The rise and fall of AMD

[R0H1T]

My reply was to a poster discussing Q2-1012 results. I have Q1-2013 results as well.

http://www.ibtimes.com/amd-market-share-rises-intel-revenue-grows-197098

Once again: Please don't try to kill the messenger if you don't like the message...

Didn't wanna criticize you unfairly but that report is from 6yrs back

 

[mrmt]

Didn't wanna criticize you unfairly but that report is from 6yrs back

Impressive what fanboyism can do. Galego cannot link market data with the latest financial statements.

 

[Idontcare]

Except that in my original post i clearly wrote "link" not "image". It is not my fault if some people cannot see the difference. Unless you can shown me that https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/ is the new arstechnica site: http://cdn.arstechnica.net/

in whose case I will apologize...

Regarding the 16 GB issue... well, as you know I already posted in public that I was wrong, I explained why I was wrong, and I gave the thanks to the guy who corrected me.

That is more than you do. I recall the Windows 7/8 BD patches issue, where you tried to convince me about how more performance would become at the expense of more power. You went towards the 'technical' side posting lots of equations to try to win your argument. I provided you real word measurements showing how the FX-patches generated improvement in performance whereas cutting down power consumption.

Your answer to the correction? You just disappeared from that thread.

Thanks for confirming that I am wasting my time. Lesson learned.

 

[galego]

Sorry with the previous 2007 link. Here is the data available at early 2012 (from previous year):

Both Intel and AMD[FONT=inherit ! important][FONT=inherit ! important][/FONT][/FONT] were able to gain market share in individual market segments, but it was AMD that came out on top overall. Intel ended the year with 80.1 percent share, down 0.6 points from 2010, while AMD gained 0.7 points to 19.7 percent and Via dropped 0.1 points to 0.2 percent share.


According to IDC, Intel suffered a 2.6 point loss in the mobile segment (down to 83.8 percent), as AMD added 2.7 points bringing it to 16.0 percent.

http://www.tomshardware.com/news/amd-intel-cpu-processor,15041.html

Here is the Q4-2012 data:

AMD made biggest gains in the commercial segment, clocking its highest ever market share of 27.1 percent in Q42012. In the commercial desktops, AMD market share stood at 22.4 percent in Q42012, from 20.6 percent in Q32012; while in the commercial notebook segment the company captured almost one-third market share at 31.4 percent.


IDC report also highlighted that the consumer notebook market share for AMD stood at 14.4 percent in Q42012; from a low of 3.1 percent in Q12011, marking it a growth of 570 percent in absolute unit terms over eight quarters.

http://www.crn.in/news/hardware/2013/03/05/amd-gains-20-percent-market-share-in-q42012---idc

AMD revenues for Q1-2013 are better than analysts waited

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-...-that-may-exceed-some-analysts-estimates.html

http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/04/18/us-amd-results-idUSBRE93H16E20130418

And the prediction of positive cash-flow for the second half of 2013

http://www.bit-tech.net/news/hardware/2013/04/19/amd-q1-2013/1

AMD is rising, whereas Intel is falling

http://www.itp.net/593009-intel-profits-down-25-in-q1-2013

 

[R0H1T]

Impressive what fanboyism can do. Galego cannot link market data with the latest financial statements.

Let's not kid ourselves that the lack of objectivity is an AMD fanboi trait only & before this goes ugly I'll excuse myself from further flame/bait !

 

[mrmt]

Sorry with the previous 2007 link. Here is the data available at early 2012 (from previous year):

You can't add 2+2, can you?

The story you posted here was written in MARCH 16, 2012, meaning that this data is from 2011. It has nothing to do with AMD current situation. In fact, that old AMD is long gone. AMD had 30% more CPU revenues on that year.

 

[jhu]

Perhaps we have some self-important dilettantes in here.

 

[Phynaz]

That is more than you do. I recall the Windows 7/8 BD patches issue, where you tried to convince me about how more performance would become at the expense of more power. You went towards the 'technical' side posting lots of equations to try to win your argument. I provided you real word measurements showing how the FX-patches generated improvement in performance whereas cutting down power consumption.

Your answer to the correction? You just disappeared from that thread.

You're actually going to attempt to call out IDC?

You must not realize he has a Phd. and was a semiconductor process engineer.

So we have you who has no qualifications at all, going by your grammar and attitude is probably a child posting from school, along with having an obvious fanboy agenda. And then we have IDC and his history here.

Guess who has more credence (hint - it's not you).

Time to pull up your big boy pants and grow up.

P.S. When you mature a bit you will learn that walking away from an argument as IDC did is often the best choice. It's obvious there was nothing to be gained by continuing to post in that thread, and doing so would not have benefited anyone except possibly you. Therefore he chose to not enable you. In words you may be more familiar with, he stopped feeding the troll.

I'm even going to give you the benefit of the doubt and give you an opportunity to learn something. Look up the thread regarding embedded processors. IDC holds the opinion that TI had very high margins on what they were selling to Ford. I stated a different opinion based upon when I used to work in the auto supplier industry. Neither of us posted again. We didn't going scouring the Internet to spam links to prove our point. Do you know why? Because adults don't have to "win" an argument when there is a difference of opinion.

 

[krumme]

This is exactly the problem, Krumme. Brazos could have been a game changer had it arrived along with Atom. When it arrived it sold like hot cakes, but the volumes are already faltering. And with Haswell/Broadwell coming for low power and the new Atom arriving by the end of the year, Kabini won't have the same easy ride.

Simply put, the marketing hole where AMD put Brazos is getting smaller and smaller, and Kabini can't change that.

Probably. We will see. The basic problem imho about kabini temash is the total profit not the ROI of the investment itself. Its probably doomed to be a huge success in itself, but the chances it can make a difference for AMD is slim.

(edit: still bobcat sold like hotcakes, so going for bobcat was well, perhaps one of the few places where you could miss )

 

[Idontcare]

Perhaps we have some self-important dilettantes in here.

No one is going to get the DH0 reference if you don't put a link to it

 

[Pilum]

1Q13 AMD marketshare is 14.3% according to Mercury Research. That is quite good, they're still nearly 27 times bigger than VIA.

 

[sontin]

They sold 38% less processors than last year. The whole market is only down 17%.

 

[guskline]

Back to the Ops original post. The two part article really showed how important it is to have a long term plan in business and to keep excessive spending in check.

The "new" AMD (if it doesn't file for bankruptcy protection) will most likely be a much different place.

 

[galego]

You can't add 2+2, can you?

The story you posted here was written in MARCH 16, 2012, meaning that this data is from 2011. It has nothing to do with AMD current situation. In fact, that old AMD is long gone. AMD had 30% more CPU revenues on that year.

The quote that you reproduce above says data "from previous year"

i.e., 2012 - 1 = 2011.

In case you did not notice I have given data from 2011, from 2012 and from 2013. Read the remaining 99% of my previous post.

 

[SocketF]

They sold 38% less processors than last year. The whole market is only down 17%.

Normal, if the market shrinks, it affects the company with inferior products first / more.

 

[galego]

You're actually going to attempt to call out IDC?

You must not realize he has a Phd. and was a semiconductor process engineer.

So we have you who has no qualifications at all, going by your grammar and attitude is probably a child posting from school, along with having an obvious fanboy agenda. And then we have IDC and his history here.

Guess who has more credence (hint - it's not you).

Time to pull up your big boy pants and grow up.

P.S. When you mature a bit you will learn that walking away from an argument as IDC did is often the best choice. It's obvious there was nothing to be gained by continuing to post in that thread, and doing so would not have benefited anyone except possibly you. Therefore he chose to not enable you. In words you may be more familiar with, he stopped feeding the troll.

I'm even going to give you the benefit of the doubt and give you an opportunity to learn something. Look up the thread regarding embedded processors. IDC holds the opinion that TI had very high margins on what they were selling to Ford. I stated a different opinion based upon when I used to work in the auto supplier industry. Neither of us posted again. We didn't going scouring the Internet to spam links to prove our point. Do you know why? Because adults don't have to "win" an argument when there is a difference of opinion.

Real-world data showed IDC was wrong.

I understand that you have not enough time to engage in any serious discussion, searching news and stories for starting new threads against AMD must take lots of time.

P.S: You have been recommending me to look to AMDZone. Finally I did and I discovered that they profess the same love for you and your posts :biggrin:.

 

[Roland00Address]

My reply was to a poster discussing Q2-1012 results. I have Q1-2013 results as well

That poster, aka me, was not talking about AMD health as a company but specifically bobcat sales. I was showing that bobcat does not sell like hotcakes anymore it used to, and all of AMD mobile CPU losses in that quarter were attrible to losses of bobcat sales.

You are obstruficating by changing the subject and pretending I am talking about something else or you never understood my point at all.

 

[Exophase]

AMD made biggest gains in the commercial segment, clocking its highest ever market share of 27.1 percent in Q42012. In the commercial desktops, AMD market share stood at 22.4 percent in Q42012, from 20.6 percent in Q32012; while in the commercial notebook segment the company captured almost one-third market share at 31.4 percent.

IDC report also highlighted that the consumer notebook market share for AMD stood at 14.4 percent in Q42012; from a low of 3.1 percent in Q12011, marking it a growth of 570 percent in absolute unit terms over eight quarters.

http://www.crn.in/news/hardware/2013/03/05/amd-gains-20-percent-market-share-in-q42012---idc

Going only by the snippet you delivered one would probably not realize that this only applies to market share in India. Were you deliberately obscuring this fact, or do you really think India is representative of global market share?

 

[Phynaz]

I understand that you have not enough time to engage in any serious discussion, searching news and stories for starting new threads against AMD must take lots of time.

Feel free to stay out of my threads if you don't like them.

 

[mrmt]

The quote that you reproduce above says data "from previous year"

i.e., 2012 - 1 = 2011.

In case you did not notice I have given data from 2011, from 2012 and from 2013. Read the remaining 99% of my previous post.

In this case, the remaining 99% of my post still stands: You can't link market data with financial statements:

1) First you cannot use 2011 data to prove *anything* because 2013 will offer over 40% less revenues than 2011, and this is baseline scenario. Once your historical data diverges 40% from your baseline scenario, it is worth nothing.

2) Second your hyping about Intel going down and AMD raising is essentially dissociated from reality. AMD stopped bleeding only after dropping 40% YoY on CPU sales, but we didn't see Q3 yet. It is in Q3 where the impact of Intel launches is felt in AMD results, and in the last two years we got a mayhen.

Disappointing as it may be for the enthusiast community, Haswell brings a lot of improvements for the mobile market, more than Ivy, and if Ivy could wreak havoc in AMD results, it is safe to expect Haswell to get similar results, as Richland (a.k.a. Trinity Panic Edition) doesn't bring anything close to bridge the gap between AMD and Intel. If anything, it will make things a little less worse but nowhere AMD needs.

3) The positive cash flows that AMD is expecting (it was break even two quarters ago) isn't due to CPU revenues, but due to embedded revenues quicking in. CPU position in the market is still weak.

What's implicit in AMD speech is that the new revenue streams will barely be enough to cover the weak position in the CPU consumer market.

4) Last, but not least, AMD in fact beat analyst expectations but just because AMD own guidance was already very pessimistic, and guidance for the next quarter isn't anything to praise at. While you are saying they are rising, in fact what we'll get by AMD own guidance is more cash burn, and flat gross margins, even with a supposedly improved product mix. That's not "rising" in my book.

You should know 1, 3 and 4 if you actually listened to AMD management, as this is more or less their official position on the subjects, and you would know 2) if you bothered to read AMD own SEC fillings.

But instead you don't, and you prefer to live in a PPT land that not even AMD management dares to go.

 

[galego]

Some detailed data about the continuous fall of Intel: 17-20% per quarter.

 

[Enigmoid]

Some detailed data about the continuous fall of Intel: 17-20% per quarter.

This isn't really a good example as the whole market is down.

 

[Sleepingforest]

And AMD is down 31% from a year ago and is still in the red. Intel, at least, is making money without selling off it's own buildings.

It's not just Intel that's down: it's the whole non-mobile/tablet PC market. It is nice to see AMD doing better than before, but that's like say a person with cancer has 5% fewer tumors than expected--things are still bad.

 

[CHADBOGA]

Some detailed data about the continuous fall of Intel: 17-20% per quarter.

Yes Intel's revenue is down 7% and this is apparently a grave problem, yet AMD's 31% revenue fall is a sign they are on their way back. LOL

 

[mrmt]

Some detailed data about the continuous fall of Intel: 17-20% per quarter.

So you are comparing AMD 30% drop in revenues against Intel 20% drop in profits? Do you really have a clue of what you are saying here?