Former AMD Exec: Even I Wouldn't Buy AMD

Page 3 - 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.
[citation][nom]ta152h[/nom] Surely he knows more than the jerks here that say how little he knows. A lot more.
[/citation]
If you are referring to the ex-exec then You are surely wrong. The exec might know more about the business. But unless they have some kind of engineering degree then I doubt they know much about the product. Just saying :)
 
I only buy AMD. Perhaps they are not the fastest, but for the price/performance ratio they are great! Phenom II X4 3.0Ghz 95w. Upgraded from my Athlon64 2.0Ghz and loving every minute of it.
 
I think it is taken out of context. I think it was marketing also. Like if he didnt work for AMD he wouldnt even know they existed. Especially with Intel monopolizing the OEM channels. I mean think about it. Back then if you were buying a computer it was probably a dell. And they cost alot of money back then. If I was underinformed and you said well I got this dell for 1500 or this one for 1460, and I saw intel on the dell and some company I had never seen on the other, I would have bought the dell.
 
That's called quote mining on Intel's part. We're lacking the context of that statement. Perhaps it was in the context of him not purchasing AMD if he were a customer due to the lack of marketing from AMD. Perhaps it was one of those self critical speeches made during brainstorming in order to get AMD to market it's product more effectively (and increase the budget for his department in order to acquire more effect marketing and sales tools).

See that is one plausible context out of many. I don't like it when folks quote mine without context.
 
Im assuming for his sake he was looking into the future. Because well AMD didnt advance much for almost 2 years there, mean while Intel was starting up/profecting their Tic Toc method.

And as for being able to run/not run apps, im clueless an x86 instruction is an x86 instruction, both AMDs and Intels chips at that time were very simular. And @Cadder I know back 2 years ago AMDs chips were slower but I noticed they muiltasked better. Now between the PII and I7 the I7 is much faser per single core app, but the speed gap deteriorates fast over multi core apps, which brings in price vs performance vs what its needed for.
 
This is long but worth reading: I remember not too long ago (maybe about 10 years or so ago) most people on a forum would comment positively towards a comment like this from any high-ranking executive of any company as if the executive, because of his title and position, was always right and could do no wrong. Then there would be one person that would comment just like most people are commenting here on this forum, questioning the true motives of the executive for making such a comment. Then someone else would post "shut up and get a job..." or "what the hell do you know..." or something to that effect, followed by more similarly negative comments aimed at that poster for questioning the words of an executive. I am now glad to see that more people today are able to read between the lines and past the lies and deceit that these 'executives' and 'government' officials are feeding us. This type of thing has happened throughout the entire history of man (but most notably and better documented, events in the last 100 years), and now that most people out there have an open mind and access to the internet, do yourself a favor and spend some time researching historical events especially pertaining to matters of governments and corporations. If you look deep enough you will find that an extremely large percentage of government and corporate actions negatively affect the general public interest. If you want a good place to start I have included a URL to a youtube video at the end of this long rant. The video is very well put together, but some of the items in the video may not be agreeable with everyone. Approach with an open mind and if you can watch the whole video from beginning to end (it makes sense when you watch it to the end), it may answer some questions or doubts anyone may have on this subject and others in general, and may help you understand the possible motives that this former AMD sales executive might have to say what he did. In other words, you all may be right, the real reason for what he said may be something other than what it seems on the surface, like he has some hidden agenda.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UHiuaGJ46zo
 
haha, back then AMD 939 was better than crappy P4 HT and D, it is so obvious. No need to argue on this. But now I seem to understand why Intel brought this guy up, it is because intel thought AMD had a really bad sales exec, this was the true reason why AMD didnt perform well during those days. Intel is trying to explain AMD's failure on marketing even though it had good CPUs.
 
"I don't buy it. 5 yrs ago AMD's Socket939 Athlon 64 was killing Intel."

Depending on what you were going to use the system for, that may not have been correct. The AMD equivalent chip was woefully inadequate for running mutlti threaded or multiple applications. It was faster when running a single application or non-multi threaded (think 3DS Max.) This is where it got it's crown because most of the tests and games they ran back then were single threaded. When they ran concurrent applications or multi threaded applications the picture flipped away from the AMD chips in a large way.

This is not a ding against the AMD of those days since very few applications or users needed this type of support. Most users just needed normal games and applications.
 
Though there are many written opinions on this posting as to his possible reasons, one of these is probably close or maybe even hit it right on the head. It's great to see people on this forum try to solve why this executive would say what he did, instead of just accepting his words for face value. We're so used to these type of people lying that they have become predictable and finding out their true motives is easy with a little research on the internet. We have become the opposite of what they wanted us to become - easily gullible. They have almost become a joke - "Three executives\politicians walk into a bar..."
 
One word, retard. that guy is a retard. When i flipped through the comments, i don't see much ppl dislike AMD. AMD has always been favored by customers, amd nvr complain or take advantages of other companies, not like that bloody Intel did. They deliver good processors with such values that shut us up. However, i'm still using intel processors due to their speed but using amd's graphics. Just that Amd need to catch up with their processors.
 
I'm pretty sure this was taken out of context. Like there were probably some important things in front of it dealing with Intel's business practices or like someone else said speaking like an uninformed consumer.
 
To each their own. I've been running on AMD since the mid 90's and I'm used to their product. Once in a while I'll build an Intel but not to much. Like most people I don't have a lot of money and AMD just makes it easier to upgrade over a period of time. When all you do is play games and get on the Internet you don't need much more than what AMD offers. 965 Black Edition seems fast enough for my needs.
 
I suppose this douche doesn't know squat about computers. Intel clearly has been the choice recently (for the last few years), but these things switch back and forward. The 939 socket in its prime was a clear winner over any intel at the time (based on overall performance).
 
[citation][nom]mrmotion[/nom]Hey the P4's werent all bad. My Northwood 2.6 HT was an ass kicker. Its still running today and running very well. It helps to be running linux on it but you get the point.[/citation]
My Pentium D 820 2.8GHz was a beast too. =D

Sure, it used more power than my i7, and was beaten by my e4400 2GHz dual core...

But honestly, the i7 920 feels just like a Pentium D to me.
I find the AMD line more interesting. 1.8GHz 35w sexacore anyone?
 
... that's why he is a former exec... and @ that time as the socket's waz changing too often... may be... soc. A, then soc. 758, soc. 939... but now... at a mid range price point, where the mos customers are, AMD haz lot to offer... soc. AM2/+/3 are more or less compatible... and even in the future AMD promises, that there is gonna be a 6core CPU, that you can put on a AM2 MoBo, if the TDP of the MoBo allow it... and why now just look at AMD from the CPU perspective? They have the most powerful GPU out there to date... intel haz none... larrabee iz a flop... ok... maybe til nVidia's fermi comes out...
 
who gives a crap, if i like a product i will buy it and don't care what anyone says, be it an old exec, superstar or anyone for that matter. i will get what works for me.
 
It would be worth reading the "WHOLE" of the message that Henri wrote before we jump the gun and kill the messenger.

As always, when you take a snippet of information out of context you can make it sound as controversial as this one does. Let's have the whole of the message INTEL and then we will crucify the man if he is still a moron.
 
I still have a spare Athlon 3500+ Socket 939 system running. At the time it was either that or an overheating, overpriced and most importantly- underperforming Prescott.

The guy's just bitter over a bad corporate "relationship". AMD had something special back then (and still do have decent hardware with the cheap - yet - powerful Phenom II's)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom