Does AMD has some future?

Page 9 - Seeking answers? Join the Tom's Hardware community: where nearly two million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Status
Not open for further replies.
AMD might be in trouble, but it's no Blackberry really.

AMD has a future, but IMO they need to forget about high-end desktops and graphics for a while and concentrate on mobile and server business.

They need to consolidate and decide on their exact products and areas portfolio, they just can't afford to spread thin and try to grab everything at the moment.
 


Too late.

 


I will be hearing people saying me "Wait for post-Zen/post-K12! They will be the real game changer!"



They missed the opportunity and now the gap with the competence is too big. They would have to invest huge amounts of money and spend many years to get competitive designs for those markets and AMD lacks both money and time. I see they with a weak future on the embedded/semicustom market.
 
I will be hearing people saying me "Wait for post-Zen/post-K12! They will be the real game changer!"
Click to expand...

It's BD all over again I tell you. This isn't the 90's; you can't create a new uArch and expect to get more then maybe 20% gains out of it over what you had. The core's are simply too advanced to squeeze that extra performance out. And the IPC gains will be partially reduced through low clocks. Hence my 10-15% prediction.

Which you may notice I ALWAYS use, because it's been basically right ever since C2D's came out. It's not rocket science.
 


I was said that Bulldozer was the real game changer. Latter than Piledriver would fix everything. Then that Steamroller was going to crush Haswell. Latter than Excavator was going to be a big leap in performance. Excavator is not still out and I am being said that Zen will be the real game changer. And when Zen was ready, the same people will say me "Wait for post-Zen! It will change everything!"
 


In the case of Intel I would agree, they already have such advanced design tech that it's incredibly difficult to find new ways to improve. AMD on the other hand still has quite a long way to go in the area of branch prediction and scheduling which is the area that Intel crush's them so badly in. So while your 10~15% gains is probably spot on, AMD does have the potential to go higher should it make an internal breakthrough in the aforementioned area's.
 



Seeing as it is looking to be a 2H2016 part there are a number of variables that need to stabilize to make a CPU decision.

DX12 being one big variable - how quickly will it be adopted
DDR4 speeds vs DDR3 speeds


Of late it hasn't really been about the CPU triggering my upgrade purchases. It's usually something else like wanting PCIe upgrade or more/faster USB ports.
 


Their R&D spending has gone down but they did that licensing deal with Synopsys. That gives them cheaper access to some pretty good IP that in the past they would have done themselves. DDR4, PCIe 4.0, USB 3.1, much of these are becoming cookie cutter drop ins.

It's not like Zen development just started, they've been at it since before Bulldozer launched.

Ultimately it will still come down to management and focusing on the priorities. And of course avoiding stupid things like billion dollar fines from GF.
 


I think he is being realist, with R&D numbers backing up his claims.
 


AMD just needs to get out of the CPU market and stick with the graphics cards because then they will actually succeed more as a company I think in total profit. Of course Intel would have a monopoly in which, at least in the U.S., the government will have to use antitrust legislations to regulate the prices of the processors.
 


I don't think it is so easy. GPU vendors are concerned because predict that AMD will give finally the GPU business to Nvidia. Their concern is based in the same data I showed before. AMD R&D has reduced alarmingly to one point where Nvidia is investing more resources on future products than AMD "which affects its graphics division"

http://hexus.net/tech/news/graphics/79929-gpu-vendors-concerned-declining-amd-demand/
 


not so sure about that. their FX cpus still sell like hotcakes to budget gamers and the like. mabye they should just continue down that avenue?

 


I would feel better if we know what the "Chinese Company" was, though I have a few guesses. A sale would mean the loss of the X86 license though, which would explain why AMD is focusing so much on ARM cores...



X86 is NOT the dominant CPU architecture, so how could Intel be a monopoly?

Oh sure, it owns the desktop and server markets now, but embedded is owned by PPC, mobile is owned by ARM. Intel is no more a monopoly then IBM and ARM is. It's just for your particular use case, there's no real alternatives. But that does NOT constitute a monopoly under US law.
 
It would be really weird for Lisa Su to sell the company in her first year. Also, why would they develop a new x86 architecture with Zen if they would lose the license in a buyout?

I really wish China doesn't touch AMD. Qualcomm, IBM or ARM would be better.
 


You'd be surprised. It's not terribly uncommon for CEOs to come in, sell the company, and make a boatload on stock options when the stock jumps by 20%. It happens ALL THE TIME.

Also, why would they develop a new x86 architecture with Zen if they would lose the license in a buyout?
Click to expand...

Keeping revenue flowing. They need a product to sell in the interem.
 
I know this may sound bad, but if that is the case, I think I'm buying intel. And that is coming from someone who's used AMD for the last 15 years or more. Another good company to buy them would be apple. Since they like having control over hardware.
 



IBM is exiting the cpu business. ARM is just a company that licenses out their Intellectual Property. Qualcomm has no fabs so I don't know how your lost makes sense.

 


If that was the plan Rory would have been the man to do it. Anyway CEO's don't make that kind of decision unless they own the company. They can only bring that proposal forward. The Board of Directors has the final say.
 


Pretty sure you are spot on here. Mobile will be Intel's undoing. The ARM processors are "good enough" for most peoples needs. They are also $20 as opposed to $200. Pretty sure in five to ten years the cheap, "good enough" cpu's will be the norm.
 


There is a caveat. And MS just brought the tip of the iceberg afloat. The VR headset.

As long as MS (and software in general) keeps pushing the need for compute, then Intel will have a way to justify those 200 greenies. In this particular example, the innards from the VR Glasses are from Intel itself and the Jews that created Kinnect (thanks for the info, Cazalan).

ARM is well placed for regular tasks, until the push for more computing power is done. We're getting close to that.

Cheers!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom