AMD upcoming financials

[tviceman]

Not looking good. AMD forecasted revenue to be up 3% sequentially, but they are saying revenues are going to come in at -11%. I honestly think their GPU division (and that includes their APU's, IMO) are keeping the company entire afloat. They need to recover from Bulldozer fast, otherwise their ability to remain competitive will continue to shrink to the point of being detrimental to we consumers.

http://www.techpowerup.com/168813/AMD-Announces-Preliminary-Second-Quarter-Results.html

 

[ShintaiDK]

After hours trading is at -10%.

11% revenue decrease is heavy.

 

[Olikan]

wut?... revenues are 3% up, but revenues are 11% down?

 

[ShintaiDK]

wut?... revenues are 3% up, but revenues are 11% down?

They expected +3%, results ended at -11%.

 

[OILFIELDTRASH]

They lost many potential customers with the way the 7XXX series cards were handled. Just like I said when they price gouged on the 79XX series release. People don't take kindly to being price gouged on something.

 

[Olikan]

They expected +3%, results ended at -11%.

yeah...missed the "forecast"...lol D:

 

[thilanliyan]

They lost many potential customers with the way the 7XXX series cards were handled. Just like I said when they price gouged on the 79XX series release. People don't take kindly to being price gouged on something.

Yes that must be why their financials are down.

It couldn't have anything to do with their lack of much on the CPU side, especially servers, which are down to something like 5% marketshare now. Nope, their uncompetitive CPUs have nothing to do with it.

 

[Xcobra]

They lost many potential customers with the way the 7XXX series cards were handled. Just like I said when they price gouged on the 79XX series release. People don't take kindly to being price gouged on something.

LOL really?

 

[OILFIELDTRASH]

LOL really?

Lol yes.

 

[OILFIELDTRASH]

Yes that must be why their financials are down.

It couldn't have anything to do with their lack of much on the CPU side, especially servers, which are down to something like 5% marketshare now. Nope, their uncompetitive CPUs have nothing to do with it.

I didn't say it was the whole reason. But when gpu sales were way up they were at least breaking even or making a little.
The current crop of video cards offer little reason to plop down several hundred dollars for the small performance increase you would be getting.
I knew after the initial surge of early adopters (which is a very small group) that sales would slow down because there just isnt enough value in this generation of cards. I owned a gtx 670 briefly. It was a great card but truth is I really only need it for one game (BF3) and I couldn't justify the price tag. I returned it and I'm rocking a used gtx 460 I picked up for $85. It plays every game I want and until I can get a solid upgrade for $150 I'm sticking with it.

 

[3DVagabond]

They lost many potential customers with the way the 7XXX series cards were handled. Just like I said when they price gouged on the 79XX series release. People don't take kindly to being price gouged on something.

Their prices are in line with the market. nVidia, by your logic, should have been out of business years ago. This is the 1st generation of cards in years where AMD set the high water mark. Then it was only for 3 months. After that they dropped to be below the competition. While nVidia's prices have gone up.

Price doesn't effect things the way some assume. It will influence your immediate buying decision. Even then it won't be the one determining factor. For many, it's not the main determining factor.

 

[OILFIELDTRASH]

Their prices are in line with the market. nVidia, by your logic, should have been out of business years ago. This is the 1st generation of cards in years where AMD set the high water mark. Then it was only for 3 months. After that they dropped to be below the competition. While nVidia's prices have gone up.

Price doesn't effect things the way some assume. It will influence your immediate buying decision. Even then it won't be the one determining factor. For many, it's not the main determining factor.

If price isn't the determining factor why is 99% of pc gaming is done with $200 cards and under? This forum and others like it represent .1% of the gaming community. People don't care enough to spend $300 on a video card. Add on top the fact that most gamers have a capable gaming card and amd is asking for another $300 for a 10-20% performance increase. It's no coincidence that their revenue is heading for the gutter.

 

[3DVagabond]

If price isn't the determining factor why is 99% of pc gaming is done with $200 cards and under? This forum and others like it represent .1% of the gaming community. People don't care enough to spend $300 on a video card. Add on top the fact that most gamers have a capable gaming card and amd is asking for another $300 for a 10-20% performance increase. It's no coincidence that their revenue is heading for the gutter.

Now you are moving from the top end 7900, in your original reply, to the $200 market, in order to justify that reply. The $200 price point is mostly about bang/$, that's correct. Irrelevent to your first statement, though.

As far as what most gaming is done on? It's OEM equipment. You might want to verify your numbers. Or post references on where you are drawing them from. Or, how you are calculating them. They seem a bit exaggerated.

 

[Phynaz]

WTF AMD? Your stock was supposed to finance my September upgrade plans.

 

[Piano Man]

WTF AMD? Your stock was supposed to finance my September upgrade plans.

AMD stock? Brave Man. Hope you got in during the early part of 09

 

[BallaTheFeared]

$550/$600 7970 - Who'd of thunk it.

AMD isn't Nvidia, sorry.


I guess price gouging on both 7 series and bulldozer didn't pay off too well.

 

[thilanliyan]

I didn't say it was the whole reason. But when gpu sales were way up they were at least breaking even or making a little.
The current crop of video cards offer little reason to plop down several hundred dollars for the small performance increase you would be getting.
I knew after the initial surge of early adopters (which is a very small group) that sales would slow down because there just isnt enough value in this generation of cards. I owned a gtx 670 briefly. It was a great card but truth is I really only need it for one game (BF3) and I couldn't justify the price tag. I returned it and I'm rocking a used gtx 460 I picked up for $85. It plays every game I want and until I can get a solid upgrade for $150 I'm sticking with it.

As 3DVagabond said, you moved away from your initial argument with this:
"If price isn't the determining factor why is 99% of pc gaming is done with $200 cards and under? This forum and others like it represent .1% of the gaming community. People don't care enough to spend $300 on a video card."

If 99% of pc gaming is done with $200 cards, what does the launch pricing of 7XXX cards have to do with it? They were all above $200, and there were plenty of other choices from AMD and nV in the <$200 arena.

Their high pricing of 7XXX cards have very little to do with these reported financials. They SHOULD be making most of their money on the CPU side, as traditionally that has been the larger part of their business, but they have very uncompetitive CPUs and their biggest failing is in the server side.

$550/$600 7970 - Who'd of thunk it.

AMD isn't Nvidia, sorry.

I guess price gouging on both 7 series and bulldozer didn't pay off too well.

Did you not buy video cards before the ATI 2900 series? I can tell you, ATI had some expensive cards back then too and people did buy them...this isn't the first time we have seen those prices.

 

[Wall Street]

It couldn't have anything to do with their lack of much on the CPU side, especially servers, which are down to something like 5% marketshare now. Nope, their uncompetitive CPUs have nothing to do with it.

You are right on. Last year, they sold $5.00 Bn. in CPUs/chipsets/servers vs. $1.57 Bn. in GPUs. This is 76% CPU to 24% GPU, suggesting that an 11% miss must have at least a very substantial CPU portion. I would guess that it is pretty hard to move Bulldozer cores right now.

I wonder is Rory Read is keeping the prices a little bit inflated to "kitchen sink" the quarter. It could be to his advantage for him to show some bad performance in the start while he "turns things around" making it easier for him to show growth in the future. It is a classic CEO earnings management tactic.

 

[thilanliyan]

You are right on. Last year, they sold $5.00 MM in CPUs/chipsets/servers vs. $1.57 Bn. in GPUs. This is 76% GPU to 24% CPU, suggesting that an 11% miss must have at least a very substantial CPU portion. I would guess that it is pretty hard to move Bulldozer cores right now.

There you go everyone...from Mr. Wall Street himself! If anyone knows financials...it's Mr. Street.

 

[RussianSensation]

$550/$600 7970 - Who'd of thunk it.
AMD isn't Nvidia, sorry.
I guess price gouging on both 7 series and bulldozer didn't pay off too well.

Initial $550 sticker shock of HD7970 aside, I think this really isn't about HD7900 series. We've known from info Grooverriding dug up a while back that only 3-4% of NV/AMD GPU stack comprises the overall discrete GPU sales. Think about it, how many people are buying > $350 GPUs daily? The bread and butter of GPUs is in the < $350 space. With < $100 GPU market mostly killed, it's really even worse than that. Still, AMD has that covered with HD7750/7770/6850/6870/7850/7870. NV literally has nothing worth spending $1 on in the < $350 price range on the desktop space. So it's doubtful desktop HD7000 series is the problem here.

I think the Mobile Kepler design wins all over the place might have clawed back some discrete mobile GPU market share from AMD.

However, if anything, weakened growth in the China and emerging markets probably hurt uptake for Trinity platform (not to mention it was delayed), servers, etc.

Also, I haven't recommended a single AMD desktop or mobile CPU to anyone I know since Bulldozer launched. If you want to honestly point the blame on why AMD is doing so poorly, lack of smartphone/tablet CPU strategy and terrible execution on Bulldozer and Llano/Trinity are the answers to most of that imo. Like I said before, Bulldozer is such an epic failure, AMD would have been better off shrinking Phenom II to 22-32nm and pumping clocks to 4.5ghz. It would have mopped the floor with Bulldozer in performance and power consumption.

Rory said the new strategy is attacking emerging and less lucrative markets where Intel doesn't want to go but all these delays for Trinity platform haven't helped. Further, the Ultrabook competitor from AMD is still MIA. Their strategy for undercutting Intel's Ultrabooks with attractive Trinity laptops so far hasn't been materializing. What AMD has launched so far are awful budget laptops with crappy keyboards, cheap screens, half working trackpads and thick plasticky shells.

The sad part is they are going to be 1-2 generations behind Intel in CPU performance unless something unexpected happens. Piledriver claws back 10-15% CPU speed, well Haswell will extend IVB by 10-15%, ad infinitum. In the desktop CPU space, AMD is behind not only in performance but also in power consumption.

 

[Wall Street]

There you go everyone...from Mr. Wall Street himself! If anyone knows financials...it's Mr. Street.

Can't believe that I screwed up millions for billions and reversed the CPU vs. GPU numbers. AMD is about 75% of revenue from CPU. If my boss saw that post, I would be looking for a new job.

 

[thilanliyan]

Can't believe that I screwed up millions for billions and reversed the CPU vs. GPU numbers. AMD is about 75% of revenue from CPU. If my boss saw that post, I would be looking for a new job.

I think we knew what you meant.

In the desktop CPU space, AMD is behind not only in performance but also in power consumption.

Yep, performance is not so bad, once you overclock, but power consumption goes through the roof. I have not been able to find the upper limit on my FX6100 because I can't keep it cool enough...4.4GHz was as high as I could take it with decent temps.

Unless Piledriver brings some decent performance AND power consumption, my next cpu will definitely be Intel based.

 

[BallaTheFeared]

The way I've seen it AMD's cards at $100-$350 were all either direct side grades to cards that have been out for years or were actually slower than what had been availble at that price point.

AMD lost a chance to really move products, instead they priced their card in relation to nvidia's old 40nm chips.

The 7850 cost around the same as the 448, but if you look at reviews the 448 is slightly stronger at stock (the classy was actually noticeably faster at a lower price point /w rebate for awhile), of course the 7850 overclocks slightly better and has considerably better consumption. But how is the same perf we've already had for almost two years at the exact same price point going to attract a lot of new purchases?

You can see this up and down the product line. You needed to go to the 7950 at least if you already had a 6970, and you'd have to pay more than what you paid for your 6970, at the lower end the 6850 was a much better value than any new card AMD produced both in price and performance.


7 series was a major blunder on AMD's part, imo. Bulldozer was the same thing, they did the same thing with Phenom II though. Remember the 1090T, $300 at release, $230 a few months later. I dunno why AMD feels they are capable of holding price points their products simply don't warrant against companies like Intel and Nvidia which are doing better and have far more brand recognition.

Right or wrong there are oogles of people who walk into stores and buy inferior Nvidia products for more than a better AMD card all the time, simply because it's green. It's been that way for years, suddenly changing your price structure which has worked for awhile now, just seems like a blunder to me.

AMD has tons of other problems, however a loss of revenue makes it pretty clear you're doing something wrong.

 

[Mopetar]

WTF AMD? Your stock was supposed to finance my September upgrade plans.

You could always short it

 

[hawtdawg]

I hope AMD doesn't take ATI down with them.