AMD placed ON list of companies "at risk of failing"

[amdhunter]

Originally posted by: barfo
Yay, can't wait to buy a new octocore netburst with a 300W TDP and a $400 price tag.

lolol I used to heart my presscott.

 

[RagingBITCH]

Originally posted by: Lonyo
Did you even look at the list?
Ford is on there. Ford.
They didn't ask for any money from the government bailout and are on the same list as AMD (who basically just got a short term bailout from the Middle East).

http://arstechnica.com/busines...ly-to-default-list.ars

Ultimately, it's difficult to gauge how much stock to put in a list like this. Most of the financial press (see Bloomberg and the WSJ) has been reporting Moody's announcement of this Bottom Rung list as a publicity stunt aimed at rehabilitating the debt rating agency's reputation after the subprime debacle. To call the reputations of Moody's and S&P "tarnished" or "tattered" would be a gross understatement?"completely ruined" is more like it, since both companies were happy to certify the now-worthless "toxic assets" at the root of the present meltdown as top-quality, investment-grade debt. Some suggest that the Bottom Rung list is just Moody's aggressively doing the opposite of what got them into trouble, i.e., they'd like to be known as the first to spot worthless debt, instead of the last.

Just bc you didn't borrow money from the govt doesn't mean they're going to stay afloat. Poor sales + piling debt will still eat them alive. They're more capable of getting out of this than Chrysler/GM are now with help, but doesn't mean they're not in danger.

 

[zinfamous]

lulz, nice title edit. So much confusion before.

 

[sygyzy]

Originally posted by: beer
Guess what? Anything bought in the past couple of years, running XP or Win7, is fast enough for the vast majority of people. And if things are slow, they are slow for reasons not related to the CPU.

Totally true. Remember 10 years ago when you literally had to replace your computer every 2 years if you wanted to keep up? Well guess what? I am still running my 1.8 (or is it 2.0Ghz) computer and I can do everything just fine. In fact, each time I want to upgrade a component I have to do weeks of research just to catch up. I don't even read the front page of Anandtech anymore. There's no need to know that there's a 2.5 ghz quadcore now, up from the 2.4. Who the hell cares?

 

[hiromizu]

Let them fail. Not very good PC chipset integration anyway.

 

[sandorski]

The Chinese will Buy it. I won't believe AMD has gone under until their products are no longer available to purchase. AMD has been Dead for 20 years, yet they are still here.

 

[Modelworks]

Originally posted by: Phokus

Originally posted by: Genx87
Irony. Nvidia buys AMD.

i doubt the gov't will allow that

It wouldn't be a problem.
The catch with the x86 licenses is that they are non transferable. So buying the company still wouldn't give them the right to make the x86 chips. Though there might be problems with ATI.

AMD if bought would have to remain totally separate from whatever company purchased them , no sharing of x86 technology, etc.

 

[her209]

What happened to Fusion?

 

[her209]

Originally posted by: Phokus

Originally posted by: Genx87
Irony. Nvidia buys AMD.

i doubt the gov't will allow that

With Intel in the business of making GPUs now, I think the government would allow it.

 

[foghorn67]

Not Eddie Bauer. I like their jeans.

 

[blinky8225]

I doubt that we would see the end of AMD processors. If they do go under, they won't disappear; the name and the capital that they have is worth too much to just disappear. Some company like Microsoft, Google, or IBM with a lot of cash in the bank would buy them at fire-sale prices.

 

[dbk]

someone would buy it

Originally posted by: her209

Originally posted by: Phokus

Originally posted by: Genx87
Irony. Nvidia buys AMD.

i doubt the gov't will allow that

With Intel in the business of making GPUs now, I think the government would allow it.

NVIDIA would own ATI

/head assplodes

 

[0roo0roo]

Originally posted by: jjsole
Even when times were good they built more debt than processors. It will be a shame, but ibm will get involved somewhere to add more competition to intel.

then they sell that unit to china, and we watch intel go down. hehe

 

[Triumph]

Originally posted by: sygyzy

Originally posted by: beer
Guess what? Anything bought in the past couple of years, running XP or Win7, is fast enough for the vast majority of people. And if things are slow, they are slow for reasons not related to the CPU.

Totally true. Remember 10 years ago when you literally had to replace your computer every 2 years if you wanted to keep up? Well guess what? I am still running my 1.8 (or is it 2.0Ghz) computer and I can do everything just fine. In fact, each time I want to upgrade a component I have to do weeks of research just to catch up. I don't even read the front page of Anandtech anymore. There's no need to know that there's a 2.5 ghz quadcore now, up from the 2.4. Who the hell cares?

I built my most recent PC a few years ago, and honestly I couldn't even tell you what I put in it. It still works, that's all I know. Hell, I was running my 300A up until about 2003, IIRC. With a gig of RAM that thing ran 2000 just fine.

 

[OCGuy]

Originally posted by: sandorski
The Chinese will Buy it. I won't believe AMD has gone under until their products are no longer available to purchase. AMD has been Dead for 20 years, yet they are still here.

You apparently dont know how it works. AMD had to get permission to get a cash infusion from the Arabs. The US protects its sensitive technology.

 

[0roo0roo]

Originally posted by: Ocguy31

Originally posted by: sandorski
The Chinese will Buy it. I won't believe AMD has gone under until their products are no longer available to purchase. AMD has been Dead for 20 years, yet they are still here.

You apparently dont know how it works. AMD had to get permission to get a cash infusion from the Arabs. The US protects its sensitive technology.

naw, u watch as the dems hand it over to china

 

[imported_Asianman]

AMD can't really be classified as sensitive technology, after all, they can just disect a $40 athlon and get all the secrets they need. All they are missing is a license to reproduce it.
Stupid AMD just had to go and buy ATI for an absurd amount of money when they could have invested it against intel. Maybe they wouldn't be in all this trouble now

 

[nerp]

Originally posted by: Asianman
AMD can't really be classified as sensitive technology, after all, they can just disect a $40 athlon and get all the secrets they need. All they are missing is a license to reproduce it.
Stupid AMD just had to go and buy ATI for an absurd amount of money when they could have invested it against intel. Maybe they wouldn't be in all this trouble now

Actually, the ATI purchase has led to one of the few bright spots in AMD's product line and balance sheet and has put nvidia on the defensive. Without the AMD acquisition, we might not have seen good chipsets like the 780g or the 4800 series of cards.

 

[brxndxn]

I don't agree with the 'it's fast enough' mentality.. I'm still one of the people that thinks computers are insanely slow and everything needs to speed the fuck up..

Hard drives.. too slow.. SSD's? Still pretty slow..

CPU's? I'm always waiting on my quad core laptop to finish it's damn hourglass..

Software? Windows.. Linux.. they all are slow.. I want a PC that is faster than me. I click.. and I notice no lag between my click and the response.

But then again.. I program distributed server systems in multiple virtual machines.. I swear if I added up all the half-second hourglasses I had to wait for throughout the day, it would add up to hours..



I really don't want AMD to go under.. Intel has completely screwed the consumer before.. and they are all too willing to do it again. AMD tried to give a million of their faster Athlons (back during the 1ghz days) to HP and HP would not take them.. because Intel threatened to raise their prices just enough to make them accepting AMD's free chips an expensive choice..

 

[Fox5]

Originally posted by: dullard
AMD is a gnat on Intel's back. Sure, it is annoying, but it doesn't make any real difference. Intel followed Moore's observation before AMD was big, and Intel followed Moore's observation after AMD was big. AMD's presence made no real difference. Heck, if you look closely when AMD came on strong in the mid 1990s, Intel slowed DOWN a bit.

Too many people here need to Learn the difference between competition and a duopoly.

Many would argue that Intel slowed down due to lack of competition up to that point, and only picked up the pace because of AMD. Remember, CPUs have a 2 or 3 years lead time from concept to production, at least.

 

[mrrman]

Id rather see Intel fail than AMD

 

[Eli]

Originally posted by: techs

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: techs
Intel rejoices. New processor roadmap to be revealed on day AMD goes under.

Yeah they'll have a super fast expensive CPU that nobody can afford or needs.

And it will be top of the line...for three years.

Word.

 

[Gothgar]

oh noes