AMD product mix by Mercury Research (Q312 numbers)

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

mrmt

Diamond Member
Aug 18, 2012
3,974
0
76
Its been said by a number of people here and I tend to agree with them, half of zambezi's problems were GloFo's 32nm process technology. Even if AMD had stuck with just shrinking the K10, as they did with Llano, the process tech did not deliver in terms of clockspeeds and power usage over that of 45nm K10's.


I think this GLF theory too convenient be true. When AMD has to resort to die-salvaging to make single module Trinity and dual-module Vishera you have to wonder how bad yields are, because if yields were good, you could design a specific SKU for those products. This is where I see GLF screwing up.

We have to look no further than Llano to see that die size scaling. AMD shrunk the Deneb core, added a GPU and Llano a reasonable die size, power consumption and clocks, and we know that Llano was more of a rush job, so I don't see any lead pointing to a chronic process flaw.

Once we compare Bulldozer with similar sized chips like SNB-EP, we see that power consumption and clock speeds aren't out of touch with Orochi, which means that for the same die size what GLF delivered isn't that bad by Intel standards.

When I see people blaming GLF, I cannot but remember Prescott at 65nm, which wasn't competitive with 90nm Athlon and X2, and this same process gave us Conroe which wiped out whatever AMD threw at it. The flaw wasn't in Intel process but at the Netburst concept. I see the same with Bulldozer, a flawed concept that no amount of engineering or process technology could make it work.

I'd be glad if you could share the reasons of the guys that blame AMD for half of Bulldozer problems. Listen to those guys wouldn't hurt.
 

phenomkid7

Banned
Nov 17, 2012
38
0
0
Healthy competition is good for the marketplace and especially the consumer. This news is not good for consumers. We need a threat to Intel to offset their near-monopoly.

The popularity of their APU line gives one hope.

Are you dense dude? What competition?

Intel owns 81% of the x86 market.

And Intel has stiff competition in Mobile, the fastest growing PC market. Its called ARM/custom SoC.