AMD focusing too much on the desktop?

[cen1]

According to online stats, there are more laptop than desktop sales every year and the ratio seems to be increasing in favor of laptops. So what does AMD have to offer for the laptops?

-high end gaming dominated by Intel(CPU) and Nvidia
-high to mid-end "multimedia" laptops which are pretty much a poor man's gaming laptop again dominated by Intel(CPU) and Nvidia
-ultrabooks all Intel
-low end, everyday use, good enough laptops either Intel or an AMD APU

Every single student I know will go for a decent laptop if they are a gamer or an ultrabook if they want to carry it around. So no sales for AMD here.

Now we are getting the r9 300 series soon but according to all the rumors, this is going to be a huge beast with liquid cooling and based on that, the 300W TDP is probably correct too. So it will be great for desktop but again, completely unusable on the laptop.

It seems that AMD is missing a huge chunk of the PC market. I really wonder what is the ratio between mobility and desktop sales for Nvidia because that would really put it into the perspective.

Thoughts?
http://wccftech.com/amd-fiji-xt-r9-390x-cooler-master-liquid/

 

[caswow]

i think last round they wanted to do more gpgpu and hpc stuff. thats why hawaii is so far the most efficient dp/watt dp/mm2 gpu in the world.

they cant afford to develope many types of gamig cards so they had to pack all this compute stuff in their gpus. thats why they are a little bit hotter than nvididas cards and hotter cards are not wanted in laptops.

 

[ShintaiDK]

AMD just dont seem to understand the performance/watt metric. Kinda ironic considering it was what they had their largest success with (K8).

And its just not in GPUs. Its their entire segment.

 

[boozzer]

I think the coin mining hurt amd alot. gamers who wanted to buy amd went with nv instead. lost alot of marketshare in just 6 months of mining craze. and the used card market bloomed after the 6 months craze, cannibalizing newer sales till now. and if I were to take a guess, it will continue till the release of 3XX cards.

should take out compute from all gaming gpus. is that even possible?

 

[ViRGE]

Thoughts?

The GPU development cycle is 4-5 years. AMD's available technology in 2015 is based on what they planned for in 2010 and 2011 (baring any delays or technical issues). AMD is focusing on the markets that make the most sense with the chips they currently have.

Should AMD have made additional investments into mobile? In hindsight, probably. But they bet heavily on powerful iGPUs, haven't really won that bet, and in the meantime they don't have chips that can go toe-to-toe with Maxwell on power efficiency.

 

[PC Master Race]

Lets hope they focus more on desktops cause it;s where they are strong.

 

[Cloudfire777]

The GPU development cycle is 4-5 years. AMD's available technology in 2015 is based on what they planned for in 2010 and 2011 (baring any delays or technical issues). AMD is focusing on the markets that make the most sense with the chips they currently have.

Should AMD have made additional investments into mobile? In hindsight, probably. But they bet heavily on powerful iGPUs, haven't really won that bet, and in the meantime they don't have chips that can go toe-to-toe with Maxwell on power efficiency.

Thats right. AMD is hindered by money mostly. Nvidia have a much bigger R&D team, and if I don`t remember wrong Nvidia wrote already in 2012 that they have recieved 20nm samples and were buisy working on the next architecture when Kepler was announced. There was some spectacle about Nvidia being angry because TSMC couldnt get a 20nm HP process up and running for their GPUs, but if they already nailed down the architecture part of Maxwell, they could probably do some small adjustments to get it out as fast as possible on 28nm HP. Thats why Nvidia had Maxwell out for a while now.
Since AMD have no new architecture that is ready yet due to development cycle, they can`t possible match Nvidia in mobile, since efficiency is everything in a strongly constrained thermal environment like you find in notebooks. Thats why they are virtually non existent on mobile right now.

Then its about allocating your available resources. AMD are deeply involved with APUs, CPUs and GPUs, Nvidia mostly just GPUs. So I think that also goes against AMD and widen their development cycle more for specific products. Its about finding balance, getting rid of dead weight (which is why they have started to back out of high end CPU race with Intel) and focusing on the products where they are successful

If ATI existed today, I think we would see a much more fierce competition between Nvidia and ATI and we would have more powerful GPUs than today.

 

[MisterLilBig]

AMD OEM relations suck, AMD marketing sucks and AMD can't pay people to use their products like Intel can and does.

 

[ShintaiDK]

Its hard to say if we would actually have faster GPUs, if ATI wasnt sold.

However its quite clear that ATIs management had a much better understanding of the market than AMD ever have. So we would have seen ATI products much more fit for the market and more appealing for the OEMs and endusers.

After Jerry Sanders, AMD essentially havent had a single success. Just one mismanagement after the other with a complete lack of foresight. And thats a real shame.

 

[el etro]

After Jerry Sanders, AMD essentially havent had a single success. Just one mismanagement after the other with a complete lack of foresight. And thats a real shame.

Really.

But i think Dirk Meyer and Rory Read did fairly good jobs there.

 

[Gikaseixas]

Efficiency its an area where AMD is struggling. They're fighting Nvidia on the mobile graphics side and Intel on the cpu. Each of those competitors offer great products for mobile applications.
As things are right now, AMD cannot spread itself any thinner than they already have. As the smaller of the 3, they should focus and specialize in fewer areas. Lets see what the new CEO has planned.

 

[caswow]

Efficiency its an area where AMD is struggling. They're fighting Nvidia on the mobile graphics side and Intel on the cpu. Each of those competitors offer great products for mobile applications.
As things are right now, AMD cannot spread itself any thinner than they already have. As the smaller of the 3, they should focus and specialize in fewer areas. Lets see what the new CEO has planned.

actually amd is bigger than nvidia. they simply fight too much at the same time while nvidia is specialized in gpus.

 

[ShintaiDK]

actually amd is bigger than nvidia. they simply fight too much at the same time while nvidia is specialized in gpus.

They are officially smaller.
Q4 Revenue
nVidia 1251M$
AMD 1239M$

Q4 R&D
nVidia 348M$
AMD 238M$

Q4 Income
nVidia 193M$
AMD -364M$

 

[caswow]

They are officially smaller.
Q4 Revenue
nVidia 1251M$
AMD 1239M$

Q4 R&D
nVidia 348M$
AMD 238M$

Q4 Income
nVidia 193M$
AMD -364M$

bigger means bigger not richer. what is hard about understanding beeing bigger than something?

amd
Number of employees
10,671 (2013)[5]

nvidia
Number of employees
8,800 (2014)

amd is bigger. they have to pay more people to do smth. they are on more projects than only on gpu related stuff.

 

[ShintaiDK]

bigger means bigger not richer. what is hard about understanding beeing bigger than something?

amd
Number of employees
10,671 (2013)[5]

nvidia
Number of employees
8,800 (2014)

amd is bigger. they have to pay more people to do smth. they are on more projects than only on gpu related stuff.

So bigger by amount of employees only?

AMDs headcount in Q4 was 9687. And 8808 is a year old for nVidia. Remember its fiscal year is one ahead. So Q4 2014 result and headcount would be FY 2015.

http://ir.amd.com/phoenix.zhtml?c=74093&p=irol-newsArticle&ID=2008997
http://www.nvidia.com/object/fy14-gcr-workforce-performance.html

 

[ocre]

Yes.

Money made doesn't make you a bigger company. Are you really suggesting it does?

There are very tiny companies, just a handful of people that make millions.

There are large companies that don't make a lot of cash although they may be working hard to start bringing in the cash flow.

A companies size doesn't hav anything to do with their wealth. That is completely different than their net worth. A different metric

 

[metalliax]

They are officially smaller.
Q4 Revenue
nVidia 1251M$
AMD 1239M$

Q4 R&D
nVidia 348M$
AMD 238M$

Q4 Income
nVidia 193M$
AMD -364M$

This is a pretty ridiculous statement.

You are taking a single quarter of revenue / income / r&d and using it to try and show that NVIDIA is factually larger than AMD.

Previous 4 Quarters Revenue as of Feb 2015
nVidia : $4,680M
AMD : $5,506M

You also picked a quarter (Q4 2014) where AMD is at a low-point, from both CPU and GPU products. I would say AMD's Q3 and Q4 this year will dwarf last years numbers if they get their 3XX series and Carrizo launched properly in Q2.

 

[RandallFlagg]

AMD should probably eliminate its non iGPU FX and Athlon lines, and pare down its sprawling and incomprehensible APU lines into just a few desktop / AIO parts along with maybe one or two tablet / laptop parts.

Seems like every week theres a 2 page thread here on some obscure AMD APU. Consumers arent going to spend that effort figuring out their products.

Same for their dGPUs. Huge complex product lines with no sku recognition for most consumers.

 

[ShintaiDK]

You also picked a quarter (Q4 2014) where AMD is at a low-point, from both CPU and GPU products. I would say AMD's Q3 and Q4 this year will dwarf last years numbers if they get their 3XX series and Carrizo launched properly in Q2.

AMD expects a 15% revenue drop in Q1.

 

[tviceman]

Lets hope they focus more on desktops cause it;s where they are strong.

I do not agree with this assessment. They are strong in perf/$ but fail miserably in every other respect, which hinders their bottom line and ability to fuel future GPU development.

Total discrete GPU sales they are getting destroyed.
Perf/w they are getting crushed by Maxwell.
Perf/mm2 they are getting firmly beat.
Overall performance they are getting beat.
Profit from console APU sales is slim.

GM204 is the fastest chip on the market AND it's getting sold in both notebooks and desktop segments. It's selling like wildfire. AMD's fastest chip is slower, more power hungry, larger, and does not exist in notebooks. And it's also selling with much, much slimmer margins. See where this is going? AMD needs to focus on perf/w in order to increase sales AND increase funding for future GPU development. Nvidia did a 180 with Kepler, basically catching up with and sometimes passing AMD on perf/mm2 and perf/w, and then hammered it home with Maxwell while all products that have come out since GCN 1.0 have not actually improved AMD's chip efficiency. The take away is that Nvidia's heavy investment into mobile is paying dividends for it's ability to compete and make money on the high end gamer market (both desktop and notebook), while AMD's investment in compute is hampering it's ability to compete in the gamer market (both desktop and notebook).

AMD cannot sustain incredibly low prices and expect to keep up with Nvidia in future GPU cycles. AMD's revenue, for the first time ever, is lower than Nvidia's. Their profit is obviously lower. They need ultra competitive parts out soon.

 

[metalliax]

AMD expects a 15% revenue drop in Q1.

Most companies that sell electronics see a revenue drop of 10-20% from Q4 to Q1. AMD won't be releasing any new products into the channel until Q2, so I expect a pretty bad Q1, followed by a slightly improved Q2, and a much better Q3/Q4 than last year.

All I can say is the numbers you showed mean very little to the point you were trying to make. AMD has a much bigger total addressable market than nVidia, therefore theoretically it would be much easier for AMD to double revenue than for nVidia to do so.

 

[ShintaiDK]

Most companies that sell electronics see a revenue drop of 10-20% from Q4 to Q1. AMD won't be releasing any new products into the channel until Q2, so I expect a pretty bad Q1, followed by a slightly improved Q2, and a much better Q3/Q4 than last year.

All I can say is the numbers you showed mean very little to the point you were trying to make. AMD has a much bigger total addressable market than nVidia, therefore theoretically it would be much easier for AMD to double revenue than for nVidia to do so.

The difference gets bigger in nVidia favour in Q1. And half of AMDs revenue doesnt even come from the PC segment.

 

[tviceman]

You also picked a quarter (Q4 2014) where AMD is at a low-point, from both CPU and GPU products. I would say AMD's Q3 and Q4 this year will dwarf last years numbers if they get their 3XX series and Carrizo launched properly in Q2.

AMD had higher revenue in the quarters prior to the last one, but made less profit and invested less money in R&D. Moving forward, Nvidia is likely to beat AMD in revenue, profit, and R&D more often than not. When was the last time AMD actually pulled a profit throughout the course of a year? I'm thinking it was when Intel paid them out $1+ billion a few years back. Anyways, Nvidia has completely eclipsed AMD in technology superiority with Maxwell before beating AMD in revenue and R&D. How bad can it get now that Nvidia is making more money and investing more back into development????

 

[metalliax]

AMD had higher revenue in the quarters prior to the last one, but made less profit and invested less money in R&D. Moving forward, Nvidia is likely to beat AMD in revenue, profit, and R&D more often than not. When was the last time AMD actually pulled a profit throughout the course of a year? I'm thinking it was when Intel paid them out $1+ billion a few years back. Anyways, Nvidia has completely eclipsed AMD in technology superiority with Maxwell before beating AMD in revenue and R&D. How bad can it get now that Nvidia is making more money and investing more back into development????

I am going to stop replying here... simply watch the next 4 quarters play out and you will see that nVidia will struggle to greatly increase revenues. They only address 1 major market (GPUs) and it will be hard for them to continue growing at their current rate if they face any competition from AMD's upcoming GPU releases.

 

[cbn]

The GPU development cycle is 4-5 years. AMD's available technology in 2015 is based on what they planned for in 2010 and 2011 (baring any delays or technical issues). AMD is focusing on the markets that make the most sense with the chips they currently have.

Should AMD have made additional investments into mobile? In hindsight, probably. But they bet heavily on powerful iGPUs, haven't really won that bet, and in the meantime they don't have chips that can go toe-to-toe with Maxwell on power efficiency.

Isn't Fiji being fabbed at GF?

Since AMD has the WSA and ends up paying for wafers anyway, maybe they can release some very low voltage versions of that big chip for laptop?