-
We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.
AMD turns in $30 million loss
- Thread starter clarkey01
- Start date
Jesus, I feel pretty gutted, they try so hard and gets them f*ck all.
Everyone thinks or has an opnion of how AMD could be a real player to Intel, but I dont even think Hector knows, shame they'll never threaten Intel, more like the fly that just buzzes around from time to time, with a soft string and nothing fatal.
Everyone thinks or has an opnion of how AMD could be a real player to Intel, but I dont even think Hector knows, shame they'll never threaten Intel, more like the fly that just buzzes around from time to time, with a soft string and nothing fatal.
Zebo
Elite Member
Bout time to buy some stock...as they say buy low sell high.
IMO AMD will never beat Intel until kids/young adults like y'all grow up and make buying decisions for your corps. (assuming AMD has parity still then) Intel simply has too much brand recognition and loyalty in business world...
IMO AMD will never beat Intel until kids/young adults like y'all grow up and make buying decisions for your corps. (assuming AMD has parity still then) Intel simply has too much brand recognition and loyalty in business world...
xbdestroya
Member
Profit levels alone don't constitute a 'threat.' I think AMD has indeed become a threat to Intel, at least in the x86 server space and the desktop. We'll see where it all goes. Too bad though.
aceofspades230
Member
I think your right about AMD being a threat despite profit losses. They are going to own the gaming market in a few years and if AMD's dual core processor is more sucessful than intel's we could see a real battle for the #1 spot. Intel still has the business sector under its control and AMD needs a large piece of that to really compete.
Lets face it...It is the business sector that will fuel them with the capital they need to actually gain and sustain a large enouh of marketshare to actually make Intel scared.
Us gamers and enthusiast are not as bg and lucrative as most think.....They need to get the government contracts, fortune 500 companies, etc and then they will see some real green. The profit margin is much better in that sector versus the cut throat consumer pc market.
Us gamers and enthusiast are not as bg and lucrative as most think.....They need to get the government contracts, fortune 500 companies, etc and then they will see some real green. The profit margin is much better in that sector versus the cut throat consumer pc market.
dannybin1742
Platinum Member
did anyone actually read the article? i read it in my schwab account, and what you guys are missing is that they incured $49 million in stock buy back to shore up a portion of the debt and retirement, otherwise they would have pulled in 5cents/share profit, but over all the total revenue is up so that good
From a distribution stand point AMD has two problems to growing large enough to combat intel:
1> It can't produce enough to supply some major oems like Dell, but they are slowly growing larger every year till hopefully they can contract to them.
2> AMD has never had a 100% rock stabile platform to run on. I have used amd platforms for myself and they are a lot of fun and great chips, but from a business standpoint there has not been a steady supply of rock solid chipsets on rock solid boards that can match intel's warranties and rma rates. It's not the processor that's the problem.. The only amd rma's/failures that I have ever seen have been due to user error. Boards on the other hand are a different story. And as much as I've touted AMD as a better processor, and not saying that intel hasn't slipped and had its own problems, in general though over time I can not argue against that position coming from businesses.
Its a good thing that Nvidia has been building chipsets. Most amd boards are still geared for home/gamers. We need some more major oem manufacturers like Tyan to build business/workstation class boards. The problem now is that they don't make enough for Dell's either and you lose the cost savings of going with AMD vs Intel when you use a highend workstation board from a company like Tyan.
That leaves purchasers with equal cost benefit, lesser service (Intel will overnight a board at their cost), and higher risk (If Intel fails, crap happens, if AMD fails its why didn't you get intel?). Still I love what AMD is doing and I hope they keep kicking ass and executing with the processor and now mobile markets.
1> It can't produce enough to supply some major oems like Dell, but they are slowly growing larger every year till hopefully they can contract to them.
2> AMD has never had a 100% rock stabile platform to run on. I have used amd platforms for myself and they are a lot of fun and great chips, but from a business standpoint there has not been a steady supply of rock solid chipsets on rock solid boards that can match intel's warranties and rma rates. It's not the processor that's the problem.. The only amd rma's/failures that I have ever seen have been due to user error. Boards on the other hand are a different story. And as much as I've touted AMD as a better processor, and not saying that intel hasn't slipped and had its own problems, in general though over time I can not argue against that position coming from businesses.
Its a good thing that Nvidia has been building chipsets. Most amd boards are still geared for home/gamers. We need some more major oem manufacturers like Tyan to build business/workstation class boards. The problem now is that they don't make enough for Dell's either and you lose the cost savings of going with AMD vs Intel when you use a highend workstation board from a company like Tyan.
That leaves purchasers with equal cost benefit, lesser service (Intel will overnight a board at their cost), and higher risk (If Intel fails, crap happens, if AMD fails its why didn't you get intel?). Still I love what AMD is doing and I hope they keep kicking ass and executing with the processor and now mobile markets.
Zebo
Elite Member
:roll:
Alright clueless n00b you asked for it.
The stability arguments are complete FUD Period. Intels had to recall whole chipsets..820..aletrwood..grantsdale etc. AMD has'nt ever had to. Nor have thier partners AFAIK. AMD is way more stable than Intel now because most of the work of chipset is offloaded into CPU now with onboard mem controller.
Those were all FUD too back in the day. http://www.tomshardware.com/ma.../010122/kt133a-16.html
"The most important finding was the enjoyable fact that each of the tested boards ran 100% stable even at the fastest possible memory timing settings. VIA's upcoming DDR chipsets may not look too impressive right now, but the Apollo KT133A is a matured, fast and solid product that offers good performance."
http://www6.tomshardware.com/c.../001017/athlon-02.html
"AMD Processors are significantly less expensive than Intel processors although they are at least on par in terms of performance. - FACT"
"AMD processors are incompatible. - LIE
Not that the average guy who just heard that phrase would know what the heck 'incompatible' is, but it sounds really bad, doesn't it? Well, even the people who do know that 'incompatible' means that a product wouldn't work reliably with other components (which of course is bad) are wrong if they accuse AMD's Athlon or Duron processors of it. In our labs we are testing all kinds of Athlon platforms with all kinds of different components and I can definitely say that I cannot see any difference between the compatibility of AMD products and platforms compared to the same from Intel."
"Chipsets for AMD processors are inferior to Intel chipsets. - LIE
Yeah, sure, the earth is flat and politicians are honest ... I am still amused when I see people posting the above message in news groups or as their response to articles. How many more times does Intel need to screw up their chipsets (i820, MTH, ...) until you guys get the message? . . . Incompatibilities are more a problem of the motherboard BIOS than of the chipset right now. Thus both chipset makers, Intel as well as VIA, are actually in the same situation."
:::sigh:::Tom::: I guess some things will never change, four years later still hearing the same ole' BS
Are you more knowledgeable than TOM?
No, AMD is not just as stable it much more stable than intel.
According to Intel the prescott CPU itself has 31 bugs which can hardlock your PC....the 915 and 925 chipsets did have multiple bugs and were recalled.
http://translate.google.com/tr...n%26lr%3D%26ie%3DUTF-8
Opetron had 1 that's been fixed.
How about ANAND? You know the guy who reviews hardware professionally seeing thousands of products a year, the guys been using AMD servers for four years now, because thier unreliable?? IMO There is actually no more effective endorsement of the stability and reliability of AMD platforms than the fact that AnandTech uses them as the sole platform for the web serving of its main site and forums.
How much is Intel paying you to post here?
miketheidiot
Lifer
GuitarDaddy
Lifer
Yeah its kind of bitter sweet. To really compete with Intel, AMD would have to give up some of the principles that make gamers and enthusiasts love them. And spend their time and money creating a corporate image thru intense marketing, and cranking out boring products that are optimized for business apps. In my opinion this would be a big mistake, as they can never compete with Intel in the corporate arena. Intel simply has too much brand loyalty, momentum, leverage and buying power.
IMHO Amd should try and expand the gaming and enthusiast market, while at the same time going after a few key niche markets where they can compete effectively.
IMHO Amd should try and expand the gaming and enthusiast market, while at the same time going after a few key niche markets where they can compete effectively.
imported_SLIM
Member
So you want them to become the Apple of the x86 world??? :disgust:
Quarter after quarter of record sales (5 in a row now) shows they are just now gaining momentum as evidenced by this little summary:
"For the full year ended December 26, 2004, AMD achieved record sales of $5 billion, a 42 percent increase from 2003. Fiscal year 2004 net income was $91 million, or $0.25 per share, including charges of $51.6 million, or $0.14 per share. AMD reported sales in 2003 of $3.52 billion and a net loss of $274 million, or $0.79 per share, including credits of $13.9 million, or $0.04 cents per share."
ie. they went from losing almost 80 cents/share (which still was an improvement from 2002 if memory serves) to gaining 25 cents/share in one year. Certainly doesn't look like the gloom and doom being discussed in this thread. I agree with the previous post suggesting now is almost the right time to buy AMD stock, but I'd wait until after the first quarter which is likely to be tough on their stock price. IMO, it's the most likely quarter for their sales to falter on their record setting pace.
SLIM
miketheidiot
Lifer
Just have to wait for 1st Q earnings, which will probably be just as bad in the flash division as this quarter. Hopefully processors will continue to do well, although they haven't done great so far at least IMO.
LifeStealer
Senior member
Things go up and down, AMD is doing very well compared to what it was doing just a few years ago. I'm glad to have someone competing with Intel regardless of wether or not they can produce the same number of chips. Intel is setting itself up for a fall, if they don't get the heat and power down on the new dual cores all the money they're spending on refurbishing factory (11 I think right?) won't be such a good thing to look back on. I don't think buisiness has any major loyalty to any cpu maker, much like they have no loyalty to most things in the buisiness world. The best ussually wins out in that sector. Opterons are a good sign AMD is going to do well.
I think AMD to truly blossom and grow muscle would need a new owner, as much as I like IBM I don?t think it would ultimately be healthy for AMD, the bureaucratic management style of IBM would let AMD rot.
AMD are in debt, they cant afford to advertise, they can not spend millions and millions on R&D, they?ve have to borrow huge amounts of cash to pay for FAB 30 & FAB 36, and I don?t even think there close to paying off FAB 30 yet ( 6 years on).
Another problem is that once FAB 36 comes online, its likely that FAB 30 will be converted to flash only, the cost of re tooling and maintaining it as one of the worlds best semi conductor fabs would be a heavy drain. Plus I don?t even think there using all of FAB 30 anyway.
Intel are just playing master of puppets with there flash division, squeezing AMD when they feel they need to brought back down to earth. I really cant see AMD making any significant progress or growth with the current situation
Even with Intel being vulnerable for most of the year , they couldn?t punch any tiny holes through there walls. This sounds like an AMD fanboy talking to the congregation at Sanders funeral so I better shut up.
All I wanna see is a stronger, more flexible, organised AMD challenging Intel. The more money AMD get, the more they can spend on R&D, the better chips we get. Imagine if the people who designed the K7/K8 had Intel?s resources.
AMD are in debt, they cant afford to advertise, they can not spend millions and millions on R&D, they?ve have to borrow huge amounts of cash to pay for FAB 30 & FAB 36, and I don?t even think there close to paying off FAB 30 yet ( 6 years on).
Another problem is that once FAB 36 comes online, its likely that FAB 30 will be converted to flash only, the cost of re tooling and maintaining it as one of the worlds best semi conductor fabs would be a heavy drain. Plus I don?t even think there using all of FAB 30 anyway.
Intel are just playing master of puppets with there flash division, squeezing AMD when they feel they need to brought back down to earth. I really cant see AMD making any significant progress or growth with the current situation
Even with Intel being vulnerable for most of the year , they couldn?t punch any tiny holes through there walls. This sounds like an AMD fanboy talking to the congregation at Sanders funeral so I better shut up.
All I wanna see is a stronger, more flexible, organised AMD challenging Intel. The more money AMD get, the more they can spend on R&D, the better chips we get. Imagine if the people who designed the K7/K8 had Intel?s resources.
otispunkmeyer
Lifer
if AMD had intels Propeganda/Marketing Machine working for them i think AMD would be very close. intel have been the best for years, they dabble in all corners of the market, and the marketing team make sure that the consumer only hears about INTEL and no one else
here in the UK when adverts for Curry's, Dixons, PC World come on the TV, they only ever tell you about the intel powered machines. yet when u actually go the the shop they have plenty of AMD rigs. but the average joe, as he only heard of intel and no one else, tends to leave the AMD rigs well alone.
id be willing to bet the average buyer would settle for a Celeron over a Athlon XP/sempron because to them AMD may as well just be a typo of AND.
here in the UK when adverts for Curry's, Dixons, PC World come on the TV, they only ever tell you about the intel powered machines. yet when u actually go the the shop they have plenty of AMD rigs. but the average joe, as he only heard of intel and no one else, tends to leave the AMD rigs well alone.
id be willing to bet the average buyer would settle for a Celeron over a Athlon XP/sempron because to them AMD may as well just be a typo of AND.
The problem with that is, server and workstation chipsets are 99% of the time not produced by AMD.
Intel/Intel for proc/mobo is just safer in the eyes of businesses ( i know thats not neccesarily true, but thats the way it is percieved).
Im sure the enormous costs of their new fab are part of that net loss, their sales are up considerably and they are making greater margains on their high end chips where intel has nothing to compete.
LTC8K6
Lifer
If they don't advertise, they won't really compete with Intel. Period.
If no one knows they are just as good and just as stable as Intel, they won't get out of the niche. Period.
It's a good thing for AMD that Intel already has one foot in the grave with those rotten Prescott cores. 😀
Or alternately, the death of Intel has been greatly exaggerated.
Although no one in their right mind, even an AMD fan, should actually want Intel to die.
If no one knows they are just as good and just as stable as Intel, they won't get out of the niche. Period.
It's a good thing for AMD that Intel already has one foot in the grave with those rotten Prescott cores. 😀
Or alternately, the death of Intel has been greatly exaggerated.
Although no one in their right mind, even an AMD fan, should actually want Intel to die.
It's really Intel that have had all the quality problems lately. I tend to lean towards Zebo's view on this.
Several PC manufacturers have had such big problems that they've tried to renegotiate supply contracts with Intel. You can also see this in the increased share that AMD gets from some builders.
Since we introduced AMD at work (against some resistance) some 2 years ago, we've had exactly zero problems with AMD (AXP3000+ and A64 3400+). The picture isn't at all as rosy on the Intel side. We've had plenty of stability problems with the introduction of the P4. I do not know the exact cause for them. They have gradually disappeared with software upgrades, but I'm at least going to suggest that some could at least possibly be due to the very long list of hardware bugs that plague every single issue of the P4, and which Intel suggests you should program around.
But the most damning, (and costly) problems with our Intels, is a tendency to throttle under sustained load. (No, I didn't spec or build those machines). This is not particularly obvious either. Today, there is a software utility, Throttlewatch, but before there was no way to discern if the PC throttled or not. (One did it at an indicated temp still in the 50's C). Other than time some specific amount of work on multiple machines. Something I never really had time and opportunity to do.
I'd say AMD's main problem is the people in decision, administration and maintenance. I meet such guys now and then. It's amazing how little they know about computer hardware. They're completely clueless: "I don't like AMD's 4in1 AGP drivers". They all also thinks AMD is hotter than Intel. This problem is aggrevated by the problem that they actually think they know something.
I also think that VIA and ATI must have made AMD a colossal diservice at some time. Since there seem to have been some serious problems that everybody still have in fresh mind. (Funny how they've so quickly forgotten all of Intel's chipset issues.)
Looking around, at friends and acquaintancies, the picture remains the same. I don't know of any problems with AMD. Not terribly many of them around, but even the oldest, a ~300MHz K6-2 (which I was quite sceptical against, at the time it was purchased) is still in service with the guy's mother. And I've spent days tinkering with peoples ailing Intel boxes. (Not that much of that have actually been Intel's fault, but it's still relevant since it's on the Intel platform.)
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 24K
-
-
