Could this be the end of the beginning or beginning of the end for AMD?

[nyker96]

Heard some real bad news lately for the company:

1, lost 610 Mil Q1, Q2 expect to be worse
2, cash flow expected to last til end of year only
3, leaked bench says 2900XTX cannot beat the 6months old 8800GTX much less the upcoming 8800Ultra and will not be launched even after 3x launch delays
4, rest of the R600s will delay til May 15th or so to launch, appearantly the issue isn't simultaneous launch but rather a weak architecture that cannot deliver the speed at high end they've been taking the extra time to trying to boost performance.
5, Intel 45nm core 2 coming, 45nm penryn coming on schedule and are leaps ahead of current core 2 design in released benchmarks
6, AMD reported sold too much chips to OEM which has lousy sale forcase all the way to June and AMD having big trouble getting back to retail market due to its pulling retail support during Xmas 2006 which lost consumer+retailer confidence.
7, no new chip release in past 9month while Intel seem to be releasing worthwhile chips every 2-3 months into retail market.
8, AMD financial situation exceeded the worth forcasts by any analyst on wall street.
9, Intel wiped out entire year's worth of AMD market share gain from 2006 in just Q1/2007.
10, AMD keeps tight lips about their recent products while Intel couldn't give away enough of their benchs etc on future Penryn etc.

What're you takes on this situation?

 

[brencat]

Don't fret yet about AMD. They've been in worse situations before and I believe they will pull through just fine. Their CEO is pretty savvy too. The lack of recent news flow could be part of their strategy to keep tight lipped about the upcoming product launches because they will never be able to compete $ for $ with Intel on capex. And lastly, they just raised $2.2 bln via a debt offering last week which should buy them 1 - 2 years of cash flow to get through the next product cycle. For the record, I am NOT an AMD fanboy. But I also think it's in all of our interests to see AMD survive for the sake of pro-consumer competition, low prices, and quality product.

 

[myocardia]

I personally think that AMD's CEO has just about run the company into the ground. That's what happens when you let your ego start making decisions that you should be letting your frontal lobes handle, it seems. You're wrong about #7, though. They've released a 3.0 Ghz FX, the FX-74 IIRC, but nobody cared, since it's expensive, hot, and can't compare performance-wise to an overclocked $200 C2D. Let's just hope that AMD doesn't go bankrupt, or we'll all be buying $700 E6600's and $600 8800 GTS's in no time.

 

[StopSign]

I really doubt AMD is keeping their lips sealed about K10 as a strategic move. With the situation they're in right now, any kind of optimism would be greatly beneficial. The only thing they've revealed was that phantom benchmark on FP performance and how it's faster than Kentsfield. That would be somewhat meaningful if K8 wasn't already faster than C2D in FP performance... Aside from that AMD has released no additional information or updates on K10. Oh and let's not forget that whole R600 issue they're dealing with right now.

It certainly does not look optimistic at all.

 

[aigomorla]

Originally posted by: nyker96
Heard some real bad news lately for the company:

1, lost 610 Mil Q1, Q2 expect to be worse
2, cash flow expected to last til end of year only
3, leaked bench says 2900XTX cannot beat the 6months old 8800GTX much less the upcoming 8800Ultra and will not be launched even after 3x launch delays
4, rest of the R600s will delay til May 15th or so to launch, appearantly the issue isn't simultaneous launch but rather a weak architecture that cannot deliver the speed at high end they've been taking the extra time to trying to boost performance.
5, Intel 45nm core 2 coming, 45nm penryn coming on schedule and are leaps ahead of current core 2 design in released benchmarks
6, AMD reported sold too much chips to OEM which has lousy sale forcase all the way to June and AMD having big trouble getting back to retail market due to its pulling retail support during Xmas 2006 which lost consumer+retailer confidence.
7, no new chip release in past 9month while Intel seem to be releasing worthwhile chips every 2-3 months into retail market.
8, AMD financial situation exceeded the worth forcasts by any analyst on wall street.

What're you takes on this situation?

uhh.. people that bought 6 months puts on its stock made a grip of money?

 

[nyker96]

Originally posted by: myocardia
I personally think that AMD's CEO has just about run the company into the ground. That's what happens when you let your ego start making decisions that you should be letting your frontal lobes handle, it seems. You're wrong about #7, though. They've released a 3.0 Ghz FX, the FX-74 IIRC, but nobody cared, since it's expensive, hot, and can't compare performance-wise to an overclocked $200 C2D. Let's just hope that AMD doesn't go bankrupt, or we'll all be buying $700 E6600's and $600 8800 GTS's in no time.

Well let's not mention that FX74 fake-quad 1000W setup thing. It's I think more a downer than upper and I didn't even include that in the list which should be there as a sign how their product has gone downhill.

 

[PingSpike]

Where are the fruits of R&D? Thats their problem. They squandered that massive lead they had by sitting on their ****** ass for to long. Did they forget what kind of product they made? They make the kind that goes obsolete in a year. That means you'd better have a better one ready afterwards, unless you enjoy having you're competitors rape you with a wooden spoon.

 

[coolpurplefan]

Well, they did release 5600+ and 6000+ with lower prices.

Other than that, I guess this company will have to rely on K10 to bring them back. They also have to and admitted that retail is important to them. The Dell deal kind of screwed them when they abandonned their regular customers.

I also beleive the socket AM2 thing wasn't too much of a bad idea. At one time, you could buy either socket A, socket 754 and socket 939. What could be more confusing than that for the retail consumer who wants to build for the first time?

Unfortunately, we'll just have to wait to see how this plays out. I mean, the leaked 40% to 70% benchmark thing is one thing. But then Intel plans to come out with a new core in 2008. Whatever, if anyone were being honest with themselves, they'd have to admit they can't predict exactly what's going to happen.

I just wish I was good using technical analysis so I could time all these price fluctuations. We're sure to see a lot of fluctuations in the following months or year.

 

[Bateluer]

Lot of fair weather friends in here. Last year, these guys were bashing Intel nonstop and praising AMD for their savvy and powerful processors. Now all those same people are predicting doom and gloom for AMD. They've been in worse scraps before, and they've been tightlipped over product releases in the past.

 

[myocardia]

That's true, but in the past, they hadn't just bought another company for ~$5,000,000,000. It's alot easier to recover from a financial downfall, when you aren't having to make payments on a $5,000,000,000 loan, don't you think?

 

[nyker96]

I think their biggest problem is the cash flow and trouble pushing out products nowadays which led to like 6months behind to competition in both CPU and GPU markets. They definitely not at the proper size to absorb such a big hit. I don't think I'm predicting doom but it certainly is in the danger zone now. Compounding the fact that they made several miscalculations like: betting heavy on Dell OEMs etc, buying a brand new company while their CPU biz isn't doing well, putting hopes on that FX74 fake-quad disasters and been overconfident on their X2 architecture to last til June/2007. Well to be fair Intel made as big a booboo back in Netburst days but hey they got tons cash to burn unlike AMD. I sincerely hope AMD will bounce back or else we all be looking at 1000 buck CPUs and an Intel that has no interest in improving their products.

 

[Acanthus]

Originally posted by: myocardia
That's true, but in the past, they hadn't just bought another company for ~$5,000,000,000. It's alot easier to recover from a financial downfall, when you aren't having to make payments on a $5,000,000,000 loan, don't you think?

Exactly, this reeks of 3DFXs acquisition right before they died, and everyone was saying 3dfx wasnt going anywhere.

AMD is in very very bad shape right now. They are losing on a 3 front war across the board, losing market share, have enormous debt, and enormous operating costs.

If you dont believe me, look at their Q1 financial report, its posted on the AMD website.

The last thing i want is for AMD to go under, but dont be unrealistic just because they made the A64. :roll:

 

[Viditor]

Originally posted by: nyker96
Heard some real bad news lately for the company:

1, lost 610 Mil Q1, Q2 expect to be worse
2, cash flow expected to last til end of year only
3, leaked bench says 2900XTX cannot beat the 6months old 8800GTX much less the upcoming 8800Ultra and will not be launched even after 3x launch delays
4, rest of the R600s will delay til May 15th or so to launch, appearantly the issue isn't simultaneous launch but rather a weak architecture that cannot deliver the speed at high end they've been taking the extra time to trying to boost performance.
5, Intel 45nm core 2 coming, 45nm penryn coming on schedule and are leaps ahead of current core 2 design in released benchmarks
6, AMD reported sold too much chips to OEM which has lousy sale forcase all the way to June and AMD having big trouble getting back to retail market due to its pulling retail support during Xmas 2006 which lost consumer+retailer confidence.
7, no new chip release in past 9month while Intel seem to be releasing worthwhile chips every 2-3 months into retail market.
8, AMD financial situation exceeded the worth forcasts by any analyst on wall street.
9, Intel wiped out entire year's worth of AMD market share gain from 2006 in just Q1/2007.
10, AMD keeps tight lips about their recent products while Intel couldn't give away enough of their benchs etc on future Penryn etc.

What're you takes on this situation?

To answer your questions...
1. Q1 sucked, but wasn't as bad as advertised. Q2 is projected to be flat to slightly up from Q1.
2. Cash flow problem has been solved this last week with the bond issuance. Bob Rivet (who is one of the world leaders at this) has managed to assure that AMD will have over $2-3 Billion in cash through the end of this year...and without any dilution in shares (he structured the deal using treasury derivatives).
4. R600 was a problem, but the problem stemmed from manufacturing...remember that AMD isn't making them in their own Fabs yet (being made at TSMC).
5. Penryn (according to Intel) will be 5-10% faster at the same clock as C2D...but K10 should still be faster.
6. The oversale occured at the end of Q4 06, which is why the Q1 numbers were skewed so bad. Mercury research stated that Q4 should have been closer to 23% marketshare and Q1 was closer to 21%...but the shipping inventory was indeed screwed up.
7. There have been more than half a dozen new chip releases over the last 9 months...some of which were 65nm but all of which were still K8. This would be similar to Intel who are also releasing derivatives of C2D...
8. true
9. Not really...
10. Are you thinking that this is a advantage/disadvantage for Intel or for AMD?

 

[yacoub]

Originally posted by: nyker96
Heard some real bad news lately for the company:

1, lost 610 Mil Q1, Q2 expect to be worse
2, cash flow expected to last til end of year only
3, leaked bench says 2900XTX cannot beat the 6months old 8800GTX much less the upcoming 8800Ultra and will not be launched even after 3x launch delays
4, rest of the R600s will delay til May 15th or so to launch, appearantly the issue isn't simultaneous launch but rather a weak architecture that cannot deliver the speed at high end they've been taking the extra time to trying to boost performance.
5, Intel 45nm core 2 coming, 45nm penryn coming on schedule and are leaps ahead of current core 2 design in released benchmarks
6, AMD reported sold too much chips to OEM which has lousy sale forcase all the way to June and AMD having big trouble getting back to retail market due to its pulling retail support during Xmas 2006 which lost consumer+retailer confidence.
7, no new chip release in past 9month while Intel seem to be releasing worthwhile chips every 2-3 months into retail market.
8, AMD financial situation exceeded the worth forcasts by any analyst on wall street.
9, Intel wiped out entire year's worth of AMD market share gain from 2006 in just Q1/2007.
10, AMD keeps tight lips about their recent products while Intel couldn't give away enough of their benchs etc on future Penryn etc.

What're you takes on this situation?

#3 is false. DT did not have an XTX, they had an OEM model XT. Hence why the scores were almost identical to the retail XT they tested previously. I don't care how much some folks want to wish that was the XTX, it simply wasn't.

Regarding the rest, AMD deserves it for not releasing a new core design in the last - what 10 months now? Intel releases something new every 3-6 months it seems (including refreshes like the 6320 & 6420). That's how you build a successful image and market base and keep the enthusiasts buying your product.

The delays on the R600 are simply unforgiveable. Six months late now means they would have been better off scrapping it before it hit production (so the only lost cost would be R&D) and releasing an R650 or whatever series they initially had slated as an R600 refresh in June/July, as the new generation instead and just bumping it up to May.

They keep making mistakes with their release schedule and it almost seems like they can't seem to get out of this bad cycle.

 

[apoppin]

Originally posted by: brencat
Don't fret yet about AMD. They've been in worse situations before and I believe they will pull through just fine. Their CEO is pretty savvy too. The lack of recent news flow could be part of their strategy to keep tight lipped about the upcoming product launches because they will never be able to compete $ for $ with Intel on capex. And lastly, they just raised $2.2 bln via a debt offering last week which should buy them 1 - 2 years of cash flow to get through the next product cycle. For the record, I am NOT an AMD fanboy. But I also think it's in all of our interests to see AMD survive for the sake of pro-consumer competition, low prices, and quality product.

their current CEO is a disaster

AMD as never dragging around the carcass of another company [ATi] that cost them a fortune - they OWE a lot - and doesn't appear to be integrated well

if Barcelona is also perceived a failure - as r600 is - then AMD *needs* someone to buy them

 

[Jaepheth]

If AMD does go under, won't anti-trust laws then apply to both Intel and NVidia?

 

[apoppin]

not under the current Administration

and *someone* will buy them

there are rumors

but it is PREmature to proclaim the 'death of AMD' - yet

 

[golem]

Originally posted by: Jaepheth
If AMD does go under, won't anti-trust laws then apply to both Intel and NVidia?

I think anti-trust laws prevent you from buying your competitors to gain a dominant market share position, but if you competitor goes belly up. I don't think it applies

 

[golem]

#3 is false. DT did not have an XTX, they had an OEM model XT. Hence why the scores were almost identical to the retail XT they tested previously. I don't care how much some folks want to wish that was the XTX, it simply wasn't.

Isn't the XTX supposed to be the only one that has 1gb of gddr4 memory? You can't blame people for thinking it's an XTX (which it still might be), the one distinguishing item between the xtx and the xt was the memory.

 

[apoppin]

shouldn't make much difference - anyway

the GTX is faster than the XTX

we will have final *confirmation* shortly

 

[Fox5]

Originally posted by: PingSpike
Where are the fruits of R&D? Thats their problem. They squandered that massive lead they had by sitting on their ****** ass for to long. Did they forget what kind of product they made? They make the kind that goes obsolete in a year. That means you'd better have a better one ready afterwards, unless you enjoy having you're competitors rape you with a wooden spoon.

Was it the previous CEO or the current one who used to work for Motorola? The one who disagreed with the idea that a product should go obsolete so quickly, and would rather just produce one product with incremental upgrades for as long as possible?

Oh well, AMD's stock is pretty low right now, so I'll buy some. I figure the company has at least a year left, and R600 and Barcelona, even if not that great, will make the company more competitive than it has been for a while, and that should bring the stock price up a bit.

 

[Hulk]

Originally posted by: nyker96
Heard some real bad news lately for the company:

1, lost 610 Mil Q1, Q2 expect to be worse
2, cash flow expected to last til end of year only
3, leaked bench says 2900XTX cannot beat the 6months old 8800GTX much less the upcoming 8800Ultra and will not be launched even after 3x launch delays
4, rest of the R600s will delay til May 15th or so to launch, appearantly the issue isn't simultaneous launch but rather a weak architecture that cannot deliver the speed at high end they've been taking the extra time to trying to boost performance.
5, Intel 45nm core 2 coming, 45nm penryn coming on schedule and are leaps ahead of current core 2 design in released benchmarks
6, AMD reported sold too much chips to OEM which has lousy sale forcase all the way to June and AMD having big trouble getting back to retail market due to its pulling retail support during Xmas 2006 which lost consumer+retailer confidence.
7, no new chip release in past 9month while Intel seem to be releasing worthwhile chips every 2-3 months into retail market.
8, AMD financial situation exceeded the worth forcasts by any analyst on wall street.
9, Intel wiped out entire year's worth of AMD market share gain from 2006 in just Q1/2007.
10, AMD keeps tight lips about their recent products while Intel couldn't give away enough of their benchs etc on future Penryn etc.

What're you takes on this situation?

Interesting post. I'll bite...

1. Expected due to the release of C2D last July. The hit is just catching up with the release in financial terms.

2 Could be a problem but they've been there before.


3. Let's wait and see but you are right in that this could be very bad news.

4. Not a death blow but certainly doesn't help things.

5. Peryn is more pressure but it's not "leaps" ahead of C2D, just an evolution of the process with some new instructions and more cache.

6. Huh? Not buying that one.

7. Barcelona coming supposedly...

8. As with a thousand other tech companies.

9. See #1.

10. Yeah I don't like the fact that AMD seems to have nothing to brag about either but maybe they want Intel to feel overconfident like with the P4/Athlon fiasco.

 

[PhlashFoto]

Originally posted by: Fox5

Originally posted by: PingSpike
Where are the fruits of R&D? Thats their problem. They squandered that massive lead they had by sitting on their ****** ass for to long. Did they forget what kind of product they made? They make the kind that goes obsolete in a year. That means you'd better have a better one ready afterwards, unless you enjoy having you're competitors rape you with a wooden spoon.

Was it the previous CEO or the current one who used to work for Motorola? The one who disagreed with the idea that a product should go obsolete so quickly, and would rather just produce one product with incremental upgrades for as long as possible?

Oh well, AMD's stock is pretty low right now, so I'll buy some. I figure the company has at least a year left, and R600 and Barcelona, even if not that great, will make the company more competitive than it has been for a while, and that should bring the stock price up a bit.

It is the current CEO, Hector Ruiz, who is from Motorola. I don't know if he said that, if so then he needs to quit the technology business and sell fertillizer if he doesn't want to be in a short product cycle industry. :disgust:

EDIT: Thinking of AMD CEOs, I was just remembering what the founder, Jerry Sanders, once said: "Only real men have FABs." Hmm, if he and Ruiz weren't so full of their egos they would realize "Only real men make PROFIT!"

 

[Fox5]

Originally posted by: ELopes580

Originally posted by: Fox5

Originally posted by: PingSpike
Where are the fruits of R&D? Thats their problem. They squandered that massive lead they had by sitting on their ****** ass for to long. Did they forget what kind of product they made? They make the kind that goes obsolete in a year. That means you'd better have a better one ready afterwards, unless you enjoy having you're competitors rape you with a wooden spoon.

Was it the previous CEO or the current one who used to work for Motorola? The one who disagreed with the idea that a product should go obsolete so quickly, and would rather just produce one product with incremental upgrades for as long as possible?

Oh well, AMD's stock is pretty low right now, so I'll buy some. I figure the company has at least a year left, and R600 and Barcelona, even if not that great, will make the company more competitive than it has been for a while, and that should bring the stock price up a bit.

It is the current CEO, Hector Ruiz, who is from Motorola. I don't know if he said that, if so then he needs to quit the technology business and sell fertillizer if he doesn't want to be in a short product cycle industry. :disgust:

EDIT: Thinking of AMD CEOs, I was just remembering what the founder, Jerry Sanders, once said: "Only real men have FABs." Hmm, if he and Ruiz weren't so full of their egos they would realize "Only real men make PROFIT!"

If it wasn't (apparently) prohibited by AMD's licensing agreement with Intel (over x86) I'd say AMD should go fabless.
They're barely staying ahead of the industry as a whole in terms of fabs, and IBM is right up there with them and surely has enough high end fab space to sell AMD. The fabs just seem like such a bad idea for AMD, they cost so much money and yet don't really give it a competitive advantage.

 

[BlizzardOne]

Originally posted by: apoppin
shouldn't make much difference - anyway

the GTX is faster than the XTX

we will have final *confirmation* shortly

For your sake, I hope you're right. I would hate to put such devout belief into a set of highly questionable and dubious scores, then get proved, thorougly and utterly wrong.