New AMD CEO: We Need to Become Predators

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.
Look, I love and use AMD's products, and wish the company well. Competition is good.

That said, it's hard to be a predator when your product isn't even in the marketplace. Where the heck is Bulldozer already? Intel has the market all to itself in the meantime.

Not competing in making chips for the mobile space is total insanity. I understand AMD has limited resources, but they have to take a stab at this -- there's too much money on the table to ignore it.
 
I agree that AMD needs some marketing. You see Intel Inside TV commercials all the time (at least there was a lot 7 years ago, and I'm sure there're still are some), but I've NEVER seen an AMD commercial. Ask any "common user" - 90% know what's Intel. Ask them about "AMD" - 80% go like "WTF is that?"
 
I'm not an AMD guy but I see this and I just like to believe, AWESOME. More competition usually means faster tech at lower prices.

Also perhaps time for some new codenames:
Sandy Bridge = Lt. Harrigan
Ive Bridge = Dutch
 
This new CEO, Rory Read, has everything he needs to become CEO of a multi-billion dollar firm and nothing that he needs to make it successful. He's a moron. He thinks he can just step into a company that is 1 to 1 and a half generations behind Intel in CPUs and make AMD much more profitable within 1 to 3 years? Like fun he will. He's in it to get his salary, his stock options, his golden parachute and if he can manipulate the shareholders, to sell off the company so he can get paid his fees for organizing the death of AMD. He's as smart as Leo Apotheker of HP who thinks he should announce the selling off of the #1 PC company in the world before he has a buyer or a plan on how to do it and ended up driving down the worth of HP on the stock market by 20% in 1 month. Rory will destroy AMD and we'll end up with only Intel for over 90% of consumer and corporate computers, with ARM and other tiny companies supplying some processing units for tablets and smartphones. Rory is a moron. Anyone who tells you different is a moron or someone trying to make money off AMD stock by shining you on to how successful he will be turning AMD around. Intel is moving to 22 nano production in 2012, AMD won't be able to compete at all with that. AMD doesn't have the research and development money, the fabs or the engineering skill to compete with Intel anymore. Bulldozer should be renamed Bullspit with the p replaced by an "h". Only someone who wants to play Hearts on their computer will consider buying one with an AMD cpu then. I enjoyed the Athlon 1800 and 2000 when it was competing with the Intel Pentium 4. But those times are gone. Gateway's gone. Micron's gone. Digital's gone. Compaq's gone. Micro Express is gone. Cyrix is gone. S3 is gone. Diamond is gone. And AMD will be gone by 2013. Rory Read is an opportunist and a fraud. Sad but true.
 


In fairness, Cyrix was bought out by IBM.

I think, right now, AMD is heading in the right direction. Their CPUs are 'Fast Enough' and their GPUs are 2nd to none, and they have found a way to satisfactorily merge an at-least median (average) GPU with an average CPU, which to date, Intel, nor any other company, has been able to do...

You give me $100 to make your computer faster, I'll spend that on an SSD... Not a CPU, not a GPU, not RAM... We finally have balanced computers available, in no small part in thanks to AMDs innovations and competition with Intel and NVidia.

I think they do need to continue to DE-emphasize CPU improvement, and focus on new ways of integrating their existing product lineup... If they can solidify their place as the next pillar in the Console market, or if they focus on ways to do for ARM what they did for 64 bit... They will be successful...

Can you imagine an AMD that finds a way to seamlessly integrate a fully working ARM architecture to their existing AMD64 instruction set, that lets x86 and ARM software run, side by side?

Not saying this clown will be the one to do it... But I am saying AMD has a pension for sticking around...
 
I will admit..I am an Intel fanboy...but I would like to see AMD come up fast and hard showing Intel they don't rule the processor market. Intel is becoming a monster that needs to be slowed down. I hope that AMD can be the ghostbusters and cross the streams and take Intel down to size. This will obviously take some years to do but they have "A New Hope".

....Time to troll on some iBundleOfSticks.
 
Rory Read talks about being a predator. Does he look or sound like "a predator" to you? Does he inspire confidence in your heart for AMD? Does he seem strong, masculine, virile, confident, aggressive, potent? Watch the video in the clip above and you tell me what you think. He sounds like a sissy, a wimp, a joke to my ears. In High School, the mean kids would have kicked his azz all over the place, called him names, given him wedgies etc. Yes, some High School kids can be mean. If this is AMD's new leader, AMD is going down the tubes, going down for the long count. This is the CPU business, Rory, dearie, it ain't Lenovo where the biggest manufacturer of the lowest cost, assembler of Chinese garbage lowest cost PC components with the worst or entirely absent quality control assurance processes gets to win the greatest market share outside the USA, because everyone needs the lowest possible cost computer. Anyone who want a fast, capable cpu from 2012 onwards will buy an Intel cpu, especially considering Intel can make a reliable, fast enough cpu for about $76. AMD cpus will end up in computers for crowds not aged 8 to 80, but for those aged under 8 and over 80. Rory will go down in Wikipedia with the last CEO's of Micron, Digital, Gateway, S3, Diamond, Micro Express and HP. Rory thinks he can sell poetry with his "look straight ahead" bullspit, he can't. He can't sell value or performance either because AMD can't produce it. Rory is a pansy. He's the best AMD could come up with? Pathetic!
 
[citation][nom]jacobdrj[/nom]AMD is fine with their R&D IMHO. Their problem has USUALLY been ADVERTISING. They don't. They need to.Even if you make the best widget ever, if Joe Consumer doesn't know the widget even exists, let alone that it is the most amazing, life changing widget of all time, Joe Consumer WILL NOT BUY IT...
[/citation]

Very true, I noticed that especially with this back to school season. Intel's advertising even in the best buy papers was better. It's unfortunate because they do have great solutions. It might also be a problem that there's just not enough revenue to go around yet. Advertising may be part of the reason they hired this guy, but the last time they had an advertiser on top he ran the company into the ground....

[citation][nom]someonewhoknowsalittle[/nom]Rory is a moron. Anyone who tells you different is a moron or someone trying to make money off AMD stock by shining you on to how successful he will be turning AMD around. Intel is moving to 22 nano production in 2012, AMD won't be able to compete at all with that. AMD doesn't have the research and development money, the fabs or the engineering skill to compete with Intel anymore. [/citation]

Amd firing Dirk was a sad example of how much control investors have on companies these days. Same goes for hp. It's really unfortunate because before that I was so high on Amd turning things around. Now I fear they may try to push into a crowded market just to please some people that don't understand the business. Speaking of not understanding a business, it will be interesting to see how this guy does as I think Amd really needs an engineer as the head of the company. I wont call him a moron yet he gets a pass for now (but the chair doesn't in my eyes). And I actually disagree with you. One of the bright sides of Amd is that they have fantastic engineers and have be putting out a lot of great engineering innovations for years now (including fusion).
 
[citation][nom]jacobdrj[/nom]In fairness, Cyrix was bought out by IBM. I think, right now, AMD is heading in the right direction. Their CPUs are 'Fast Enough' and their GPUs are 2nd to none, and they have found a way to satisfactorily merge an at-least median (average) GPU with an average CPU, which to date, Intel, nor any other company, has been able to do...You give me $100 to make your computer faster, I'll spend that on an SSD... Not a CPU, not a GPU, not RAM... We finally have balanced computers available, in no small part in thanks to AMDs innovations and competition with Intel and NVidia. I think they do need to continue to DE-emphasize CPU improvement, and focus on new ways of integrating their existing product lineup... If they can solidify their place as the next pillar in the Console market, or if they focus on ways to do for ARM what they did for 64 bit... They will be successful...Can you imagine an AMD that finds a way to seamlessly integrate a fully working ARM architecture to their existing AMD64 instruction set, that lets x86 and ARM software run, side by side?Not saying this clown will be the one to do it... But I am saying AMD has a pension for sticking around...[/citation]

You hit the nail on the head. This guy, Rory, might be a heckuva nice person but he comes off as a clown, not as a leader. I'm not optimistic about AMD's chances with this king of cliches and queen of quiches leading them into battle against Intel. Too bad because Intel and the general public could benefit from a solid competitor to Intel. AMD for now can continue to survive based on its superior video performance of its integrated cpus to Intels' cpus but AMD lags so far behind Intel in cpu performance, that AMD cpus will soon only be suitable for those who want to send emails, instant message, browse the internet, watch videos and play low definition 2-3 games. Plus with all the recent problems with the lack of reliability with AMD chips, only really cheap and reckless people will take a chance by buying computers with AMD cpus in them. AMD cpus run hot too. Maybe they can solve the global cooling problem if everyone switches to AMD cpus!? Even if AMD had the best, fastest and cheapest cpus, would you buy one after listening to Rory Read? He's the anti-Steve Jobs. Rory Read is like a Richard Simmons character without Richard's charisma or likability. A bad choice by AMD.
 
@someonewhoknowsalittle

sorry what huh????! reliability issues?@?@!, which would they be, did i miss some article somewhere they showed AMD chips have a higher failure rates than Intel??? where on earth did you pull that from, so once long time ago they had a issue with the TLB but we talking wayyyyyyyyy back (and was easily rectified) and that was much smaller than your Pentium maths bug or more recently the sandy bridge chipset sata bug

so your telling me an AMD chip would only satisfy 90% of computing needs for Joe public out there? as attested by the success of Apple products, Joe public are a fickle bunch, they dont need raw power, only enough for what you described. There are a small bunch of folk (which strangely probably populate 90% of this website) who may utilize every single drop of raw computing power you throw at them, but we are a minority, for everyone else, an AMD chip is more then sufficient

i would also like to point out that Apple is an exception to the rule, the majority of companies perform well enough in spite of their leadership, the majority of CEO (those who did not create the company in the first place anyways) are dead weight, the company manages to run fine in spite of them, it take more then a moronic CEO to run a company into the ground (check MS out), now i'll admit a visionary CEO can turn a company around (conversely a bad CEO can bring the company bad fortune) but it requires the whole company to make it succeed or fail, not just a single individual

and as for AMD taking Intel head on in battle, not going happen, thats like Tibet declaring war on China, it's a one sides massacre, when facing an opponent who is bigger and has significantly more guns then you, your going have to be alot more selective, you need to inflict small casualties on the opposition while taking none yourself, doesn't matter if you won the battle if you take too much casualty to be unable to carry the war on (i learned that from command and conquer lol)

there is no solid competitor to Intel, even if all the other chip makers pooled their resources, they would not even be able to match Intel's capacity, Intel controls the world's supply of x86 computing chips and if you look at it from that perspective, doesn't make an ouch of difference if you can make the best CPU at dirt cheap prices, your never going be able supply enough to satisfy demand and intel will just soak up the rest
 
[citation][nom]dark_lord69[/nom]ok...One thing AMD has going for them is thier experience within the graphics department. If they can combine a 6990 like GPU and a 6 (or 8) core high speed CPU that runs faster than an i7 on one chip with a low price then they could really give Intel and nVidia a run for the money.I believe AMD is very competative in the graphics card department but they really need to step up thier game in the CPU world.If they could combine both and slap a low price on it then Intel and nVidia will likely struggle. (FYI, I know there is a chip like that currently out but the graphics capabilities suck.)[/citation]

You do realize the chip and heat sink would have to be massive and extremely expensive right? Not to mention the market share for something like is non-existent at the moment.
 
It's about bloody well time. They have been far too passive for the last few years and need a strong CEO to give them a kick in the pants. Maybe now they will be more relevant in the high end market.
 
i like the pep talk. seems like AMD now is more of a scavenger, satisfying itself with whatever crumbs Intel left behind. suck, another bulldozer delay. by the time it launches, it's obsolete.
 
I definitely want AMD to ramp up their game, and to challenge Intel in marketing. I have not seen an AMD ad in forever while I just saw Intel promote their i5 yesterday on TV. AMD needs to do more to wipe their negative perception from the minds of Intel zombies.
 
[citation][nom]amk-aka-phantom[/nom]Less talk, more action. Can we finally have Bulldozer?[/citation]
agree. amd are talking too much and TOO SLOW like its codename: bulldozer. noisy and slow.

p/s: to all amd fanboys, feel free to click thumbs down, because amd is like that, thumbs down 😀
 
[citation][nom]figgus[/nom]When is the last time you bought a hexacore Intel chip and matched it with 512MB of RAM? It's all about balance.GeekApproved is smart enough to realize that most current CPUs are powerful enough to satisfy most demands for most people. The GPU is where there is room for advancement, and that is a race that AMD can win.If you don't appreciate the notion that some parts matter more in the scheme of things than other parts, well... Personally, I remember when one mobo could outperform another one, now they are so fast you don't notice the minute difference in performance and the choice comes down to features. All computer components are headed this way, but the CPU will get there before the GPU does.[/citation]

It's this line of thinking that makes noobs end up with q6600's and GTX580's. "A Q6600 is fast enough, CPU's aren't important" - then they're left wondering why the 580 is only getting half the performance that Anandtech says it will get.
 
Look, this guy Rory Read is talking fraternity boy rubbish and nonsense about AMD being a predator. No one buys AMD cpus because they prefer them to Intel cpus. They buy them because they're cheaper and supposedly barely acceptable performance-wise for their intended purposes.AMD's new CPUs are fine for playing Hearts on the computer but the gpu's on them are too slow to play the most demanding games at the higher definition resolutions at high frame rates, and their die sizes are still too big, creating too much heat and consuming too much energy compared to Intel cpus, they're a generation behind Intel's die size, plus their cpu frequencies are surprisingly slow too. Bulldozer was probably named because it's short for Bullspit (substitute the h for the p) and Dozer (meaning someone who is asleep). Bulldozer cpus are not going to be any better performing than the Core i7-980X which came out over a year and a half ago. And Ivy Bridge is coming out in a few months which will make Bulldozer look like a tricycle. Looks like AMD is going to sell off or spin off their moribund cpu division and just concentrate on gpus. Rory and Leo (who wants to sell of spin off HP computers) will retire to some island and have some Shirley Temple drinks and enjoy their golden parachutes after they both get canned. AMD fanboys will vote down this comment, but they can't save AMD's cpus from the dustbin of history. They must be the same kind of people who actually think that RIM's Blackberries will survive with anything like their current market share. Blackberries are going to become as relevant as Palm Pilots and Apple Newtons.
 
lol @someonewhoknowsalittle and you know sandy bridge with it's IGP is a far better solution, care to share that sample of bulldozer you got there or is it shoved too far up your a$$ cause im presuming thats what your using to benchmark it, we need more folks like you who use all that raw power for your CFD runs and gene folding sequencing, heavens knows if we run any of those things on an AMD we be waiting forever to find a cure for cancer, lucky we got sandy bridge to help eh
 
[citation][nom]doron[/nom]1. High end components for the end-user were, and will be, always intended for a niche market.2. Cpus have enough processing power for office use, yes, but there are many ways to improve - Mainly performance / power and overall cost per cpu (Imagine the most powerful cpu today, at 100$ and with mini-itx power / heat requirements in a couple of years). Also most people own monitors at a resolution of 1080p and below, so when higher resolution monitors (amoled and holodecks anyone?) will be available at a mainstream level gamers will thirst for higher end components (cpus as well). I can also guarantee that power users and professionals around the world are very happy with the price / performance cpus offer today compared to the past.My point is there's always room for improvement and desktops will always stay relevant. Innovation is part of the equation.[/citation]

lets go with the monitor thing
a 1600p (2560x1600)

the gpu matters FAR more than the cpu, as even in games where the cpu bottle necks it, at that resolution, the gpu is almost ALWAYS the bottle neck.
 
It sounded great! Until I saw him confuse left and right. Watch video again notice he signals to the right when he says "Left" and vice versa.
 
@arentwelucky:

You seem to be a little confused. I never said that Sandy Bridge with its integrated graphics is a better solution. Intel doesn't pretend to offer high end gpu performance integrated on a cpu. AMD does. I just said that the new AMD fusion chips graphics' ability is not sufficient to render the most demanding games at the highest HD resolutions at the best frame rates. I hope you understand that. Is it clear to you now?

The top Sandy Bridge CPU, suitably and easily overclocked, will of course run rings around any current AMD CPU, and when paired with a top of the line video card, the top Sandy Bridge CPU will easily outclass the top of the line AMD CPU with the same video card. AMD is scared that even their top of the line Bulldozer CPU won't perform significantly better than a 2600K on any computer running up to 8 threads intensively.

AMD still makes a good CPU. It just can't compete with Intel CPUs at the high end on performance or medium end of the market on performance vs. price, ie. value. If all you want to do is send an email, chat with your grandpa, browse some web pages and have your security program running in the background while you play Solitaire, a top of the line AMD CPU should be enough for you, you fierce "Predator" you. Rory Read talking about being a "Predator" makes himself into a laughingstock. Like Jed Clampett used to say on The Beverly Hillbillies: "Pitiful, jus' pitiful."
 
Dear MR CEO: i would like to see a mainstream 6 core CPU from AMD which supports triple channel architecture and that would be a blast. Because right now... ?! We are stuck with dual channel in both sides. Intel has the triple channel support for some CPU, but what mainstream consumer can touch those extreme pries ?! OFF TOPIC: I really like what AMD did with the ATI RADEON but when will we see a sustainable physics implementation, Havok could kick Nvidia PhysX ass (which btw is not Nvidia tech i was acquired quite stolen i might say, they did the same juuuuuust like with VooDoo, seems who has potential is either bought or eliminated by the 3 Musketeers: MS, Nvidia and Intel ) if more development would be killed in it.
 
I agree with this guy as long as the people, open standards, user serviceability, and user freedom to grow have a high priority, something that Apple as the predator and a nazi-wannabe company has failed in.
 
Rory Read is a flash in the pan. By 2014, you'll need to consult Wikipedia to find out what he ever said or did. Look and listen to this guy. Would you trust your multi billion dollar company to this poser? Excuse me while I barf. Looks like we're stuck with Intel. Note to those who are looking to buy a computer or cpu, once AMD goes bankrupt, there will be no more warranty on their cpus. AMD is like Pontiac and Oldsmobile. They won't be around in a few years except in some ancient computers enlisted to browse the internet and help people to send emails. AMD is your father's CPU. Rory Read sounds like a cartoon character and looks like one. Sad. Predator, my sagging ass.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom