• 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's CEO Dirk Meyer to leave company - CONFIRMED!!!!

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
"I believe we have significant opportunities to cement our leadership positions in several key market segments based on the strength of our upcoming products "

Damage control or truth?
 
BD231 said:
"I believe we have significant opportunities to cement our leadership positions in several key market segments based on the strength of our upcoming products "

Damage control or truth?
Click to expand...
Seeing as AMD does not hold a leadership position when it comes to CPUs, I take it that he's saying that their GPUs will be good.

This does make it seem like Bulldozer will be terrible. It's a shame if it's true.
 
BD231 said:
"I believe we have significant opportunities to cement our leadership positions in several key market segments based on the strength of our upcoming products "

Damage control or truth?
Click to expand...

Would you leave a company or force the CEO out if it were?
 
Don't panic about BD, etc, yet...it could be that he was unable to get AMD's stock price to do well despite relatively strong new products and a leadership position in GPUs, etc...
 
I'm wondering if it's actually the GPU portion of Sandy Bridge that's going to kill AMD. I have a feeling that they've been delaying Fusion intentionally until the time when Intel had decent integrated graphics (with SB they do).

AMD is going to lose a lot of money because of SB in several ways.

My one observation is that it took AMD way too long to release Fusion. It should have been elementary for them to do considering their expertise. The fact that Intel did it first is embarrassing, unless of course AMD delayed it on purpose.
 
SickBeast said:
I'm wondering if it's actually the GPU portion of Sandy Bridge that's going to kill AMD. I have a feeling that they've been delaying Fusion intentionally until the time when Intel had decent integrated graphics (with SB they do).

AMD is going to lose a lot of money because of SB in several ways.

My one observation is that it took AMD way too long to release Fusion. It should have been elementary for them to do considering their expertise. The fact that Intel did it first is embarrassing, unless of course AMD delayed it on purpose.
Click to expand...

AMD will have the better integrated graphics when they finally get around to bringing it out, but intel will have more pure CPU power.
 
Markfw900 said:
We NEED AMD to be competitive, otherwise, back to the $500 under-par CPU's.

You have to admit, AMD made a laughing stock of Intel with the Athlon64 and X2 series. And Intel came back with a vengeance. Yesterday was more proof, if Conroe and the chips since weren't enough !
Click to expand...

I don't ever see intel going back to 500 dollar processors.
 
Castiel said:
I don't ever see intel going back to 500 dollar processors.
Click to expand...


I agree. That won't happen.

IF AMD were to close, I could see Intel slowing down the pace of new development (slightly), but they would not raise the prices significantly.
 
Smells like Bulldozer is a flop, and it sounds like Meyer was forced out.

Guess I won't be waiting until Q2/April to upgrade when Sandy Bridge is here and it delivers.
 
edplayer said:
I agree. That won't happen.

IF AMD were to close, I could see Intel slowing down the pace of new development (slightly), but they would not raise the prices significantly.
Click to expand...

I would think Intel would put much greater efforts into its fight against ARM rather than just 'faster faster faster' with AMD.
 
Castiel said:
I don't ever see intel going back to 500 dollar processors.
Click to expand...

Maybe not. My big point was that wee need a good competitor. Intel only does good when they have to try. (as most of us do, more need to excel, more excellence happens)
 
tokie said:
Smells like Bulldozer is a flop, and it sounds like Meyer was forced out.

Guess I won't be waiting until Q2/April to upgrade when Sandy Bridge is here and it delivers.
Click to expand...

I really don't think this has anything to do with BD. Dirk was a technical guy and did a good job at getting AMD on the right track, but once on the right track he didn't do a very good job of making AMD money. I see this as more of a "we need someone better able to take our product lineup and make us some friggin money with it" decision. Even when AMD processors were superior to Intel ones, AMD still failed at doing what really matters: making money. Look for the next CEO to have more management experience, and maybe be one of the ex-ATI people. Think on the Intel side: Otellini (manager) vs his predecessor, Barrett (engineer)...Otellini coming in and replacing Barrett sure as hell didn't mean Core sucked, far from it.
 
extra said:
Think on the Intel side: Otellini (manager) vs his predecessor, Barrett (engineer)...Otellini coming in and replacing Barrett sure as hell didn't mean Core sucked, far from it.
Click to expand...

I agree with extra. AMD failed to make money, hence the rushed replacement.

Actually, I think moving to Core 2 was Otellini's idea. Barret stuck to relying on process technology strength for far too long. The Pentium 4 died when his CEO job ended.
 
You're prolly right, Core (original) came out in beginning of 2006, so I figured it must have been in development before he left, but knowing Intel, maybe not, since it was based on Pentium-M.
 
Ouch. Nvidia working with Intel for on die gpu.

"Intel and NVIDIA have announced a six-year, $1.5 billion dollar technology cross-licensing deal that marks the end of a long patent dispute between the two chipmakers. On a conference call this afternoon, NVIDIA representatives described the agreement as a way to extend each company's access to the other's technology. "
 
Heh, also the fact that Nvidia got more money from their settlement than AMD did has to be seen as a giant FAIL for AMD. My thinking, too, is that with the growing focus on mobile stuff, and AMD having a great product there, the board probably sees 2011 as a make-or-break year, and they want someone with a bit more "vision" (pun intended).
 
extra said:
I really don't think this has anything to do with BD. Dirk was a technical guy and did a good job at getting AMD on the right track, but once on the right track he didn't do a very good job of making AMD money. I see this as more of a "we need someone better able to take our product lineup and make us some friggin money with it" decision. Even when AMD processors were superior to Intel ones, AMD still failed at doing what really matters: making money. Look for the next CEO to have more management experience, and maybe be one of the ex-ATI people. Think on the Intel side: Otellini (manager) vs his predecessor, Barrett (engineer)...Otellini coming in and replacing Barrett sure as hell didn't mean Core sucked, far from it.
Click to expand...

Meyer has only been CEO for two years, so he had nothing to do with them not making enough money during the good times. Also if that was the reason, and in some ways it sounds credible, then why would he leave suddenly without a replacement lined up?
Instead of looking for a new CEO they should be looking for someone to take them over. Assuming that x86 isn't 'dead' then there should be plenty of buyer's and if it is 'dead' well then this isn't really important.
 
Ugh, seemed like AMD was just recovering from Ruiz. It's really hard to say why something like this happens. Perhaps now that the engineer CEO has refocused their product lines they are looking to bring in a financial CEO to work on their share price?

They are bringing out desktop BD first so we won't have to wait too long to see if it's a flop.
 
IntelUser2000 said:
I agree with extra. AMD failed to make money, hence the rushed replacement.

Actually, I think moving to Core 2 was Otellini's idea. Barret stuck to relying on process technology strength for far too long. The Pentium 4 died when his CEO job ended.
Click to expand...

Pentium 4 was Otellini's idea - let's sell the GHz, who cares about anything else (power consumption, performance) . Then correction was made when that failed.

flashbacks:
http://articles.cnn.com/2000-11-03/...-4s-pentium-iiis-desktop-processor?_s=PM:TECH
In coming years, the P4 architecture will scale to 10 GHz, Otellini says.
Click to expand...
http://www.pcworld.com/article/59825/intel_previews_35ghz_pentium_4.html
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top