[extremetech] AMD talks with private equity firm Silver Lake fell through: Report

[frozentundra123456]

The contra revenue is direct example that the traditional x86 volume is getting too small.

If Intel raised prices without competition. Volume would decrease.

No, contra revenue is there because there *is* competition and Intel has to provide a subsidy to make up for atoms higher costs to implement.

 

[ShintaiDK]

No, contra revenue is there because there *is* competition and Intel has to provide a subsidy to make up for atoms higher costs to implement.

But the reason they do it is to expand x86 volume because the current volume will be a problem in the years ahead.

 

[frozentundra123456]

But the reason they do it is to expand x86 volume because the current volume will be a problem in the years ahead.

Obviously they want to expand the voulume, but if they had a competitive product contra revenue would not be necessary. And even worse, after dumping all that money into the mobile rathole, they have very little presence in phones, tablets are becoming a saturated market, and Cherry Trail, well dont get me started on how disappointing that product is.

I have a Bay Trail tablet, and it is OK since I got it very cheap. I was hoping to upgrade to a cherry trail model, but the performance improvement is so small, even a regression in cpu in some cases, that I definitely see no reason to do so. And no, I dont really care about the extra gpu grunt. The cpu is so anemic that you cant really play many games on it anyway.

 

[dark zero]

Cherry Trail made AMD Mullins competent again... and there are not new chips, so that means that Cherry Trail ended to be a massive dissaster from Intel.

AMD had the chance with Mullins... if they decided to use some of that money on few gaming tablets... people would thanks AMD for that.

 

[R0H1T]

Cherry Trail made AMD Mullins competent again... and there are not new chips, so that means that Cherry Trail ended to be a massive dissaster from Intel.

AMD had the chance with Mullins... if they decided to use some of that money on few gaming tablets... people would thanks AMD for that.

Nope, Intel's closed that door with Baytrail subsidies so unless it goes down to zero, practically & literally, Mullins or any other cat core isn't viable at any price point.

 

[2is]

You want them to go bankrupt, instead of releasing a potentially interesting product? What is wrong with you?

We'd all love for AMD to come out with an interesting product, but for most of us, reality set it a long time ago. For others, it won't set it even after AMD goes under.

 

[Fjodor2001]

We'd all love for AMD to come out with an interesting product

Certainly not all on the forum I'm afraid.

but for most of us, reality set it a long time ago.

Care to clarify that? Just wondering, do you know something that the rest of us don't?

 

[2is]

Certainly not all on the forum I'm afraid.

Care to clarify that? Just wondering, do you know something that the rest of us don't?

I, and many others have figured out the obvious. You haven't. Sorry. I'm afraid clarification won't help you. Go ahead and add this to your sig if you'd like.

 

[dark zero]

Returning to gloom Mode..

Good bye AMD. No one cares on you anymore... AMD is.The Christmas cake of the technology. And Eventually that will affect the.console performance... Poor Nintendo...

 

[RussianSensation]

We'd all love for AMD to come out with an interesting product, but for most of us, reality set it a long time ago. For others, it won't set it even after AMD goes under.

I am going to say that HD4850/4870, 5850/5870, 6950/6970, 7950/7970, R9 290/290X & R9 295X2 were great & interesting products. Everything in between also offered class leading price/performance. So unless someone ONLY buys the top-of-the-line single NV cards every generation, I am not sure what you mean. Certainly overall HD7970/7970Ghz is a much better product than GTX680 was. That's just one example.

Right now if you go on Newegg and look at the prices of videocards from $150-$550, how does the situatino look for NV? God damn awful.

Also, while the 980Ti/Titan X are certainly stars of the show beccause of their overclocking, their stock performance is't that much better than Fury X, and reference 980Ti SLI is actually slower than reference Fury X CF.

But again, if we ignore 980Ti which is clearly better than the Fury X, the rest of NV's GPU line-up looks worse right now, especially once we start comparing price/performance then it's all over for NV. They are losing in every price segment from $150-550.

So again, just because you are a heavy GameWorks players, doesn't mean AMD hasn't had a great line-up of graphics in the last 5-6 years. Finally, even if you primarily buy NV products, it's absolutely in the best interest for you that AMD pumps out graphics cards that are as fast as possible because:

1) It forces NV to respond with even better products;
2) It forces NV to be far more aggressive with price drops (280, 780, or 970 aggressive pricing);
3) It forces NV to stay on top of their game, always going the extra mile to retain the performance crown.
4) It forces NV to introduce new features that one up AMD's features.

etc.

The reality is, there are only 4 types of people who desire for AMD to go bankrupt:

1) Short sellers;
2) Bitter Ex-AMD employees;
3) Employees of a competitor or indirect supply competitor that benefits from NV/Intel performing well.
4) Delusional and blind ***boys who don't understand economics or capitalism.

No one else would desire for AMD to go bankrupt. In fact, even the 4th group would rather have AMD stay alive since by having a weaker product as a point of reference, it boosts their egos. :biggrin:

Really, AMD's CPU division is seriously struggling but they are extremely competitive in the desktop GPU segments.

Finally, even if someone ONLY buys NV, it's in their best interest that there is as much competition for NV as possible because ti forces NV to lower prices and/or release even faster SKUs. This is actually as common sense as it gets except for certain people from Denmark. Also, it's honestly getting tiring to read about AMD going bankrupt for the last 10+ years. Pretty much everyone on AT who is predicting AMD to go bankrupt any year now has not put his money where his mouth is -- if they truly believed that, they would put their car, house, annual salary and short away/buy puts to millions so that they would never work a single day. Don't know any 1 person who is doing this on AT, reading a lot of smack talk though on this topic from investment and finance 'experts.'

If Zen and Arctic Islands even mildly succeed and AMD starts to make $, I wonder what new non-sense we will read online why AMD will for sure go bankrupt in 2017, and then in 2018, then 2019, etc.

 

[2is]

I am going to say that HD4850/4870, 5850/5870, 6950/6970, 7950/7970, R9 290/290X & R9 295X2 were great & interesting products. Everything in between also offered class leading price/performance. So unless someone ONLY buys the top-of-the-line single NV cards every generation, I am not sure what you mean. Certainly overall HD7970/7970Ghz is a much better product than GTX680 was. That's just one example.

Right now if you go on Newegg and look at the prices of videocards from $150-$550, how does the situatino look for NV? God damn awful.

Also, while the 980Ti/Titan X are certainly stars of the show beccause of their overclocking, their stock performance is't that much better than Fury X, and reference 980Ti SLI is actually slower than reference Fury X CF.

But again, if we ignore 980Ti which is clearly better than the Fury X, the rest of NV's GPU line-up looks worse right now, especially once we start comparing price/performance then it's all over for NV. They are losing in every price segment from $150-550.

So again, just because you are a heavy GameWorks players, doesn't mean AMD hasn't had a great line-up of graphics in the last 5-6 years. Finally, even if you primarily buy NV products, it's absolutely in the best interest for you that AMD pumps out graphics cards that are as fast as possible because:

1) It forces NV to respond with even better products;
2) It forces NV to be far more aggressive with price drops (280, 780, or 970 aggressive pricing);
3) It forces NV to stay on top of their game, always going the extra mile to retain the performance crown.
4) It forces NV to introduce new features that one up AMD's features.

etc.

The reality is, there are only 4 types of people who desire for AMD to go bankrupt:

1) Short sellers;
2) Bitter Ex-AMD employees;
3) Employees of a competitor or indirect supply competitor that benefits from NV/Intel performing well.
4) Delusional and blind ***boys who don't understand economics or capitalism.

No one else would desire for AMD to go bankrupt. In fact, even the 4th group would rather have AMD stay alive since by having a weaker product as a point of reference, it boosts their egos. :biggrin:

Really, AMD's CPU division is seriously struggling but they are extremely competitive in the desktop GPU segments.

Finally, even if someone ONLY buys NV, it's in their best interest that there is as much competition for NV as possible because ti forces NV to lower prices and/or release even faster SKUs. This is actually as common sense as it gets except for certain people from Denmark. Also, it's honestly getting tiring to read about AMD going bankrupt for the last 10+ years. Pretty much everyone on AT who is predicting AMD to go bankrupt any year now has not put his money where his mouth is -- if they truly believed that, they would put their car, house, annual salary and short away/buy puts to millions so that they would never work a single day. Don't know any 1 person who is doing this on AT, reading a lot of smack talk though on this topic from investment and finance 'experts.'

If Zen and Arctic Islands even mildly succeed and AMD starts to make $, I wonder what new non-sense we will read online why AMD will for sure go bankrupt in 2017, and then in 2018, then 2019, etc.

None of that matters. Most of those products you listed are several years old and even the newer ones that may offer up decent performance didn't/aren't putting enough dollars in AMD's pockets. This isn't a performance debate, it's a survival one and for that you need to make money and regardless of how competitive they've been in terms of performance, they aren't at all competitive in terms of profit and sales.

That's on the GPU side, which is bad enough, then you look at the CPU side which is MUCH MUCH worse off.

 

[Fjodor2001]

I, and many others have figured out the obvious. You haven't. Sorry. I'm afraid clarification won't help you. Go ahead and add this to your sig if you'd like.

So you've "figured it out", yet have no info to back it up or explain it, and can't even provide some logic for your reasoning. We are just to take your predictions at face value. Right...

And yes, you can check my sig for examples of what has happened before when we were to take such dead certain speculations as truth without anything to back it up with...

 

[Mondozei]

None of that matters.

Except it does.

This isn't a performance debate

Interesting how the goalposts shift all of a sudden.

This was you, literally a few posts ago:

We'd all love for AMD to come out with an interesting product, but for most of us, reality set it a long time ago. For others, it won't set it even after AMD goes under.

So what do people look for in compelling products. Performance? Clearly not, right?

You claim AMD doens't have any good products, then you get pushback based on facts and you resort to a 180 saying "performance doesn't matter, profit does".

Actually both do. There are many reasons why AMD is floundering, and the CPU side is certainly going to shoulder a large part of the blame for this, but to first claim that AMD doens't have any compelling products and then when called out on the BS, do a 180 and say performance doesn't matter, sales/profits do is just fairly stupid.

NV does have a large base of people who will buy their products regardless and you've just revealed yourself as one of them, who will try to rationalise their one-sided blind loyalty.

For those of us who switch between sides, there's no question AMD is in dire straits and the reasons for this are multifold and complicated. But to say AMD haven't had a good GPU product to buy is just ignorant and that's why you got called out. And you haven't been able to respond with facts instead resorting to oneliners.

Which of course just compounds the problem for you.

 

[Snafuh]

The contra revenue is direct example that the traditional x86 volume is getting too small.

If Intel raised prices without competition. Volume would decrease.

Do you think contra revenue is not a example of the tough competition in the ultra mobile market?
If AMD goes bankrupt Intels volume could go up by almost 20%. Enough room to raise prices and gain volume anyway. In the low end prices would go up because there is no alternative. The low end market is less flexible, too. If you need a new PC there is no cheaper alternative to a Pentium or i3 anymore.

 

[ShintaiDK]

Do you think contra revenue is not a example of the tough competition in the ultra mobile market?
If AMD goes bankrupt Intels volume could go up by almost 20%. Enough room to raise prices and gain volume anyway. In the low end prices would go up because there is no alternative. The low end market is less flexible, too. If you need a new PC there is no cheaper alternative to a Pentium or i3 anymore.

AMD doesn't have 20% volume. I think you have to look below 10%. And they sit with around 2% x86 revenue.

Contra revenue is a direct attempt to break into a new market to keep x86 volume up and increasing size to offset future costs. This is the holy grail in the leading edge semiconductor industry. And why we see company deals to consolidate the market for higher company volumes. NXP/Freescale, Avago/Broadcom and so on.

 

[2is]

Except it does.



Interesting how the goalposts shift all of a sudden.

This was you, literally a few posts ago:



So what do people look for in compelling products. Performance? Clearly not, right?

You claim AMD doens't have any good products, then you get pushback based on facts and you resort to a 180 saying "performance doesn't matter, profit does".

Actually both do. There are many reasons why AMD is floundering, and the CPU side is certainly going to shoulder a large part of the blame for this, but to first claim that AMD doens't have any compelling products and then when called out on the BS, do a 180 and say performance doesn't matter, sales/profits do is just fairly stupid.

NV does have a large base of people who will buy their products regardless and you've just revealed yourself as one of them, who will try to rationalise their one-sided blind loyalty.

For those of us who switch between sides, there's no question AMD is in dire straits and the reasons for this are multifold and complicated. But to say AMD haven't had a good GPU product to buy is just ignorant and that's why you got called out. And you haven't been able to respond with facts instead resorting to oneliners.

Which of course just compounds the problem for you.

The post I said "literally" a few posts ago was in response to another post and if you had the mental capacity to look at things in context vs letting fanboyism get in the way, you wouldn't be so confused. AMD needs to make money to continue to survive, the only way to do that is to come out with a product that peaks peoples interest. In other words, an interesting product.

Very simple concept to understand, sad that you needed it, "literally" spelled out for you.



You've already lost the argument if you have to result to name calling.




esquared
Anandtech Forum Director

 

[2is]

So you've "figured it out", yet have no info to back it up or explain it, and can't even provide some logic for your reasoning. We are just to take your predictions at face value. Right...

And yes, you can check my sig for examples of what has happened before when we were to take such dead certain speculations as truth without anything to back it up with...

Seems all the AMD fan boys are running around in cycles in this thread, without any form of direction... Much like AMD actually.

If by "no info" you mean over a decade worth lay offs, mismanagement, people leaving, reduced R&D budget, declining sales, declining profits, increasing losses, then yes, I suppose we have no info. Someone would have to be blind or dumb to say there's "no info" and you're clearly able to read my posts.







You've already lost the argument if you have to result to name calling.

This is two different members you have insulted in consecutive posts.


esquared
Anandtech Forum Director

 

[Snafuh]

AMD doesn't have 20% volume. I think you have to look below 10%. And they sit with around 2% x86 revenue.

x86 market share is at 17% thanks to consoles. Desktop and mobile is probably between 10% and 15%.
If Intel's market share goes from 83% to 100% it's a 20.5% increase. AMD doesn't need 20% market share to make my statement true.

Contra revenue is a direct attempt to break into a new market

You don't have to explain the Intel's intentions.
Does Intel uses contra revenue because there is so much competition in the market or not?

 

[ShintaiDK]

x86 market share is at 17% thanks to consoles. Desktop and mobile is probably between 10% and 15%.
If Intel's market share goes from 83% to 100% it's a 20.5% increase. AMD doesn't need 20% market share to make my statement true.

Got any Q2 2015 numbers for that?

You don't have to explain the Intel's intentions.
Does Intel uses contra revenue because there is so much competition in the market or not?

You mean the established android ecosystem dont have any merit?

You can field the best product 10x over. But if you dont have a software ecosystem and an established base. Your success can pretty much fit in between small and non existent. Windows RT is an example of something essentially unsellable. No matter if you added A9 and A9X SoCs into them for the sake of argument.

Same reason why companies buy their way in.

 

[cytg111]

You can field the best product 10x over. But if you dont have a software ecosystem and an established base. Your success can pretty much fit in between small and non existent. Windows RT is an example of something essentially unsellable. No matter if you added A9 and A9X SoCs into them for the sake of argument.Same reason why companies buy their way in.

So you're selling the egg in "what came first, chicken or egg?"-scenario.. whatever every1 knows you aint got objective agendas here

 

[Snafuh]

Got any Q2 2015 numbers for that?

Regarding 86x market share:

now the company hovers around the 17 percent mark

http://www.pcadvisor.co.uk/feature/pc-components/amd-vs-intel-3528212/
But there is no source for this number. It might be an older number

Older numbers about share in different segments

, notably server, where Intel’s unit share hit 98.3% in 3Q14, according to Mercury Research’s PC Processor Report, and 98.5%, according to IDC. In notebooks, Mercury’s 3Q14 figure is 92.9%, while IDC pegs it at 90.3%. Mercury says Intel’s desktop share was 82.7%, while IDC puts it at 81.8%,

http://www.forbes.com/sites/rogerkay/2014/11/25/intel-and-amd-the-juggernaut-vs-the-squid/


You are dodging my question about competition in the ultra mobile market. I think this is enough of an answer.

 

[Fjodor2001]

Seems all the AMD fan boys are running around in cycles in this thread, without any form of direction... Much like AMD actually.

If by "no info" you mean over a decade worth lay offs, mismanagement, people leaving, reduced R&D budget, declining sales, declining profits, increasing losses, then yes, I suppose we have no info. Someone would have to be blind or dumb to say there's "no info" and you're clearly able to read my posts.

Ok, so no new info of substance then. Just the same doomsday talk we've been hearing continuously for the past twenty years.

 

[dark zero]

AMD MUST die. Sadly their.cycle ended long time ago. Now they are the Christmas Cake of the industry and only desperate industries like the console ones depends on them.

Hoping that this Black.Friday ends into a dissaster in the console sales.
That would mark the end of AMD

/Gloom mode

 

[redhotiron2004]

AMD MUST die. Sadly their.cycle ended long time ago. Now they are the Christmas Cake of the industry and only desperate industries like the console ones depends on them.

Hoping that this Black.Friday ends into a dissaster in the console sales.
That would mark the end of AMD

/Gloom mode

Agreed, AMD along with NVIDIA must die as well. Desperate computer gamers rely on them.

Hoping that this black friday ends into a disaster for computer and GPU sales and a new beginning for portable mobiles with ARM chips should take over sales from intel. So that everything can become even cheaper. :thumbup:

 

[dark zero]

Agreed, AMD along with NVIDIA must die as well. Desperate computer gamers rely on them.

Hoping that this black friday ends into a disaster for computer and GPU sales and a new beginning for portable mobiles with ARM chips should take over sales from intel. So that everything can become even cheaper. :thumbup:

Lol,that's not bad idea... Apple is enough strong to deliver some pro software in their chips.