AMD setting itself up for a fall

[priyajeet]

<A HREF="http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=18733" target="_new">http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=18733</A>

<i> :tongue: <font color=blue>I don't suffer from insanity.</font color=blue><font color=red> I enjoy every minute of it.</font color=red> :tongue: </i>
<b>He who laughs last thinks slowest!</b>

 

[Ned_Flanders]

interesting artical

_______________________
"In the US and A there are many jobs. For Men: Accountant, Life Guard, and Sportsman. For Women...Prostitute"

 

[El_Jefe_77]

Yeah, AMD's website is crap, and it masks everything, especially hard to figure out what the 3200 means and compare them.
Amd is 1/6 the revenue and I doubt they want to be 2x the revenue of intel. You just cant have so few employees and expect to out produce intel. Its like saying the man with 1 billion dollars really needs 4 billion more. people may be greedy but it doesnt work that way in reality.
I disagree with amd needing a 3 ghz chip. That's kinda stupid. It needs the next build of dual core first, it needs more intelligent technology before intel. it doesnt need a stupid mhz increase.
And how will amd fall at all? think its going to go out of business? its pepsi coke, none ever go out of business, they own YOU and tell YOU what to do. thats always stable.

 

[wolverinero79]

Like Enron and Worldcom and Kmart.

I'm just your average habitual smiler =D

 

[Crashman]

Given CURRENT technology AMD has to release a much faster chip in GHz to provide it a much higher PR number, in order to get any kind of recognition as an industry leader. So the 3GHz suggestion wasn't bad given CURRENT tech.

But I'll go with you on the dual-core solution as well. If AMD were to release a 2.4GHz dual-core soon it would walk all over Intel and still get the recognition.

Personally I'd like to see a dual-core with dual single-channel memory controllers. That way the 2 current channels used for dual-channel could each be dedicated to 1 CPU, making board production cheap and easy. After all, AMD doesn't seem to show much of a performance increase with Dual Channel on their single cores, but giving each core it's own channel could keep both operating at peak efficiency.

And if AMD really DID need more bandwidth they could always move their Dual core to DDR2 667.

<font color=blue>Only a place as big as the internet could be home to a hero as big as Crashman!</font color=blue>
<font color=red>Only a place as big as the internet could be home to an ego as large as Crashman's!</font color=red>

 

[endyen]

I dont get it though. Does anyone think Amd is in a position to make more processors? Does anyone think that Intel couldn't back someone like via to take control of Amd? Does anyone think that Intel would let Amd become the primier processor producer, without firing a shot?
I wonder how many nusance law suites intel would have to back, before Amd was in serious trouble?
Amd is playing thier hand the only way they can, and they are playing those cards tight to thier chest. Anyone who cant see that, aint looking.

 

[Crashman]

What you just said reminded me of around 4 years ago when AMD appologized for making faster processors than Intel and said they'd never do it again.

Actually I paraphrased that of course. At the time, Intel was blaming them for the failed economy, saying that AMD's price war had cut both companies profitability (below 0 for many processors), and that AMD pushing the envelope on performance had caused a glut in the market (so many high speed computers were produced that people wouldn't be upgrading for years). The lower profitability had investors threatening to sue again, so AMD said they'd back off the top, raise the prices on the bottom, and focus toward mainstream processors where most of the sales and profits came from. And so they did back off the top for a short while, and haven't tried to overtake the industry since.

According to Intel, AMD caused the recession. According to MS, their XP release is fixing it (by forcing upgrades).

<font color=blue>Only a place as big as the internet could be home to a hero as big as Crashman!</font color=blue>
<font color=red>Only a place as big as the internet could be home to an ego as large as Crashman's!</font color=red>

 

[darko21]

Yes I see that article as out of touch and lacking forsight. There can always be <A HREF="http://www.overclockers.com/articles1112/index.asp" target="_new"> rebuttals</A> this guys journalism seems more knowlegable on the situation at hand. Can't say I agree entirley with the <A HREF="http://www.overclockers.com/articles1112/index02.asp" target="_new"> 2nd page</A> but a valid opinion non the less.

If I glanced at a spilt box of tooth picks on the floor, could I tell you how many are in the pile. Not a chance, But then again I don't have to buy my underware at Kmart.

 

[bjpatrick]

If you people didn't realized this fact. Smaller companies usually make better product.

Who the hell was Oracle ten years ago?
Who the hell was People Soft ten years ago?

AMD continues to win market share. They are already an established corporation that is only getting bigger. With the contracts with Sun, HP, and possibly Apple. Their market share is only going to increase.

Like Microsoft is scared of Linux. Intel is scared of AMD.

Little I.T. histroy. Who was the biggest desktop manufactor before Microsoft and why did MS win the war.

AMD does need to market their products better and that is just about it.

<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by bjpatrick on 09/30/04 12:42 PM.</EM></FONT></P>

 

[darko21]

Little I.T. histroy. Who was the biggest desktop manufactor before Microsoft and why did MS win the war.


I'd guess Apple. I think M$ beat apple cause they used openness and apple was strictly apple like a sony thing. IBM made microsoft great and M$ in turn made intel great. Inorder to grow these companies like controlling more and more of the industry and can later backfire.

If I glanced at a spilt box of tooth picks on the floor, could I tell you how many are in the pile. Not a chance, But then again I don't have to buy my underware at Kmart.

 

[hellcatjr]

This topic is something of mute, thats been talked about on many forums pre this thread.

I mean of course AMD is only going to get bigger, if this was not the truth, then they would of been gone long ago.

See, as of right now from my own view, I see intel having a much more sound plan in the production an marketing area that AMD is very much lacking in.

I mean the issue of a company being the first to do something, doesn't really mean it makes that company the most popular, or sought after for that matter.

I mean AMD became big because of the fact that it was producing performance pushing CPU's for cheap dollar price tags. Now, keeping that thought in mind, can you say the same for AMD now as it was then?

Most likely no, the current chipset issue IS a huge reason to complain. People like variety, people like knowing they have a choice. An the common consumer uses this to their advantage.

I mean I read both of those articles, an although yes, I suppose proving (might I add obvious things that've been known for a while now.) that AMD is coming up short on ends.
Its just the fact that those articles had so much opinion based thoughts in it, the statistics seemed way to over shadowed to make me go, wow this really is a issue.

An like the one article had stated about needing to drop a faster CPU speed for AMD, i sierously could not agree more. When your looking into buying something almost anything with a higher number means better... People see "3200GHZ INSIDE!" an instantly associate it with the words better. If this wasn't true, then why would the video game market abuse the whole *(256MB ON BOARD!!)*. I mean really, marketing wins the war.

Appeal wins the war.I honestly think mcdonalds food tastes like crap, but its undoubtly still one of the highest ranked fast food resturants. If AMD can't show big numbers, people don't want it.

If AMD can't provide variety, then they will surely be hurt more in the "CPU crown run".




<A HREF="http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k1=8149895" target="_new">Veni, vidi, vici."</A>
<font color=red>"Alea Iacta Est"</font color=red>

 

[DonnieDarko]

If AMD can't show big numbers, people don't want it.

.....that is why they have the power rating system, so people can see what it's comparable too.......

Watch out for the <b><font color=red>bloody</font color=red></b> Fanboys!

AMD64 2800+ :: MSI Neo-Fis2r :: 1024mb Kingmax ddr400 :: Sapphire 9800pro 128mb :: 10K WD Raptor

Addicted, finally.

 

[hellcatjr]

....ugh really? Geez thanks for the explination ... no I had already known that, was more so speaking on the fact of pure mhz/ghz...

<A HREF="http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k1=8149895" target="_new">Veni, vidi, vici."</A>
<font color=red>"Alea Iacta Est"</font color=red>