A Simi-custom APU and third party CPUs, A custom x86 APU with better than Haswell graphics may be the way to get into Apple laptops. hybrid ARM CPUs with on chip AMD GPUs for tablets! AMD needs to work on developing a very low power x86 many core server chip to compete with the new Intel Atom line. The entire cpu fabrication industry needs to compete with Intel's process lead, or it is game over.
-
We tested the Nvidia App performance problems — games can run up to 15 percent slower with the app
- Status
livebriand
Distinguished
- Apr 18, 2011
- 1,004
- 0
- 19,290
I am not looking forward to a monopoly (in the x86 market anyway)... At least my laptop has an AMD APU. Why didn't they just improve on the Phenom II's architecture?
- Jul 16, 2009
- 4,821
- 0
- 22,780
The ATI graphics line is holding the company afloat, if they demerged again they could save at least ATI but would sign AMDs death warrant
This is really bad news this is a worse case for consumers. AMD has pretty much said Intel has free reign on the desktop CPU market for the time being.
The icing on the cake is the slowing desktop sales from OEM's. I got a feeling cpu prices are about to skyrocket.
The icing on the cake is the slowing desktop sales from OEM's. I got a feeling cpu prices are about to skyrocket.
- Jul 16, 2009
- 4,821
- 0
- 22,780
[citation][nom]livebriand[/nom]Why didn't they just improve on the Phenom II's architecture?[/citation]
Because Intel are just too far ahead they have to change the nature of the battle, the only reason Athlon64 chips took the performance crown over P4's was Intel dropped the ball and AMD took advantage, Intel won't make the same mistake again and would rather keep improving die size than try to do another MHz race
...
AMD can take the performance crown, but only if they spend billions they don't have on R&D they can't afford for an enthusiast market that doesn't produce enough revenue, the smart money is in the mass-market, mid-range, if they make good market share back maybe they can get back to the nuclear arms race but it could take 10 years or more
Because Intel are just too far ahead they have to change the nature of the battle, the only reason Athlon64 chips took the performance crown over P4's was Intel dropped the ball and AMD took advantage, Intel won't make the same mistake again and would rather keep improving die size than try to do another MHz race
...
AMD can take the performance crown, but only if they spend billions they don't have on R&D they can't afford for an enthusiast market that doesn't produce enough revenue, the smart money is in the mass-market, mid-range, if they make good market share back maybe they can get back to the nuclear arms race but it could take 10 years or more
[citation][nom]back_by_demand[/nom]The ATI graphics line is holding the company afloat, if they demerged again they could save at least ATI but would sign AMDs death warrant[/citation]
In the same sense though, It would be a shame if ATI went under if AMD went down swinging too hard. I'd rather see at least one of these companies make it rather than both end up in a Chapter 11 or even worse: chapter 7 bankruptcy. I sure hope Read knows what he's doing, I cannot agree with really anything I've seen him do so far from a consumer point of view.
In the same sense though, It would be a shame if ATI went under if AMD went down swinging too hard. I'd rather see at least one of these companies make it rather than both end up in a Chapter 11 or even worse: chapter 7 bankruptcy. I sure hope Read knows what he's doing, I cannot agree with really anything I've seen him do so far from a consumer point of view.
Ragnar-Kon
Distinguished
- Apr 13, 2010
- 517
- 0
- 18,990
[citation][nom]livebriand[/nom]I am not looking forward to a monopoly (in the x86 market anyway)... At least my laptop has an AMD APU. Why didn't they just improve on the Phenom II's architecture?[/citation]
They probably felt that designing a new microarchitecture from the ground-up would put them in a better position in the market in the long-run. The new FX chips are basically slightly modified versions of the Bulldozer Opteron chips, and the new APU chips are also using a Bulldozer-based architecture. So it is clear they wanted the 15h family across their entire CPU/APU lineup.
Plus one of the reasons why AMD was ahead during the Athlon 64 days was because Intel tried sticking with NetBurst (Pentium 4) for WAY to long. AMD was probably trying to avoid doing the same mistake.
I think given enough time and money AMD could really make the 15h family shine, probably even compete with Intel's upper-end offerings. The problem is... they are running out of both time and money.
They probably felt that designing a new microarchitecture from the ground-up would put them in a better position in the market in the long-run. The new FX chips are basically slightly modified versions of the Bulldozer Opteron chips, and the new APU chips are also using a Bulldozer-based architecture. So it is clear they wanted the 15h family across their entire CPU/APU lineup.
Plus one of the reasons why AMD was ahead during the Athlon 64 days was because Intel tried sticking with NetBurst (Pentium 4) for WAY to long. AMD was probably trying to avoid doing the same mistake.
I think given enough time and money AMD could really make the 15h family shine, probably even compete with Intel's upper-end offerings. The problem is... they are running out of both time and money.
[citation][nom]Ragnar-Kon[/nom]I think given enough time and money AMD could really make the 15h family shine, probably even compete with Intel's upper-end offerings. The problem is... they are running out of both time and money.[/citation]How? So far, it seems we're dealing with an architectural problem on the AMD side :/ - we've got worse performance per GHz, worse power consumption per performance unit, worse hyperthreading (call it what you want) performance, and price point that simply isn't compelling enough.
Now, if AMD could... say, significantly reduce power consumption (but at a lower total performance unit) while at a competitive price... or really crank up performance (but at a higher wattage)... or offer something sorta comparable in both areas at a lower price... or do just something to (positively) differentiate themselves from Intel, things would be interesting. But that's just not where we are right now.
Apart from substantially better integrated GPU performance, which only matters in the budget segment, I fail to see a trumph card on AMD's hands - and considering that Intel has mainly beeing doing GPU development in-house rather than buying up major players, they're advancing way too rapidly for comfort in that field. If they extinguish AMD, we might be back to the über-sucky "advancement" of the HD2xxx levels.
[citation][nom]hasten[/nom]Common practice in business - defensive strategy. Charge less when a main competitor is vulnerable, especially if you hold the differentiating feature. It's unfortunate but very effective.[/citation]Yup, even if it means profit losses, or even minor losses. When the competitor is drenched and bankrupt, turn on the consumer thumbscrews... and I'm not looking forward to that.
So, anyway - I'm glad I bought my new workstation and server at the end of 2012. We might be seeing rather disagreeable prices in the next few years, if Apple and Microsoft have their way :-/
Now, if AMD could... say, significantly reduce power consumption (but at a lower total performance unit) while at a competitive price... or really crank up performance (but at a higher wattage)... or offer something sorta comparable in both areas at a lower price... or do just something to (positively) differentiate themselves from Intel, things would be interesting. But that's just not where we are right now.
Apart from substantially better integrated GPU performance, which only matters in the budget segment, I fail to see a trumph card on AMD's hands - and considering that Intel has mainly beeing doing GPU development in-house rather than buying up major players, they're advancing way too rapidly for comfort in that field. If they extinguish AMD, we might be back to the über-sucky "advancement" of the HD2xxx levels.
[citation][nom]hasten[/nom]Common practice in business - defensive strategy. Charge less when a main competitor is vulnerable, especially if you hold the differentiating feature. It's unfortunate but very effective.[/citation]Yup, even if it means profit losses, or even minor losses. When the competitor is drenched and bankrupt, turn on the consumer thumbscrews... and I'm not looking forward to that.
So, anyway - I'm glad I bought my new workstation and server at the end of 2012. We might be seeing rather disagreeable prices in the next few years, if Apple and Microsoft have their way :-/
fazers_on_stun
Splendid
- Aug 31, 2006
- 4,743
- 0
- 22,860
From the Q3 conference call transcript at http://seekingalpha.com/article/934141-advanced-micro-devices-management-discusses-q3-2012-results-earnings-call-transcript?page=2
So, a substantial shift away from desktop CPUs to APUs and cloud server, as well as custom APUs for things like gaming consoles.
It could just be me but I was disturbed that the 1737 saves the company a little over $109,000 per person per year.. hopefully it was highly paid people that contributed very little and AMD realized it and cut them off.
I think people are panicking for no reason. Rory just said something everyone's known all along. The money isn't in just PCs anymore. AMD needs to shift away from being just a CPU/GPU maker and they've taken a few steps in that direction (APUs, low power CPUs, possible ARM licenses). They'll still make the good stuff for the rest of us but the only way AMD will survive is to change with the market and differentiate themselves from Intel more.
Am I surprised? No. It's a result of bad marketing. I am sad to see AMD go this route, but again, not surprised.
The difference between Intel and AMD is that Intel, when confronted with losing the performance crown, set rigid goals and effectively lit a fire under their engineers' rear ends. AMD took the "We'll see where this goes. People are still buying our CPUs and supporting us, so we don't need to improve. We'll just send out vague benchmarks and hype our products."
Did it work? No. I've been in that discussion with too many people on these forums before, who defend AMD like a religion or something. Well, now the ship is sinking. This is not a sign of a healthy or successful company and despite the claims that the CPUs are "just as good" as Intel's stuff... which company is marching forward and which company is stuck in a rut?
Plain and simple, Phenom was a miserable failure that brought too little, too late, and never recovered from the bad publicity it received early on. Phenom II was quite an improvement, but again, by the time AMD's Core 2 "killer" was out we'd all already moved on to i5s or 17s. Then we have Bulldozer, which has quite obviously done little it was promised to do in terms of saving a sinking ship. Performance stinks, power consumption stinks, and honestly? It's pathetic that my mobile i7 destroys my hexacore AMD desktop system. I'm not happy as a consumer.
The only reasonable success AMD has had in recent times is the APU lineup, but those are only good for limited applications. Too little, too late, a dollar short.
The difference between Intel and AMD is that Intel, when confronted with losing the performance crown, set rigid goals and effectively lit a fire under their engineers' rear ends. AMD took the "We'll see where this goes. People are still buying our CPUs and supporting us, so we don't need to improve. We'll just send out vague benchmarks and hype our products."
Did it work? No. I've been in that discussion with too many people on these forums before, who defend AMD like a religion or something. Well, now the ship is sinking. This is not a sign of a healthy or successful company and despite the claims that the CPUs are "just as good" as Intel's stuff... which company is marching forward and which company is stuck in a rut?
Plain and simple, Phenom was a miserable failure that brought too little, too late, and never recovered from the bad publicity it received early on. Phenom II was quite an improvement, but again, by the time AMD's Core 2 "killer" was out we'd all already moved on to i5s or 17s. Then we have Bulldozer, which has quite obviously done little it was promised to do in terms of saving a sinking ship. Performance stinks, power consumption stinks, and honestly? It's pathetic that my mobile i7 destroys my hexacore AMD desktop system. I'm not happy as a consumer.
The only reasonable success AMD has had in recent times is the APU lineup, but those are only good for limited applications. Too little, too late, a dollar short.
Why not make a cpu that works inside a server, tablet and pc? In a pc just use more sockets like in servers and put a few in the case, in servers 100 or 1000 of those? Everyone goes home a winner. And what's up with that green AMD logo... it's like you are going to save nature with that cpu... make it orange or something ... Frankly the only reason I didn't buy a Bulldozer was that I saw a benchmark of half the single thread performance of a Sandy bridge and I still think the Sandy Bridge is 10 times to slow for heavy tasks, so why stop innovation like that? If Intel has a big market share you can steal all of that if you make a great product.
dalethepcman
Distinguished
- Jul 1, 2010
- 1,636
- 0
- 19,860
AMD really messed up the windows 8 launch. They should have kept working on their ultra low end apu's for tablets. Instead of something new and shiny, we get a re-branded C-50 apu. There is a reason no tablet vendors are using AMD chips. AMD hasn't made any advancements in 18 months in that market.
When the C-50 came out it smoked the competition, now 18 months later it is too far behind in CPU power, and on a level playing field in the video and energy consumption departments.
They were in a great position to really grab a hold of the market if they were able to produce a shrunk down scaled up lower power A or Z series APU, but the 45NM 5 watt chip just released is not enough. If they had gone to 22 or 28nm and done nothing else they should have been able to scale up clocks by 20-30% and still shaved 20-30% off the power which would have made a compelling reason for tablet vendors to use their product.
Video on par with i5, cpu/power on par with Atom. Win/win.
Instead we get bankruptcy.
This is a sad day.
When the C-50 came out it smoked the competition, now 18 months later it is too far behind in CPU power, and on a level playing field in the video and energy consumption departments.
They were in a great position to really grab a hold of the market if they were able to produce a shrunk down scaled up lower power A or Z series APU, but the 45NM 5 watt chip just released is not enough. If they had gone to 22 or 28nm and done nothing else they should have been able to scale up clocks by 20-30% and still shaved 20-30% off the power which would have made a compelling reason for tablet vendors to use their product.
Video on par with i5, cpu/power on par with Atom. Win/win.
Instead we get bankruptcy.
This is a sad day.
PANZER4
Honorable
- Jul 2, 2012
- 290
- 0
- 10,810
@tajisi, intel played pretty much every dirty trick in the book during the P4 days to stop AMD from benefiting. Sure, they came out with the excellent core architecture later on, but they bribed many OEMs with rebates, etc before it came out. I read somewhere that AMD was literally unable to GIVE AWAY their CPUs because the OEM would be unable to accept an intel rebate for using there CPUs. I also heard that dell was at one point making more from intel than from selling computers. Is that ridiculous or what?
fazers_on_stun
Splendid
- Aug 31, 2006
- 4,743
- 0
- 22,860
[citation][nom]andfsfnsdfsdh[/nom]It could just be me but I was disturbed that the 1737 saves the company a little over $109,000 per person per year.. hopefully it was highly paid people that contributed very little and AMD realized it and cut them off.[/citation]
Read on S/A that it is supposed to be 30% of the engineers being sacked, including from the graphics division, so that is not good at all for enthusiasts. Really, it seems AMD might be conceding the high end to Intel and to nVidia..
Read on S/A that it is supposed to be 30% of the engineers being sacked, including from the graphics division, so that is not good at all for enthusiasts. Really, it seems AMD might be conceding the high end to Intel and to nVidia..
This is no good. Only owned two processors from AMD, the original Athlon and the T-Bird. The PC realm needs a counter balance to Intel now more than ever, although Intel is so far ahead and just a juggernaut I can't see how anyone could really compete with them market wise.
For the past few years the only conclusions I've come to is that AMD will need to be bought out or merged with a much much larger Conglomerate which will takeover and oversee AMD's operations to correct the massive mistakes they've made in the CPU arena over the past 6 years.
For the past few years the only conclusions I've come to is that AMD will need to be bought out or merged with a much much larger Conglomerate which will takeover and oversee AMD's operations to correct the massive mistakes they've made in the CPU arena over the past 6 years.
darkavenger123
Distinguished
- Feb 22, 2010
- 353
- 0
- 18,780
I don't see anyway they can breakthrough the server market...Intel is king and nobody is even a significant second. They only have one area left to compete...in the APU on thin client, ultrabook, consoles, tablet etc...at the moment, their APU looks too power hunggry to be in tablet form.....if they don't grab a few contract with Nintendo, MS or Sony for the next console....they're basically done.
mightymaxio
Distinguished
- Nov 9, 2009
- 1,193
- 0
- 19,360
Well soon it will be an Nvidia and Intel market pretty soon. Wonder what happens if they both become monopolies if the government would step in and split up the company like they did with Ma Bell .
jkflipflop98
Distinguished
- Feb 3, 2006
- 1,971
- 420
- 20,170
[citation][nom]Panzer4[/nom]@tajisi, intel played pretty much every dirty trick in the book during the P4 days to stop AMD from benefiting. Sure, they came out with the excellent core architecture later on, but they bribed many OEMs with rebates, etc before it came out. I read somewhere that AMD was literally unable to GIVE AWAY their CPUs because the OEM would be unable to accept an intel rebate for using there CPUs. I also heard that dell was at one point making more from intel than from selling computers. Is that ridiculous or what?[/citation]
That's the dumbest thing I've ever heard. Do you really think it's worth it for a OEM to turn away FREE materials? How big of a rebate are you giving out that someone can afford to turn their nose up at "Free"?
That's the dumbest thing I've ever heard. Do you really think it's worth it for a OEM to turn away FREE materials? How big of a rebate are you giving out that someone can afford to turn their nose up at "Free"?
kyuuketsuki
Distinguished
- May 17, 2011
- 267
- 5
- 18,785
First thing AMD needs to do is accelerate development and distribution of their 28nm tablet APU/SoC. The lower-power C-50 they're trying to sell is okay (I'd take the GPU advantage over Haswell's small CPU/power advantage, myself), but if they can get the new one out before Intel can make a Haswell successor and get it into actual products, I'd be all over it and I don't think I'm the only one.
PANZER4
Honorable
- Jul 2, 2012
- 290
- 0
- 10,810
@jkflipflop98
I'll be a bit clearer
I think it was something like a million athlons that AMD couldn't give away to HP(I think that's the company) because HP would then not get a rebate from intel (at least, I think that's what happened, correct me if I'm wrong)
I'll be a bit clearer
I think it was something like a million athlons that AMD couldn't give away to HP(I think that's the company) because HP would then not get a rebate from intel (at least, I think that's what happened, correct me if I'm wrong)
PANZER4
Honorable
- Jul 2, 2012
- 290
- 0
- 10,810
- Status
TRENDING THREADS
-
-
-
Discussion What's your favourite video game you've been playing?- Started by amdfangirl
- Replies: 4K
-
News Intel terminates x86S initiative — unilateral quest to de-bloat x86 instruction set comes to an end- Started by Admin
- Replies: 31
-
Question What kind of audio setup do you have for your gaming PC?- Started by NickyB
- Replies: 0
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram