If AMD goes bankrupt will INTEL have monopoly?

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
The problem with sticking with a company or brand out of loyalty, be it in CPUs, peanut butter, cars, toasters...if a company keeps making money selling it's crappy products, why would it care or need to improve?
 
I'd be suprised if they gave a flip. AMD failure wouldn't cripple the economy and it wouldn't affect day to day gonvernment business or any government's political power structure. If it ever got to that point, seriously, don't hold your breath waiting for govt. intervention.


■Reorganization isn't a given - reorg plans have to be approved by a judge.
■There are types of debt that can't be easily 'flushed' or set aside. I'm a little foggy here, but I seem to remember 2012 as a year of reconing for some senior notes.
■You are correct, the stock would tank.
■BK destroys a company's credit rating. This makes it difficult to obtain financing on favorable terms, if at all. If the company went Chapter 11 and weren't operating in the black shortly after reorganizing, this would be a huge concern.

You're correct in that Chapter 11 isn't the end of the world - companies can and do make it through. But I'd expect jobs to be lost and possibly R&D taking a hit. My point is that while it is survivable, it wouldn't be pretty, and recovery wouldn't be certain. But hey, as doomy and gloomy as that sounds, I honestly don't see this as an immediate concern.
 


Then again if that happened then Intel got complete control... It would slack off, then realize it sales are extremely low...
Then they'll make a new arch, price the best for $10000 and make most of us use $250 Celerons that are faster than the previous generation, but only a little bit. Then the age of pin-hack will come around again... Then Intel will simply create a modified die...

Consumer loses... VIA becomes popular... but doesn't match up to Intel... most low-performance chips will come from VIA and since most users these days can't really max out their computers anyway, VIA will become the new AMD...

Its that or IBM 😉
 
I have serious doubts about AMD ceasing to exist. That just wouldnt happen overnight.
If it did i guess the IT world would terribly slow their pace.

As for me, in the last few years i always have AMD machines. At the price point, whenever i buy, well, they got the "candy".
I dont like to dish 350+ for a CPU. For a GPU already did it, and ill do it again !!!!

I guess ill keep buying amd. Im mounting a Crossfire rig, so if the CPU is intel or not, ill buy AMD anyway !!!
 



That sounds more like evolution than the economy.

The truth is there are a lot of crap products out there that people buy, but then there are other products that are not so bad but are cheaper. There is a huge spectrum of products that fill certain niches in the market.

So if everyone just bought the best of the best of what a company made then you would only have a few really good products but then why would they care or need to improve them. So it can work both ways.

You need balance in everything.

 


Look at what happened with Apple and its cult... Apple products have less than everyone else and look how well they sell! Not to mention the price...
 
I like supporting the little guy even if their products are a little worse. I feel good about myself because i know ive done my part to encourage fair market competition.
 
I think something akin to what Nvidia did with it's GPUs will happen (they'll use the same core for 1.5/2 times longer while just releasing products that are marginally better

Then with any luck history will repeat itself and AMD will be back at it in 2-3 generations (so the one that comes after deneb or it's die-shrink)
 


I agree. But one thing is I try to buy only American company products since that benefits the economy more.

Plus I just like American stuff better. Cars, electronics and so on.
 
A note about IBM [Samsung.. whatever, insert your favorite white knight company here..] stepping in to compete with Intel by either saving AMD or starting to produce x86 chips. Besides the x86 licensing agreement expressly forbidding it without Intel's (the dominant, not in dire financial trouble party) consent, I have yet to see anyone make a substantially logical argument that would demonstrate why anyone would want to go toe to toe with Intel in the low profit commodity CPU market. The start up costs are too high, the ROI takes long enough that a while would seem to be a tick on the clock, you have to constantly advance the process technology and all this while keeping up with Big Blue on their home turf, if they even let you play in their sandbox. Tis madness, and no sane company would jump into that kind of clusterf*ck for the honor of taking on Intel.
 

Well the main reason is that OSX IS much better(security/stability) wise that Vista. And OSX can also run many of the UNIX/LINUX applications. Also Iphone/Ipod/iTunes,etc are also adding big $$$ to the company.
 


Is it a fair market if you have to buy underwhelming products from an underwhelming company to keep that company from being overwhelmed?
 


False advertising and brainwashing can easily give you lots of sales.
 
Even if AMD disappeared Intel would have to compete against whoever makes the chips in consoles (IBM makes the PS3 Cell processor doesn't it?) to get the business of the gamer enthusiast crowd.
 
If AMD got to the point where they were ready to fold, they would be bought, probably by somebody big like Samsung or IBM. AMD's technological assets as well as their x86 license are very valuable. Their products and R&D are pretty sound; they just got hamstrung by the ATi purchase and if they were going bankrupt, it was because they'd run out of cash before the turn-around into profitability happened. That is a somewhat common occurrence in buyouts/mergers.

Yes, I know that the Intel x86-32 licenses are supposed to not transfer to a purchaser of AMD, but Intel would pretty much have to let that slide. Why?

1. This is the really big one. They are under an antitrust probe right now and potentially positioning yourself as manufacturer of about 99% of the x86 CPU market does NOT help your cause, especially since VIA's x86 licenses are not perpetual like AMD's, but sort of a lease of sorts. VIA promises not to sue Intel for patent infringement while Intel promises not to sue VIA for x86 licensing and a few other things like their use of the Socket 370 interface and GTL FSB protocol *for only a certain period of time.* So it may be the DOJ telling Intel "you can let them have the licenses or we can make you give them up, your choice." Intel is in between a rock and a hard place and I have a hunch they'd pick to give up the licenses on their own accord than be forced to give them up by the government.

2. Being reliant on a single vendor for your processors is NOT a good thing and CFOs and such remember The Bad Old Days in the 1980s and early 1990s when Intel was pretty much the sole supplier. You would expect people who run open software and OSes (e.g. a LAMP stack) to shop around a little to see if they can get something else like ARM and MIPS on the low end or PowerPC/POWER and SPARC on the high end to get the job done. Those ISAs are either open or have multiple manufacturers due to low licensing costs.

3. Microsoft pretty much staked their business on legacy x86 application support and as a result, they have little to offer on anything except x86 or x86_64. And the use of Microsoft software and legacy software written for Microsoft OSes is what keeps most people on x86 in the first place. So Intel would feel pressured to keep people on x86, even if it means letting AMD's purchaser have the x86 license terms on something roughly similar to what AMD did. Intel would much rather give up a little of the x86 market to avoid having the market erode and disappear on them by moving to some other ISA that Intel has no control over and may even have to license. Intel _would_ make one hell of a CPU foundry but that's not really where the money is and they know it.
 
IBM just got done selling off their hardware divisions, they make their money off of patents and selling services. Heck, they don't even fab Cells. Toshiba does that. Why jump back into the market you worked so long to get out of?
 
Intel posted strong Q2 earnings and the stock is only up 1 %. Lol we are in a bear market. 1929 Great depression here we come.
 
Whats with this monopoly talk. If AMD goes under it is there own fault because they couldn't make a good CPU anymore or compete with intel. It's not intels fault that they are having sucess and that other CPU companies are falling by the wayside. That like saying that someone like a boxer who is world champion should be stripped of his belt because no one can beat him. LOL this thread is totally pointless and dumb
 
Keyword- if. AMD will not go bankrupt. Even though they are sucking in the gaming/hardcore market, they are still doing fairly well in the budget world. The Athlon X2's are still popular. Sure it's not much, but it's still something. Also, AMD owns ATi.... ATi's cards right now are amazing (HD 4870 ftw).

Even if, somehow AMD goes bankrupt, and is somehow wiped from the face of the CPU market, then they will have a very large percentage of the CPU market, and unless VIA or whatever can pull something out of their butts, it will remain that way.... if AMD goes bankrupt.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom