile version.
 
jescott418: This isn't 1995, back when everyone could use a faster computer. Here's how it breaks down:

50% of users could get by fine with an e350 and not notice the "slow CPU"
90% of users could get by fine with Llano and not notice the "slow CPU" or "slow GPU"
5% of users actually need a powerful discrete GPU to do their uber-gaming
5% of users need epic amounts of CPU power for intensive rendering tasks


It's the same Intel fanboys who claim that Sandy Bridge supposedly beating Phenom II by 10-20% in real life is actually noticeable, are the same ones who claim Llano's GPU beating SB by 100-200% isn't noticeable.

The bottom line: Llano is capable of doing things SB is not, SB is not capable of doing anything Llano isn't. Yet the paid Introlls like Anand state that Llano has "too much GPU", and SB is "balanced".
 
Llano is the perfect chip for the vast majority of my customers needs, just quoted up a HTPC with HVR 4400 tuned card, A8 and Asus board, probably the best product to Come from AMD yet, they should gain share from this for sure.
 
[citation][nom]GeekApproved[/nom]Desktop is dying fast.[/citation]

My Core i7 rig disagrees. It doesn't think that Llano and lower power CPUs/GPUs can be better than it.

When these low power chips will be enough to play the latest games while converting videos and installing programs on the background, I'll buy them. Until then, I'll only build low-power boards based PCs as part of my job and for fun. Thinking of getting a solid mini-ITX or micro-ATX build just to play around with it... no real use whatsoever in the low-power stuff.

[citation][nom]llano_buyer[/nom]The bottom line: Llano is capable of doing things SB is not, SB is not capable of doing anything Llano isn't. Yet the paid Introlls like Anand state that Llano has "too much GPU", and SB is "balanced".[/citation]

Troll much? Onboard GPUs are USELESS. For office tasks, HD video and YouTube the Intel 945G onboard graphics were more than enough (those who can't watch HD with that just don't know how to setup the codecs, I guarantee that). Adding GPUs into CPUs is just a marketing trick. 90% of the people who use Sandy Bridge (except i3) don't use its internal GPU and get dedicated graphics. I don't care whether Llano's GPU is better than SB's, I've got a GTX 560 Ti. If I ever buy I computer that is NOT meant for gaming, I won't care what kind of IGP it has, because I know ALL modern IGPs can do office, HD and so on.

And don't tell me that 90% of the users won't notice a slow CPU... part of my job is to help keep many networks in our town running, and many of them are based on Linux... Atoms and other "low-power" stuff really suffers there, especially on thin clients. Not saying that they should use i7-990X or i5-2500K there to improve their performance, but I usually talk people out of getting low-power boards and convince them to get something like Core 2 Duo or Core i3, even for office purposes (not just Linux-based).

And don't get me wrong, I like AMD... their graphics kick some serious ass and they were my favorite back in the days when they kicked Intel's Pentium 4, but I feel like they ARE taking a wrong route here. If at all, they should go for SERIOUS low-power, meaning phones/tablets/netbooks. However, low-power in desktop? I laugh at this.

Actually, might be useful if you're running a lot of computers and you're very limited on electricity - like power cuts all the time, and a battery backup room that can only supply electricity for a few hours; then low-power stuff will last longer. But where do you find that, except Asia? 😀
 
I'm in agreement with those that think Bobcat is a promising technology, but AMD screwed up by making the GPU in it too strong. It's probably a power play by a weakling, and will not work. Obviously, they are trying to get software developers to see the unused resources of the GPU, and start using them for computing. If this happened, AMD would benefit greatly, but it is a Catch-22, since they aren't big enough to do it. It's another 3D Now!.

They should halve the GPU, and save some money. Too weak a CPU, and too poor memory for that GPU. Halve it, and you'll have a nice balance that will cost less and use less power, and do what 95% of the people need it to do. Getting a new programming model is beyond AMD's ability.
 
[citation][nom]amk-aka-phantom[/nom]My Core i7 rig disagrees. It doesn't think that Llano and lower power CPUs/GPUs can be better than it. When these low power chips will be enough to play the latest games while converting videos and installing programs on the background, I'll buy them. Until then, I'll only build low-power boards based PCs as part of my job and for fun. Thinking of getting a solid mini-ITX or micro-ATX build just to play around with it... no real use whatsoever in the low-power stuff.Troll much? Onboard GPUs are USELESS. For office tasks, HD video and YouTube the Intel 945G onboard graphics were more than enough (those who can't watch HD with that just don't know how to setup the codecs, I guarantee that). Adding GPUs into CPUs is just a marketing trick. 90% of the people who use Sandy Bridge (except i3) don't use its internal GPU and get dedicated graphics. I don't care whether Llano's GPU is better than SB's, I've got a GTX 560 Ti. If I ever buy I computer that is NOT meant for gaming, I won't care what kind of IGP it has, because I know ALL modern IGPs can do office, HD and so on.And don't tell me that 90% of the users won't notice a slow CPU... part of my job is to help keep many networks in our town running, and many of them are based on Linux... Atoms and other "low-power" stuff really suffers there, especially on thin clients. Not saying that they should use i7-990X or i5-2500K there to improve their performance, but I usually talk people out of getting low-power boards and convince them to get something like Core 2 Duo or Core i3, even for office purposes (not just Linux-based).And don't get me wrong, I like AMD... their graphics kick some serious ass and they were my favorite back in the days when they kicked Intel's Pentium 4, but I feel like they ARE taking a wrong route here. If at all, they should go for SERIOUS low-power, meaning phones/tablets/netbooks. However, low-power in desktop? I laugh at this.Actually, might be useful if you're running a lot of computers and you're very limited on electricity - like power cuts all the time, and a battery backup room that can only supply electricity for a few hours; then low-power stuff will last longer. But where do you find that, except Asia?[/citation]

You must realize you don't belong to the group of average consumers.

I think you are be wrong, but AMD still might lose because people don't actually know what they need. AMD's APUs are much more balanced when it comes to an average consumer's needs. Plus, removing a discrete GPU from a laptop helps improve a system's lifespan and decrease power/heat. At my workplace (I'm a software engineer), the only time my system sporting a first generation i7 even uses any of it's processing power is when I'm compiling large projects. I've tried to install some games on it (Intel 3000 graphics) and the performance is very bad and the fan sounds like I'm trying to bury it underground.

Though I have not actually used a system sporting an A6/A8 APU, I'd imagine they should rock the marketplace when comparing user experiences between systems without a discrete graphics card.

And seriously low power would mean competing with ARM, who I can tell you makes some very slick microprocessors (what I do most of my work on)
 
I think people here are forgetting Llanos intended audience. The Llano CPUs are strong at their price point, they are NOT for pc enthusiasts, thats what bulldozer is for. Overall for budget pcs and laptops the LLano is by far the most balanced, for non enthusiasts. Bulldozer will obviously be more powerful and if it isnt good enough for sandy bridge, its still good enough in its own right, because itll undoubtably be a powerful enough CPU and have good graphics on 1 chip. And itll only get better as new generations come, while intel struggles with their intel graphics.
 
IMO Llano is the right direction, especially for laptops. Recently I've been looking into laptops and I think Trinity would be my best bet. The graphics on the Llano chips are already pretty solid and can play games decently, if it was coupled with a BD chip (Trinity) it'd be perfect for laptop use. Hopefully they still keep that low power usage though.
 
There will be a point where a CPU will be too powerful for it current applications even for a few years later. GPU is the future, people want t watch video's, watch movies, and play games on the go with low power and greater quality. AMD is smart that it doesn't need to make a CPU that cost $1K while they can make one the year later for only $300 that kicks it's but. Hell I still have an AMD X2 core running at only 2GHZ and plays all new games with a ATI5670 with not a hiccup. Guys you don't need to spend all that money when you won't even realize the gain. STUPID!!!!!!!!!
 
My Core i7 rig disagrees. It doesn't think that Llano and lower power CPUs/GPUs can be better than it.

When these low power chips will be enough to play the latest games while converting videos and installing programs on the background, I'll buy them. Until then, I'll only build low-power boards based PCs as part of my job and for fun. Thinking of getting a solid mini-ITX or micro-ATX build just to play around with it... no real use whatsoever in the low-power stuff.
Click to expand...

im 2014, when electricity cost more than a gallon of unobtainium, u will be realize how foolish u have been
 
Firing Dirk was still stupid. AMD should ease fusion into tablet territory but they shouldn't focus on that low margin market till they take care of their main markets. Putting out Bulldozer and optimizing the Fusion technology should take priority. Improved GPU and CPU performance as well as enhanced power management can then make their way down to tablet parts, but right now AMD has alot of room to grow in the CPU and GPU market by of course eating competitors shares.
 
Well AMD should know that sears mexico is asking 680.765 USD for an HP Netbook with APU E-350 1.6Ghz and that's not cheap at all, and that's not even close to 400usd that amd had claimed. I had the intention to buy one but after seeing the price well I just won't buy that.
 


Cool story bro. Not in my country.

Hell I still have an AMD X2 core running at only 2GHZ and plays all new games with a ATI5670 with not a hiccup. Guys you don't need to spend all that money when you won't even realize the gain. STUPID!!!!!!!!!
Click to expand...

Like hell. What are you playing at, 1024x768? =) And what do you consider "latest games"? Though, with all the console ports out there I ALMOST believe you. But still, I suggest you go try out Crysis 2 DX11 for the fun of it... let's see what kind of "hiccup" your PC gets then 😉

Back to topic: I realize there's a market for these "low-power" solutions, but there're so much old computers out there which will still kill any office/video task that I consider buying a new board for that a waste... Most of these machines just need a new cabinet and an HDD, and you're set. But if you want new stuff, go for Sandy Bridge micro-ATX, they're pretty cool =) Or if you're so stubborn that you want low power no matter what, get a netbook - at least then low power finally becomes an advantage. Low-power desktop = :fou:
 
Troll much? Onboard GPUs are USELESS. For office tasks, HD video and YouTube the Intel 945G onboard graphics were more than enough (those who can't watch HD with that just don't know how to setup the codecs, I guarantee that).
Click to expand...
who are you kidding? the 945G is as crappy as hell. you can't run EVERY HD videos in it without worrying "o please let this run smooth HD please!". installed the lightest codec that i use in my brother's crappy old skool laptop and it won't even run some of my videos without being a ppt.

anyway, llano is doing great but we are expecting AMD to also deliver and compete in the mid/high end CPU brute power so we can expect good prices in the market. IMO, AMD's currently released products are only good for the mobile department and NOT in desktop (well except for HTPC use).
 
[citation][nom]megamanx00[/nom]Firing Dirk was still stupid. AMD should ease fusion into tablet territory but they shouldn't focus on that low margin market till they take care of their main markets. Putting out Bulldozer and optimizing the Fusion technology should take priority. Improved GPU and CPU performance as well as enhanced power management can then make their way down to tablet parts, but right now AMD has alot of room to grow in the CPU and GPU market by of course eating competitors shares.[/citation]

I agree. Dirk was trying to get AMDs main markest into the green, mainly server and DT where it matters most. In fact server is much more important than UMID considering they can ask for well over $1K for a good CPU there.

But the shareholders thought he should have focused on the UMID market and honestly, if they focus too much on the wrong market it will bite them in the ass.

[citation][nom]_Pez_[/nom]Well AMD should know that sears mexico is asking 680.765 USD for an HP Netbook with APU E-350 1.6Ghz and that's not cheap at all, and that's not even close to 400usd that amd had claimed. I had the intention to buy one but after seeing the price well I just won't buy that.[/citation]

Thats pretty pricey considering most Atom based Netbooks go for $200-$300. They must be trying to make money or just rip people off.
 
Liano and bulldozer is a such a compelling product for mass market boxes, Dell/HP/Acer/etc.. can totally get rid of the PCIE/PCI slot, GPU is built into the processor, PCI can be displaced by USB2/3. This translates into a cheaper and smaller system. Also they can further economize the PSU since the only expansion is additional hard drives which is ~10w a piece.

The real question is how long can a big fish like apple resist temptation from AMD. If AMD can get apple onboard, that might be doubling AMD's market share overnight.
 
[citation][nom]greghome[/nom]Problem with Llano isn't CPU, it's just missing high speed RAM to exploit it's full potential. * in most system configs*[/citation]That's not a Llano problem at all! That's a system builder/OEM problem. You can't blame AMD for the OEMs cheaping out on memory. :/
 
[citation][nom]carlhenry[/nom]who are you kidding? the 945G is as crappy as hell. you can't run EVERY HD videos in it without worrying "o please let this run smooth HD please!". installed the lightest codec that i use in my brother's crappy old skool laptop and it won't even run some of my videos without being a ppt.[/citation]Agreed. My father's previous desktop had a 945G and it was utter trash, even when it was new.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom