ATI still hurting AMD

[Nemesis 1]

Originally posted by: Wreckage

Originally posted by: Nemesis 1

Without the clear wire write down Intel made a billion. So your link is good for what exactly?

Ah yes. in your world dropping profit by 90% is a good thing. If you read my link...which clearly you did not. Intel said more of the same bad news is coming. '

Thanks for playing, but you fail.

Oh lord your foolish little boy. I read just fine its my grammer spelling that suck. Without the clearwire wright down Intel made 1billion dollars profit . What part of that don't you understand others can help ya maybe.

We all know revenue fell . The profits tho would have still been 1 billion plus without that wright down . Do you fully understand what that means? I will let others translate for ya. Geez!



Nemesis, please refrain from making such personal jabs, thanks.

Video Mod BFG10K.

 

[Nemesis 1]

Originally posted by: Pelu
by the way did you notice the quality of products in general is going down... in cpu and gpus.. and also the entertainment of games too...

No I haven't . But I have time for ya to explain yourself. Lets hear it.

 

[Wreckage]

Originally posted by: Nemesis 1


Oh lord your foolish little boy. I read just fine its my grammer spelling that suck. Without the clearwire wright down Intel made 1billion dollars profit . What part of that don't you understand others can help ya maybe.

We all know revenue fell . The profits tho would have still been 1 billion plus without that wright down . Do you fully understand what that means? I will let others translate for ya. Geez!

That's like saying "without the bullet to the head the patient may have lived"

Also you totally ignore Intel saying "the semiconductor giant predicted even weaker conditions ahead"

Stop while you are behind.

 

[Nemesis 1]

The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing - Edmund Burke

Most the time this is true. But in this instance I will take your advice and Stop befor ya give me a headache . When were we talking about future revenue? Evil is what evil does . Smoke and mirrors. Intel still made over a billion dollars in their pockets real money. The write down is paper money . Its on paper only . Unless Intel sold its position in the company than and only than is it real money. Geez!

 

[thilanliyan]

Originally posted by: nRollo
AMD had 12% marketshare in Q3 2008

I think the new Phenoms will unfortunately prove too little, too late. Maybe if they would have launched with these parts, not now.

That includes notebooks too doesn't it (which you wouldn't be able to upgrade anyway) and of which Intel has a huge share?

I agree with you on that last sentence...if they had launched with these chips they might be hurting less than they are now.

 

[BFG10K]

Originally posted by: Nemesis 1

Oh lord your foolish little boy.

Nemesis, please refrain from making such personal jabs, thanks.

Video Mod BFG10K.

 

[nRollo]

Originally posted by: thilan29

Originally posted by: nRollo
AMD had 12% marketshare in Q3 2008

I think the new Phenoms will unfortunately prove too little, too late. Maybe if they would have launched with these parts, not now.

That includes notebooks too doesn't it (which you wouldn't be able to upgrade anyway) and of which Intel has a huge share?

I agree with you on that last sentence...if they had launched with these chips they might be hurting less than they are now.

Guaranteed.

Back then people were waiting to see what they were going to do and posting stuff to me like "It's called BarcelOWNa! Foolish Rollo! AMD will destroy Intel!"

And why not?

They had just come off years of Athlon X2 superiority, there was no reason to think that their next effort would be a. defective b. slow when it worked.

Back then people had AM2 motherboard, and confidence in AMD.

They would have accepted a second place chip that OCd well. Now everyone has moved on from AMD and they have no public perception except "the guys that launched the most infamous CPU in history.

The new Phenoms would have to be better than Intel to get people to choose AMD motherboards over Intel motherboards in 2009, parity with Intel's mid range will only get the curious or bargain hunters.

 

[nRollo]

oops dp

 

[taltamir]

isn't it basically a tax issue? if they "lose" more money on ATI they pay less taxes?
maybe they are also angling for a slice of the bailout pie.

 

[SlowSpyder]

Originally posted by: taltamir
isn't it basically a tax issue? if they "lose" more money on ATI they pay less taxes?
maybe they are also angling for a slice of the bailout pie.

I'm pretty sure it is. When AMD took a loss this last quarter or the one before I'm pretty sure they included an $800 million write down in their $1 billion loss. Everyone took that as doom for AMD as they can't lose that much per quarter and continue to exist much longer obviously. But, 80% of the 'loss' was just a write down. I think it means it's still money lost, as they paid it for ATI, but it's not quite the same thing as if they really lost $1 billion from operating costs vs. sales. But, I'm no expert on economics, so someone can correct me if I'm wrong.

 

[Leyawiin]

While you can't really base things on today's stock prices, I do feel AMD overpaid quite a lot for ATI. When I read about it back then my immediate thought was "it ain't worth a billion, let alone 5.4 billion". A close partnering with some investment from AMD would have netted the same benefit.

 

[PingSpike]

Originally posted by: nRollo

Originally posted by: thilan29

Originally posted by: nRollo
AMD had 12% marketshare in Q3 2008

I think the new Phenoms will unfortunately prove too little, too late. Maybe if they would have launched with these parts, not now.

That includes notebooks too doesn't it (which you wouldn't be able to upgrade anyway) and of which Intel has a huge share?

I agree with you on that last sentence...if they had launched with these chips they might be hurting less than they are now.

Guaranteed.

Back then people were waiting to see what they were going to do and posting stuff to me like "It's called BarcelOWNa! Foolish Rollo! AMD will destroy Intel!"

And why not?

They had just come off years of Athlon X2 superiority, there was no reason to think that their next effort would be a. defective b. slow when it worked.

Back then people had AM2 motherboard, and confidence in AMD.

They would have accepted a second place chip that OCd well. Now everyone has moved on from AMD and they have no public perception except "the guys that launched the most infamous CPU in history.

The new Phenoms would have to be better than Intel to get people to choose AMD motherboards over Intel motherboards in 2009, parity with Intel's mid range will only get the curious or bargain hunters.

I tend to agree. The new Phenoms are good enough to compete (albeit, as second place) but they needed a good second place product awhile ago to stop the blood loss. AM2 was a tough sell early on. You had to swap your existing ram (remember, ram was more expensive back then) and CPU in addition to mothreboard, a complete upgrade...to move to a system that got the same performance as s939. If you were an AMD hopeful, you say on socket 939 waiting for a reason from them. And when it took to long to come you jumped to the mature intel platform. The new Phenom is a decent upgrade to a s939 holdout or some one building a PC from scratch, but I'm sure how many of those people exist anymore.

Now they're on the other side of the inertia. People don't need to buy new RAM (and it costs so little it wouldn't matter anyway) but with the intel platform offering faster higher end parts now why would you buy a new motherboard and CPU from AMD (with ??? top end upgrade potential) when you could just buy a new CPU from intel? (Which current has concrete upgrade potential)

 

[Wreckage]

The Phenom II does well against the Core 2. But not against the i7.

Which sucks because the cost of a Motherboard+i7 CPU is very high right now.

 

[nRollo]

Add to all that:

Which CIO/IT Mgr is going to sign their name to a big contract for 100s of Phenoms after horrible publicity of the TLB error at launch, and the pretty common knowledge Intel has the superior tech now?

None.

What business are large system builders trying to get?

Big business contracts.

So AMD goes back to people like us who don't necessarily care about past failed products (e.g. FX5800, Itanium, MAXX) but for sure do care about upgradeability. And we're a niche market anyway.

I don't see where they go from here unless they can conjure up QX or i7 level performance for less money.

Which leaves them relying on ATi revenues, which haven't been historically profitable even in good times often enough. Now they're expected to carry the much larger company that bought them when their averaqe sale price per unit is lower than it's ever been. Not to mention the interest on billions.

The people that work there are expected to work hard, bring the company back to profitability, for less pay in the wake of several rounds of layoffs and certainly departmental budget cuts.

This is pretty epic disaster.

I don't know enough about anti-trust to know what this means to Intel and NVIDIA if there is plywood on the doors at AMD in December. Presumably it's not their fault if AMDs bad product launches and ATi buyout remove their only competition. Maybe with the launch of Larrabee, Intel and NVIDIA become the last competitors standing.

 

[Nemesis 1]

Originally posted by: Wreckage
The Phenom II does well against the Core 2. But not against the i7.

Which sucks because the cost of a Motherboard+i7 CPU is very high right now.

Sorry for inferring you were a foolish little boy. I didn't know if you were man or boy. I assumed you were a boy because ya don't understand the tax system .

 

[taltamir]

wow, shoveling insults into your "apology". And you call others immature.

 

[Nemesis 1]

Now Rollo don't wright AMD/ATI off. Just yet . If AMD /ATI stay intact till Larrabee and Both AMD and Intel stay committed to platiforms . I believe in the end only 2 will be left standing Intel AMD/ATI
Project offset Game Will only play on Intel systems. Guess what it does raytracing . OH my goodness . All those who said it was 5 ten years away new nothing. Guess what AMD/ ATI are moving in the same direction . Intel larrabee will work way better on Intel platiform than a ATI or NV on intel . AMD has said the exact same thing about there coming platiform . Who is left out in the cold? AMD present card can do raytracing not a problem . with DX11 it becomes easy. NV has to do new arch . Guess what . Thats exactly what nv is doing according to thread @ XS.

 

[Wreckage]

Originally posted by: Nemesis 1

Originally posted by: Wreckage
The Phenom II does well against the Core 2. But not against the i7.

Which sucks because the cost of a Motherboard+i7 CPU is very high right now.

Sorry for inferring you were a foolish little boy. I didn't know if you were man or boy. I assumed you were a boy because ya don't understand the tax system .

I'll just quote that for how it makes you look.

 

[heyheybooboo]

Originally posted by: Arkaign

I don't buy the on-die GPU.~~~

On-die GPU will not be competitive with discrete solutions for those wanting gaming performance. Meaning that it will be relegated to competing with onboard video ...

It's not engineered to do that - the on-microprocessor-die GPU is meant to handle parallel processing tasks and will require the new instructions outlined in AMD SSE5.

Originally posted by: nRollo

Q: How many people own an AM2 motherboard in 2009?
A: Not many.

AMD revenue for the last 12 months is $6.6 billion - up 10%. They ain't making money but they are (were?) selling product.

Originally posted by: nRollo ~~~

I don't know enough about anti-trust to know what this means to Intel and NVIDIA if there is plywood on the doors at AMD in December. Presumably it's not their fault if AMDs bad product launches and ATi buyout remove their only competition. Maybe with the launch of Larrabee, Intel and NVIDIA become the last competitors standing.

Stop spreading FUD.

When AMD purchased ATI the fastest growing segment of nVidia's business was chipsets. How's that working for nVidia, now? Not quite the Apple of your eye, anymore, eh? Hard to succeed with those persistent rumors of dropping the chipset bidness in its entirety during 2009, huh?


Yes. AMD paid too much but ATI is not 'still hurting AMD'. AMD hurt AMD as they struggled with the integration of DDR2 when Intel hit its stride with C2D.

The first sign of a loser is someone who has to tear down their competition to build themselves up ...

 

[nRollo]

Originally posted by: heyheybooboo

Originally posted by: nRollo ~~~

I don't know enough about anti-trust to know what this means to Intel and NVIDIA if there is plywood on the doors at AMD in December. Presumably it's not their fault if AMDs bad product launches and ATi buyout remove their only competition. Maybe with the launch of Larrabee, Intel and NVIDIA become the last competitors standing.

Stop spreading FUD.

When AMD purchased ATI the fastest growing segment of nVidia's business was chipsets. How's that working for nVidia, now? Not quite the Apple of your eye, anymore, eh? Hard to succeed with those persistent rumors of dropping the chipset bidness in its entirety during 2009, huh?


Yes. AMD paid too much but ATI is not 'still hurting AMD'. AMD hurt AMD as they struggled with the integration of DDR2 when Intel hit its stride with C2D.

The first sign of a loser is someone who has to tear down their competition to build themselves up ...

I don't work for NVIDIA.

I've always supported AMD and still do. (9650 in my second machine, long history of buying AMD even when they weren't the best choice, back to 486 days)

I do not want AMD to go out of business, but I don't think the odds look good for them.

 

[Wreckage]

Originally posted by: heyheybooboo

When AMD purchased ATI the fastest growing segment of nVidia's business was chipsets. How's that working for nVidia, now? Not quite the Apple of your eye, anymore, eh? Hard to succeed with those persistent rumors of dropping the chipset bidness in its entirety during 2009, huh?

Considering how well their Intel chipsets are selling and how many laptops now use their chipsets, they are doing better now than ever. The Apple win was a huge success and they just keep getting more business.

 

[JaBro999]

Getting the Apple mobile chipset business is a huge win for nVidia. But, Apple made that decision strictly because of the nVidia integrated graphics performance (or Intel IGP chipsets' utter lack of performance).

 

[thilanliyan]

Originally posted by: nRollo
Add to all that:

Which CIO/IT Mgr is going to sign their name to a big contract for 100s of Phenoms after horrible publicity of the TLB error at launch, and the pretty common knowledge Intel has the superior tech now?

None.

The other side of that is...who is going to spend for a brand new and more expensive Intel platform in these economic times?

Even if you were to drop in regular Xeons, the new Opterons are very competitive and AFAIK Opteron servers are and have been popular compared to Xeons. Here's a review:
http://techreport.com/articles.x/15905/13
Especially now, it doesn't make sense for any company to spend money on Xeon servers that require more expensive and power hungry FB-dimms and aren't always the best-performing.

 

[Zstream]

Originally posted by: nRollo
Add to all that:

Which CIO/IT Mgr is going to sign their name to a big contract for 100s of Phenoms after horrible publicity of the TLB error at launch, and the pretty common knowledge Intel has the superior tech now?

None.

What business are large system builders trying to get?

Big business contracts.

So AMD goes back to people like us who don't necessarily care about past failed products (e.g. FX5800, Itanium, MAXX) but for sure do care about upgradeability. And we're a niche market anyway.

I don't see where they go from here unless they can conjure up QX or i7 level performance for less money.

Which leaves them relying on ATi revenues, which haven't been historically profitable even in good times often enough. Now they're expected to carry the much larger company that bought them when their averaqe sale price per unit is lower than it's ever been. Not to mention the interest on billions.

The people that work there are expected to work hard, bring the company back to profitability, for less pay in the wake of several rounds of layoffs and certainly departmental budget cuts.

This is pretty epic disaster.

I don't know enough about anti-trust to know what this means to Intel and NVIDIA if there is plywood on the doors at AMD in December. Presumably it's not their fault if AMDs bad product launches and ATi buyout remove their only competition. Maybe with the launch of Larrabee, Intel and NVIDIA become the last competitors standing.

Umm, management rarely has any clue as to what AMD TLB bug is or even know what TLB stands for. This is what the Sr. Technical Architects are for and then they rarely know.

The point of the story is that a company will go to HP/Dell/SUN/IBM for a system. They evaluate that system mainly on price. They might finish evaluating all the systems but price/performance is what gets a contract. Nothing more and nothing less.

If you get 80% of the performance at 40-70% of the price then you bet they will go for this.

VMware is now getting very large in the corporate IT world. AMD does quite a bit better in this segment.

 

[Nemesis 1]

Originally posted by: taltamir
wow, shoveling insults into your "apology". And you call others immature.

Were is the insult. I see none, Apology was sincer.