AMD Selling More CPUs, Posts Record Quarter Too

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Status
Not open for further replies.
Way to go AMD! Hopefully you'll start hauling out some new things soon, can't wait to see how Fusion works out. If it's good I'll probably buy a new laptop with that just to have something somewhat decent rather than Intel's @@#$@#$ graphics chipset, seriously I don't understand why they bothered doing this when their graphics are worse or perhaps on par with the 3k series from AMD /cringe

Lets watch the language please mate.
 
While having vastly superior products, all AMD manages is holding one third of the market. We've seen it in CPU market, now we are seeing it in graphic card market.

So sad...
 
Intel dominates the enthusiast desktop PC market and almost all the laptop and netbook market operating with high profit margins due to the lack of more powerful CPUs from AMD. Also Intel sells a lot of their overpriced mid and lower-segment CPUS due to their marketing network and rebate.

AMD has all the performance/cost sweet spots in mid and lower sections of desktop CPUS and sells well on these.

So basically we have 2 companies that for the last year are operating in different niches, no wonder they both maximized their profits since their opposing fronts do not overlap...

In order for profits for both companies to drop and prices get better for us we need a full scale war from these companies....
 
[citation][nom]Humans think[/nom]Intel dominates the enthusiast desktop PC market and almost all the laptop and netbook market operating with high profit margins due to the lack of more powerful CPUs from AMD. Also Intel sells a lot of their overpriced mid and lower-segment CPUS due to their marketing network and rebate.AMD has all the performance/cost sweet spots in mid and lower sections of desktop CPUS and sells well on these.So basically we have 2 companies that for the last year are operating in different niches, no wonder they both maximized their profits since their opposing fronts do not overlap...In order for profits for both companies to drop and prices get better for us we need a full scale war from these companies....[/citation]

True, but when AMD offered much much better products during the A64 days, Intel still dominated by far. Few people bought AMD back then. So no, Intel isn't selling expensive products due to the lack of competition, they're doing it because they can and people will still buy from them. Sad but true...
 
During the A64 days AMD had it all going right and the small enthusist market would buy AMD. Now that Intel has the fastest processors the small enthusist market is looking to them. The larger OEM market on the other hand is very slow to change and since Intel had always been their provider they will likely remain the provided for quite sometime. As the article states AMD just signed on Sony which is a step in the right direction. As for ATI side of AMD, I believe that this round ATI has a better product with the 5xxx then NVidia has with the 4XX. Even if Nvidia is slightly faster, the extra heat and higher power requirements really puts a damper on a possibly great product from NVidia.
 
[citation][nom]Humans think[/nom]Intel dominates the enthusiast desktop PC market and almost all the laptop and netbook market operating with high profit margins due to the lack of more powerful CPUs from AMD. Also Intel sells a lot of their overpriced mid and lower-segment CPUS due to their marketing network and rebate.AMD has all the performance/cost sweet spots in mid and lower sections of desktop CPUS and sells well on these.So basically we have 2 companies that for the last year are operating in different niches, no wonder they both maximized their profits since their opposing fronts do not overlap...In order for profits for both companies to drop and prices get better for us we need a full scale war from these companies....[/citation]

Maximized their profits? Say no to drugs!

Intel made massive profits, AMD is selling huge processors for low costs because their designs suck. It sounds like they lost money on desktop CPUs, since they mentioned mobile, and we all know ATI has bee
carrying them.

Intel is maximizing profits, AMD is struggling to survive.

I don't think anyone believes AMD can match Intel in processor design anymore, but even if they close the gap that can have a big impact on them. ATI is a huge advantage for them, that with a good processor, can be leveraged even more.

I sure hope Bulldozer is good. Remember the last time AMD was supposed to catch up with Intel (Barcelona)? It didn't quite work out that way. Intel has too big of an advantage in manufacturing for AMD to keep creating badly designed processors.
 
AMD < Intel
ATI > Nvidia

That`s the way it is. AMD isn`t really trying to compete on the high end market, but they have the best price/performance ratio. You can get a 30% faster CPU from Intel, but you would have to pay 2 to 4 times more for that CPU.

Talking about ATI... they are just owning the graphics card market right now. The 480 is only a little bit slower than the 5970, and costs less too, but the 480 requires more power and generates higher heat.
 
Don't forget about AMD's incredible 12 core opteron processors. In Linux they absolutely trounce more expensive Xeons in the world of rendering, oh yea and theyre lower power... Im sure theyre are selling decent.
 
fourzeronine
Don't forget about AMD's incredible 12 core opteron processors. In Linux they absolutely trounce more expensive Xeons in the world of rendering, oh yea and theyre lower power... Im sure theyre are selling decent.
-----------------
That's probably the most on point comment here. Server market has been helping them greatly. Enthusiast market is tiny and AMD has long given up on that. AT first people really punished them for it, but now folk are catching on that they don't need a $1000 CPU... they need a $1000 computer.
There is also the fact that Intel is far more diversified then AMD, so there are more revenue streams that go into their numbers. AMD should start looking at that if Bulldozer is received well.

"The views expressed here are mine and do not reflect the official opinion of my employer or the organization through which the Internet was accessed."
 
Intel CPU offerings are not alot faster then AMD's, sorry to burst you bubble. Did I read 30%? In your dreams, my overclocked X3 benches right with i5's and i7's. Intel's CPU's are over-rated.
 
It is the repayment of the seniors notes that is pounding their finances ... take a read.

The graphics subdivision did very well, but was also slightly constrained by the TSMC 40nm yeilds ... they could have pumped out a lot more (and sold) lower end DX11 parts.

TSMC have announced a major upgrade to their Fab15 facility.

The server end of the company should have done better but Server OEM's were slow to respond with designs to accomodate the new products.

The competition is now coming strong from Intel with their i3 and i5 parts having low end graphics ... thats the new front line of the war they need to address with Fusion ... alas delayed for a couple more months. When it arrives it will trounce Intels offerings at least in the graphics performance area.

AMD will make further announcements regarding Bulldozer and Fusion at the August Hot Chips Event.

Bulldozer taped out a while back in Q2 but was announced a couple of days ago.

AMD are currently sampling silicon for both the Bobcat and Bulldozer offerings.

This much I found from reading 12 recent arrticles.
 
[citation][nom]amstech[/nom]Intel CPU offerings are not alot faster then AMD's, sorry to burst you bubble. Did I read 30%? In your dreams, my overclocked X3 benches right with i5's and i7's. Intel's CPU's are over-rated.[/citation]

My ancient Q6600 holds its own against modern AMD's, and your comparing a heavily overclocked AMD vs a stock Intel - nice one.
 
[citation][nom]lauxenburg[/nom]People are just afraid to buy AMD....and I am not sure why.[/citation]

Thank there shoddy past platforms - thanks to crappy via, sis and nvidia chipsets but atlast with there own chipsets there starting to change that.

It certainly changed my "fast but perhaps unstable" thoughts (from the K7 days) about AMD (well, more the overall setup), to the now thinking even there low end offerings with a board featuring an ATi/AMD chipset are still more capable overall then an Intel offering (come on, with ATi video onboard, crappy systems can even play games FFS).

Nice work AMD :)

AMD still needs to dust off the old K7 design, scale it down to 45nm and underclocked it to compete with the Atom... with a better ATi chipset and more flexible platform (2+ ram slots, pcie 16x etc) they could have Intel for breakfast.
 
[citation][nom]kartu[/nom]While having vastly superior products, all AMD manages is holding one third of the market. We've seen it in CPU market, now we are seeing it in graphic card market.So sad...[/citation]
vastly superior? compared to what?
 
Here is a deal with AMD.

CPU line is a joke compared to Intel, and i don't think that any review sites can show that right. I have being using i7 i920 now i am on i7 6 core and i did play with quad and six core AMD counterpart, no AMD cpu is match to Intel in any aspect of work and gaming. Someone says that his overclocked X3 runs as i5 and i7, well buddy i have a news for you overclocked i7 i920 is put that difference back. You know you can overclock i7 CPUs way more then AMD you have!
Speaking of AMD/ATI cards, good cards on paper but absolutely crap because of drivers. CCC 10.4 is only good set for Crossfire setup, everything else sucks pretty much. How sad is that. I did buy HD5870 Crossfire setup and it is the worst purchase i did ever mae and can't wait to get to rid of that crap.
 
[citation][nom]reynod[/nom]It is the repayment of the seniors notes that is pounding their finances ... take a read.The graphics subdivision did very well, but was also slightly constrained by the TSMC 40nm yeilds ... they could have pumped out a lot more (and sold) lower end DX11 parts.TSMC have announced a major upgrade to their Fab15 facility.The server end of the company should have done better but Server OEM's were slow to respond with designs to accomodate the new products.The competition is now coming strong from Intel with their i3 and i5 parts having low end graphics ... thats the new front line of the war they need to address with Fusion ... alas delayed for a couple more months. When it arrives it will trounce Intels offerings at least in the graphics performance area.AMD will make further announcements regarding Bulldozer and Fusion at the August Hot Chips Event.Bulldozer taped out a while back in Q2 but was announced a couple of days ago.AMD are currently sampling silicon for both the Bobcat and Bulldozer offerings.This much I found from reading 12 recent arrticles.[/citation]

Yeah, I read the same info. Some estimates put AMD's server marketshare loss at 1-2% (think they were around 10% for Q1 2010). Partly because of the server OEMs slow to ramp but also due to the new Westmere Xeons and Nehalem EP servers, despite the latter being more expensive.

Also looks like corporations upgrading their workstations now that the recession looks like it's ending, tend to favor Intel's lineup since integrated graphics are just fine for spreadsheets & word processing.
 
lauxenburg :
People are just afraid to buy AMD....and I am not sure why.

bad habits die hard, in the past if OEMs weren't pushing intel chips they were in for a whole lot of financial hurt
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom