AMD made a profit this 1/4

[formulav8]

Hopefully things will keep going well for AMD in the profit sector. About $505m if I read correctly.

http://phx.corporate-ir.net/phoenix.zhtml?c=74093&p=irol-newsArticle&ID=1553537&highlight=

Looks like their GPUs and Fusion chips are the big winners.

 

[RyanGreener]

Nice. Can't wait for Llano, and hopefully Bulldozer is a success.

 

[hans007]

its not as good as it sound. they did beat estimates. but a lot of that profit was a one time gain because of divesting the last pieces of global foundaries i think.

i think excluding that the profit was something like 56 million if i recall.

 

[formulav8]

What I don't like is that AMD talked about llano but nothing about bd that I could see?

 

[dma0991]

What I don't like is that AMD talked about llano but nothing about bd that I could see?

BD could very well be AMD's trump card, maybe.

 

[Martimus]

Looks like they have been in the black for over a year now. Dirk really did a good job stabilizing the company, which makes me wonder what they are doing into the future wihtout him. I wonder if he just wasn't a good enough BSer to keep his job, even though he had the actual results you wanted from him.

 

[formulav8]

Dirk really did a good job stabilizing the company, which makes me wonder what they are doing into the future wihtout him.

:thumbsup:

 

[Vesku]

Poor Dirk, I have a feeling his engineering background caused him to actually give the board a lecture on why it wouldn't be a good idea for AMD to gut their x86 business and jump right into making chips for "all those ipads and iphones and ishoes".

 

[SickBeast]

BD could very well be AMD's trump card, maybe.

The problem is that it may be short lived with Intel coming out with Ivy Bridge shortly thereafter.

 

[Phynaz]

Looks like they have been in the black for over a year now. Dirk really did a good job stabilizing the company, which makes me wonder what they are doing into the future wihtout him. I wonder if he just wasn't a good enough BSer to keep his job, even though he had the actual results you wanted from him.

Dirk was fired for not having a mobile strategy.

 

[dma0991]

The problem is that it may be short lived with Intel coming out with Ivy Bridge shortly thereafter.

Ivy Bridge is not due till next year. The earliest Intel could release it would be the end of this year which is still a few months away after the release of Zambezi. If Ivy Bridge proves itself to be a strong contender against Zambezi there is always Komodo afterwards. Life goes on as usual.

 

[drizek]

Intel Makes Historic Profit

Historic: AMD Makes Profit

 

[Lonbjerg]

Intel Makes Historic Profit

Historic: AMD Makes Profit

I lol'ed...

 

[jimbo75]

I'm sure intel will put those $billions to great use as usual. Oh wait.

 

[Lonbjerg]

I'm sure intel will put those $billions to great use as usual. Oh wait.

Try and count their fabs...

 

[Idontcare]

Dirk was fired for not having a mobile strategy.

Oh? Me thinks he had quite the "mobile" strategy in place all along.

In fact one could argue that Dirk's mobile strategy was far more profitable (from his perspective) than any other mobile strategy in AMD's entire product lineup.

I can only imagine that every ex-AMD employee could only wish to be so rewarded for having failed to effect their duties and responsibilities.

Didn't bother to double-check those TLB circuits for Barcelona? Your fired! But here's your $12m severance check Time to go invent that "jump to conclusions" mat :thumbsup:

 

[mosox]

The only reason you didn't pay $600 for your Sandy Bridge CPU is AMD not loosing too much money. And if Intel use their money for things like hardware DRM - no thanks.

 

[mb103051]

Im really glad to see amd start rising from the ashes...i believe BD will be a fine product and very competative against current platforms...dont know about intel socket 2011 tho..but if there close and priced right they will sell a bunch for sure...
im on my first intel build since 1996 with this i7 920 dfi setup and its very fast but i do miss amd and look foreward to going back to them..intel really screws you with price when they get the chance..as long as amd has something competative i would be interested in buying amd again...

 

[Idontcare]

The only reason you didn't pay $600 for your Sandy Bridge CPU is AMD not loosing too much money. And if Intel use their money for things like hardware DRM - no thanks.

I disagree.

Intel is not competing with AMD. They are competing with their own chips they sold 2 and 4 yrs ago.

If Intel prices themselves too high then they risk stagnating the background volume of upgrades, both corporate and consumer.

Think about it. 4 yrs ago 4 of every 5 CPUs sold were Intel chips. Today 4 of every 5 chips sold are Intel chips. Intel chips are being sold to replace existing Intel chips. The price Intel sets is what determines this replacement rate.

You think they want to become a $1B/qtr company? AMD could sell every chip of theirs for $1 and they'd still only have 25% market share because they simply don't have the capacity to serve the entire market.

Intel would not cut off its nose to spite its face. Prices are set to compete with their existing CPU's they sold years ago. They MUST compel those folks to upgrade, or risk their sales collapsing.

 

[jimbo75]

Try and count their fabs...

I dunno, 15 or so? I'd rather count their spending.

$5 billion on a new fab
$5 billion on dell/other bribes
$8 billion on McAfee
$2.25 billion on payoffs to AMD and Nvidia
$5 billion on Larrabee

And god knows what else. Intel is a money making machine sure, but it's spending is pathetic. In the past 5 years it's probably spent less than a third to a quarter on actual manufacturing and the rest has been wasted on piss poor aquisitions and bribes/fines.

Edit - how could I forget the recent $1 billion recall.

 

[magomago]

Im really glad to see amd start rising from the ashes...i believe BD will be a fine product and very competative against current platforms...dont know about intel socket 2011 tho..but if there close and priced right they will sell a bunch for sure...
im on my first intel build since 1996 with this i7 920 dfi setup and its very fast but i do miss amd and look foreward to going back to them..intel really screws you with price when they get the chance..as long as amd has something competative i would be interested in buying amd again...

yup first time here using intel as well; i2500k. every other processor has been amd my whole life; k6-233, k62-550, 1700+,2200+,3700+,x2-4800+,x2-6000+....i just couldn't sit and keep waiting for bulldozer lol.

 

[podspi]

What I don't like is that AMD talked about llano but nothing about bd that I could see?

That's because Zambezi isn't going to be a big money-maker, Llano is. Bulldozer is exciting for us, but won't be high volume until Trinity

And I don't even want to talk about the server division, and neither did they, apparently D:

I disagree.

Intel is not competing with AMD. They are competing with their own chips they sold 2 and 4 yrs ago.

If Intel prices themselves too high then they risk stagnating the background volume of upgrades, both corporate and consumer.

...

Intel would not cut off its nose to spite its face. Prices are set to compete with their existing CPU's they sold years ago. They MUST compel those folks to upgrade, or risk their sales collapsing.

To an extent you are correct, particularly in mainstream markets, but I think AMD has some influence on Intel's pricing behavior -- just not as much as they would have if CPUs weren't durable.


Not only that, but the market is moving away from desktops which will last forever, and towards laptops which need to be replaced every 1-2 years because it got dropped/sat on/stolen/etc. This means Intel will be competing with itself (in an intertemporal sense) less than it has in quite a while.

Of course, as ARM marches upwards we may not need AMD to discipline Intel, but over the years I've grown quite fond of them, so I hope they stick around

 

[Vesku]

I disagree.

Intel is not competing with AMD. They are competing with their own chips they sold 2 and 4 yrs ago.

If Intel prices themselves too high then they risk stagnating the background volume of upgrades, both corporate and consumer.

Think about it. 4 yrs ago 4 of every 5 CPUs sold were Intel chips. Today 4 of every 5 chips sold are Intel chips. Intel chips are being sold to replace existing Intel chips. The price Intel sets is what determines this replacement rate.

You think they want to become a $1B/qtr company? AMD could sell every chip of theirs for $1 and they'd still only have 25% market share because they simply don't have the capacity to serve the entire market.

Intel would not cut off its nose to spite its face. Prices are set to compete with their existing CPU's they sold years ago. They MUST compel those folks to upgrade, or risk their sales collapsing.

I feel pretty comfortable in suggesting that Intel's pace and direction of cpu development would be quite different without the presence of at least one competitor. Imagine if AMD had closed shop just as the Pentium 4 architecture came out. Do you really think if that were the case that today's Intel would have the same or better price, performance per watt, and IPC as they do with their current lineup?

 

[Martimus]

I feel pretty comfortable in suggesting that Intel's pace and direction of cpu development would be quite different without the presence of at least one competitor. Imagine if AMD had closed shop just as the Pentium 4 architecture came out. Do you really think if that were the case that today's Intel would have the same or better price, performance per watt, and IPC as they do with their current lineup?

I doubt they would have advanced nearly as much, but the price structure isn't likely to have been that much higher. If anything they would have added more segmentation to their products so they could artificially cover all segments of the market with fewer designs (just fuse off parts of the product to create a cheaper chip to sell to people at a lower price.) They likely would also add more proprietary ISAs and purchase more software companies to ensure that new software uses those to make newer generation processors faster than old ones without having to increase the IPC or clockspeed.

 

[Lonbjerg]

I dunno, 15 or so? I'd rather count their spending.

$5 billion on a new fab
$5 billion on dell/other bribes
$8 billion on McAfee
$2.25 billion on payoffs to AMD and Nvidia
$5 billion on Larrabee

And god knows what else. Intel is a money making machine sure, but it's spending is pathetic. In the past 5 years it's probably spent less than a third to a quarter on actual manufacturing and the rest has been wasted on piss poor aquisitions and bribes/fines.

Edit - how could I forget the recent $1 billion recall.

The math is weak with this one...