• 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.

Oh god no: Rumor: Dell to buy AMD

That is the dumbest rumor I've heard in a long time.

DELL's revenue is probably 95% Intel-derived. Buying AMD would be truly the absolute last thing DELL would do at this time.

They'd go on record as supporting the clubbing of baby seals before they would even contemplate the merits of buying AMD, let alone actually formulating a proposal to do so.

AMD does represent takeover opportunity for the likes of Oracle (to complement their SUN purchase) and HP (or anyone that aspires to be more like Apple to take on Apple).

But DELL? What a waste of an opportunity to spin a splendid rumor. Weaksauce.
 
I wouldn't see this as a good move for either party, honestly.

Dell wouldn't add to their bottom line as AMD isn't profitable.

AMD would probably cost cut all over the place under Dell management and build fabs in India.

No one wins.
 
Idontcare said:
That is the dumbest rumor I've heard in a long time.

DELL's revenue is probably 95% Intel-derived. Buying AMD would be truly the absolute last thing DELL would do at this time.

They'd go on record as supporting the clubbing of baby seals before they would even contemplate the merits of buying AMD, let alone actually formulating a proposal to do so.

AMD does represent takeover opportunity for the likes of Oracle (to complement their SUN purchase) and HP (or anyone that aspires to be more like Apple to take on Apple).

But DELL? What a waste of an opportunity to spin a splendid rumor. Weaksauce.
Click to expand...

Unless they know Bulldozer.
 
AMD not for sale, but will listen to offers - D. Meyer
Click to expand...
Riiiight... and you got the boot, along with a few others on the top.

Dell huh? I dont buy it... *IF* someone was gonna buy AMD it would be Apple/HP/ATIC or Oracle...Dell?

(Dell is Intels bish...so...no doesnt sound that likely)

on the other hand:
Hp/Dell probably has the scale to sell amds total capacity plus sum by themselves...pocket the profits.
 
Last edited:
NO YOU GUYS ARE WRONG!

ANYONE would want to buy AMD because haven't you heard????

BULLDOZER!!!!

This thing is gonna absolutely kill Intel when it comes out!!!! ^_^


(sarcasm)
 
If this is true, this is the ending of AMD.

People will start jumpin the green ship and Intel... hmmmmmm


remember seagate merger with maxtor... disaster,, maxtor was building their hd,,and what not.. thx and gl,
 
Wouldn't such a purchase invalidate AMD's x86 license with Intel? I thought there was a clause in Intel's x86 licensing agreement with AMD in that any buyout of AMD would render it invalid...?
 
Ugh, maxtor and seagate, makes you wonder does anybody other than Intel actually make any money out of the PC business in the long run? Seems like everyone from memory makers to disk drives to CPU (sans Intel) loses money or barely breaks even if you look at their net earnings over the past 20yrs or so.
 
If this is true, this is the ending of AMD.

People will start jumpin the green ship and Intel... hmmmmmm

remember seagate merger with maxtor... disaster,, maxtor was building their hd,,and what not.. thx and gl,
Click to expand...
Seagate makes harddrives.
Maxtor makes harddrives.

Differnt situation with Dell and AMD.... faulty logic.

There would still be AMD products sold to others, Dell would just use intire AMD lineup in their own PCs they sell, pocket the profits from chip sales, meaning they could be more competitive with PC prices or have higher profits. (for AMD cpu/gpu sales, 100% dell useage would be a huge increase in amount of cpu/gpu sales)

Dell + AMD merge would just mean no more intel cpus in dell pcs.
 
Last edited:
In the business world, everything is for sale at the right price. I don't think anyone will be offering the right price to AMD for a while.
 
Wreckage said:
I would think HP would be a (slightly) more logical candidate.
Click to expand...

It just dawned on me why HP would never, not soon anyways, buy AMD and that is because of Itanium. HP is entirely dependent on Intel for their big-iron business and their is really no opportunity that AMD represents that could trump that. One in the hand is worth two in the bush.

Same reasoning I would use to argue that Apple will not buy AMD.

Basically any busines that would want AMD is a business that is seeking to compete with Intel and there aren't too many businesses that seek to compete with Intel in the microprocessor marekt.

IBM, Oracle (SUN), followed by the ARM crowd that is contending with Atom. Most everyone else in the industry makes their money because of, not in spite of, Intel.
 
Idontcare said:
That is the dumbest rumor I've heard in a long time.

DELL's revenue is probably 95% Intel-derived. Buying AMD would be truly the absolute last thing DELL would do at this time.

They'd go on record as supporting the clubbing of baby seals before they would even contemplate the merits of buying AMD, let alone actually formulating a proposal to do so.

AMD does represent takeover opportunity for the likes of Oracle (to complement their SUN purchase) and HP (or anyone that aspires to be more like Apple to take on Apple).

But DELL? What a waste of an opportunity to spin a splendid rumor. Weaksauce.
Click to expand...

Here is a long shot guess:

Maybe Dell is worried about Google's plans and MS's rumored plans for Cloud OS and wants to vertically integrate (like HP and Apple) to keep profits and Personal computers alive?

Of course, if they did that they would need to develop their own proprietary OS (with app store).

P.S. Maybe even putting some of the AMD design team on ARM would make sense for mobile. (With their own app store and software driven sales they would be in a better position to subsidize entry level hardware like Cortex A5 and the upcoming "Kingfisher" for the world mobile market rather than purely making their money on the device itself).
 
Last edited:
Takeover rumor for AMD is just like takeover rumor for ARM. It always comes up once in a while, but it never happens. It would make better sense for a company in Abu Dhabi doing that instead.

Or... someone that's not directly competing with AMD. Can anyone give a compelling reason how it would make any financial sense for Dell? They would be better off having the flexibility to offer what vendor they'd like to offer. I guess they can still offer Intel systems after that, but why...
 
SparkyJJO said:
Dell buy AMD? lulz
Click to expand...

Yes, but AMD no doubt owns a considerable amount of patents.

Maybe some of these patents would be useful for designing proprietary ARM devices aimed at the world mobile market and other areas? (I am basing this statement off of the recent agreement between Nvidia and Intel where "CPU" and "GPU" IP were cross licensed, More information here.)

Nvidia gets Access To Unspecified Intel Microprocessor Patents. Denver?
Click to expand...
 
it would make more sense if a company wanted to have the expertise of hardware developers alongsides software ones, so they *fit* better together, and/or you could impliment certain things into the hardware that would benefit the software. (Oracle ei.)

or a company wanted a total package solution,... intire pc sold by them all the parts made by them, and all the profits taken by them.

instead of buying 1 unit of psu from psu manufactor, that has his own profits from selling you a psu, that you in turn put into a pc you sell, where you then need to not only cover the psu cost and psu manufactors profits, but also a overall profit from pc sale.


I dont see Dell buying Amd either.
 
Well remember how Cyrix died. Well ATI had to pull out these things like merging with AMD

Soo they can continue to provide high volume graphics be it on board a budget card etc
 
Well remember how Cyrix died....
Click to expand...
Initially Cyrix tried to charge a premium for its extra performance, but the 6x86's math coprocessor was not as fast as that in the Intel Pentium. The main difference was not one of actual computing performance on the coprocessor, but a lack of instruction pipelining. Due to the increasing popularity of first-person 3D games, Cyrix was forced to lower its prices.
Click to expand...
Ahhh... look out for gameing performance! otherwise its your downfall!

...quickly gained a following among computer enthusiasts and independent computer shops, unlike AMD, its chips had yet to be used by a major OEM customer.
Click to expand...
Dont get OEMs to sell your CPU... you lose.


Ironically, had the software been written in a more conventional way, then the 6x86 CPU would have vastly outperformed the Intel "equivalent" in Quake. The FPU process was only used to load registers to get around the slowness of execution the Intel parts exhibited with a conventional program technique. So by "optimizing" for Intel architectural shortcomings, competitor CPUs were disadvantaged. This boosted the popularity of Intel CPUs amongst the gaming community.
Click to expand...
Make a bad CPU, get the software guys on your side, win big time with the gamers = sell alot of CPUs.


In 1996 Cyrix released the MediaGX CPU, which integrated all of the major discrete components of a PC, including sound and video, onto one chip. Initially based on the old 5x86 technology and running at 120 or 133 MHz, its performance was widely criticized but its low price made it successful. The MediaGX led to Cyrix's first big win, when Compaq used it in its lowest-priced Presario 2100 and 2200 computer. This led to further MediaGX sales to Packard Bell and also seemed to give Cyrix legitimacy, as 6x86 sales to Packard Bell and eMachines quickly followed.
Click to expand...
They profited by intregateing things, so they made them cheaper than their competitors (this is the only thing that Cyrix did, that was smart).

Cyrix had always been a fabless company but contracted the actual semiconductor manufacturing to an outside foundry. In the early days, Cyrix mostly used Texas Instruments production facilities.

Following a series of disagreements with Texas Instruments, and production difficulties at SGS Thomson, Cyrix turned to IBM Microelectronics.

As part of the manufacturing agreement between the two companies, IBM received the right to build and sell Cyrix-designed CPUs under the IBM name.

While some in the industry speculated this would lead to IBM using 6x86 CPUs extensively in its product line and improve Cyrix's reputation, IBM continued to mostly use Intel CPUs, and to a lesser extent, AMD CPUs, in the majority of its products and only used the Cyrix designs in a few budget models, mostly sold outside of the United States. IBM instead sold its 6x86 chips on the open market, competing directly against Cyrix and sometimes undercutting Cyrix's prices.
Click to expand...
Lesson? Dont let IBM f*** you over...


Cyrix's designs were completely independent. Focused on removing potential competitors, Intel spent many years in legal battles with Cyrix, consuming Cyrix financial resources, claiming that the Cyrix 486 violated Intel's patents, when in reality the design was proven independent.
Click to expand...
Intel dont fight fair... they had more money, and legal fees will make you go bankrupt.






How did Cyrix die? was it the Intel wageing legal wars? Haveing trouble getting OEMs onboard? was it IBM screwing Cyrix over? Was it them not antisipateing how big a impact gameing would have on PCs?

And how is this relevant to this discussion? of a rumor about dell buying amd?
That said... cyrix was just unlucky... or made a row of bad business decisions.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top