Why AMD Should Buy ARM Now

[Skurge]

http://www.tomshardware.com/news/mobile-processor-cpu-gpu-arm-cpu,12670.html#xtor=RSS-181?#xtor=998

I don't know much about CPUs, but enjoy reading threads here. What do you guys think?

Do AMD even have the money to buy ARM?

 

[OCGuy]

Doubt it.

 

[tweakboy]

Why we care about Arms,, their doing ok in iraq, God is watching over our troops.

 

[Idontcare]

Dirk stepped down in a way that one could be interpretted as being a strong disagreement over an impending M&A (merger and acquisition).

We know AMD entertained the idea of buying Nvidia but that Ruiz refused on the basis of JHH stipulating that he would have to be the CEO of the merged entity.

Maybe Dirk refused to a merger with ARM over similar reasons but the BOD this time told him to pound sand?

AMD merging with ARM makes sense ONLY if the plan is for AMD/ARM to not compete in mobile space (ARM doesn't compete with IT'S customers, it licenses ARM tech to them) or the plan is for ARM to stop licensing and have the new AMD/ARM entity take the market over for itself.

I don't see how a combined entity could continue to function as both a licensor as well as a competitor in the existing market spaces. Historically that just doesn't work out.

 

[Accord99]

Do AMD even have the money to buy ARM?

Based on today's closing share prices, ARM is worth more than twice as much as AMD. $14.1B versus 6.25B.

http://www.google.com/finance?q=NYSE:AMD
http://www.google.com/finance?q=NYSE:AMD

 

[podspi]

Based on today's closing share prices, ARM is worth more than twice as much as AMD. $14.1B versus 6.25B.

http://www.google.com/finance?q=NYSE:AMD
http://www.google.com/finance?q=NYSE:AMD

On revenue of less than $1B. Meanwhile AMD is going for less than its yearly revenue...

The only way ARM+AMD happens is if ARM acquires AMD in some stock swap deal.

 

[smartpatrol]

What would AMD possibly have to gain by buying ARM? Or vice versa?

ARM are making a killing on their licenses. Why would they ever want to compete against Intel in the x86 market?

AMD don't have anywhere near the cash to buy ARM, but even if they did, why would they? Why not just get a license from ARM and build their own SoCs? Anyway they already sold their mobile GPU business to Qualcomm.

 

[nenforcer]

I can't see AMD (legacy x86 architecture) having anything ARM would want to own.

It's the other way around and I don't think AMD can afford it right now having just turned profitable after how many losing quarters.

ARM is already getting ready to move into the low powered server space with CORTEX chips which will put them directly in line with Intel / AMD at the low end.

 

[gdansk]

I can't see AMD (legacy x86 architecture) having anything ARM would want to own.

At least its GPU division would be something ARM would like, considering they acquired the Mali core and team.

 

[Arkadrel]

I dont think AMD can buy ARM... maybe the other way around though?

A merger could work....

that would make the A-team, as Ive read some other places.
AMD + ATI + ARM = A team.

AMD does have expertise in other area's than just CPUs....its GPU/APU expertise/OpenCL stuff from ATI is probably what ARM would be most intrested in, though.

APU "ARM + Radeon" chip anyone?
For tablets/nettops.

Windows 8 will have ARM support, who wouldnt want a small fast directx 11 "APU ARM" chip?

With massive OpenCL compute performance for very little energy use? More than 1 way to skin a cat, maybe this is how ARM wants to get more compute power, though the GPU instead of the ARM CPU.

That way ARM dont get into fits with its competitors licences's, cuz their still getting the same ARM CPU that ll be inside amd chips, but the compute power will come from the GPU that AMD throws into the chips?

 

[zebrax2]

Could they still produce x86 chips in case they bought AMD?

 

[Bearach]

http://www.tomshardware.com/news/x86-AMD-Fusion-Warren-East-John-Taylor-ARM,12673.html

It would seem ARM want AMD to license their architecture but AMD is stubborn, says they're sticking with their x86 APU designs.

Another story saying that AMD is not pursuing ARM license :

http://www.computerworld.com/s/arti...se_sticking_to_x86?taxonomyId=12&pageNumber=1

Not sure how credible the sources are, but rumours will surface more as an ARM representative is talking at AMD's Fusion Developer Summit.

I don't see AMD buying ARM. Maybe a license in the future, but actually buy the company would be a risk.

Firstly, I don't believe they have enough capital, and even if they could get the money, I believe it could be too much to take financially, AMD and ARM would suffer.

 

[Idontcare]

Could they still produce x86 chips in case they bought AMD?

Reputedly the answer is "no", not immedetially at least as the existing x86 license is non-transferable. It would need to be renegotiated with Intel.

http://www.tomshardware.com/news/x86-AMD-Fusion-Warren-East-John-Taylor-ARM,12673.html

It would seem ARM want AMD to license their architecture but AMD is stubborn, says they're sticking with their x86 APU designs.

Another story saying that AMD is not pursuing ARM license :

http://www.computerworld.com/s/arti...se_sticking_to_x86?taxonomyId=12&pageNumber=1

Not sure how credible the sources are, but rumours will surface more as an ARM representative is talking at AMD's Fusion Developer Summit.

I don't see AMD buying ARM. Maybe a license in the future, but actually buy the company would be a risk.

Firstly, I don't believe they have enough capital, and even if they could get the money, I believe it could be too much to take financially, AMD and ARM would suffer.

What is odd about the "news story" is that ARM has always been "trying" to get AMD to license their IP. This isn't something new. ARM is trying to get everyone that sells IC's anywhere to license their IP...it is kinda their business to do that, always has been.

So when someone comes out and says "ZOMG BBQsauze we are trying to get AMD to license ARM!" the response really ought to be "no sh!t? you mean like you haven't been trying to do that the past 10 yrs? Really?".

 

[Bearach]

Reputedly the answer is "no", not immedetially at least as the existing x86 license is non-transferable. It would need to be renegotiated with Intel.



What is odd about the "news story" is that ARM has always been "trying" to get AMD to license their IP. This isn't something new. ARM is trying to get everyone that sells IC's anywhere to license their IP...it is kinda their business to do that, always has been.

So when someone comes out and says "ZOMG BBQsauze we are trying to get AMD to license ARM!" the response really ought to be "no sh!t? you mean like you haven't been trying to do that the past 10 yrs? Really?".

I agree, it shouldn't be a surprise or considered anything new. I'm confused as to why it's treated as more.

 

[smartpatrol]

PU "ARM + Radeon" chip anyone?
For tablets/nettops.

AMD already had a GPU for mobile SoCs called Imageon. They sold that branch to Qualcomm a few years ago, and its derivatives are being used in the Snapdragon processors.

Windows 8 will have ARM support, who wouldnt want a small fast directx 11 "APU ARM" chip?

With massive OpenCL compute performance for very little energy use? More than 1 way to skin a cat, maybe this is how ARM wants to get more compute power, though the GPU instead of the ARM CPU.

That way ARM dont get into fits with its competitors licences's, cuz their still getting the same ARM CPU that ll be inside amd chips, but the compute power will come from the GPU that AMD throws into the chips?

Everything you described could be done just as well if AMD buys an ARM license (in fact, that seems to be exactly what Nvidia is doing with project Denver). There is absolutely no reason why the companies would need to merge.

 

[SickBeast]

According to Xbit Labs, this is not gonna happen:

http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/other/...Has_No_Plans_to_License_ARM_Architecture.html

I wonder if AMD could license the ARM instruction set and create their own mobile chip that is compatible with the platform, rather than simply using the actual ARM chips.

 

[nyker96]

I dont think AMD can buy ARM... maybe the other way around though?

A merger could work....

that would make the A-team, as Ive read some other places.
AMD + ATI + ARM = A team.

I love it when a plan comes together!

 

[Mopetar]

If it does happen, it's going to be because Intel manages to actually deliver a good competitor to the current ARM SoCs found in tablets and phones. I don't expect that to happen for at least another two years, but Intel has to be worried that phones and tablets may be the primary computing devices of the future so they will definitely try to break into this space.

Depending on how well Llano and Bulldozer turn out, AMD may either end up gaining a decent chunk of market share, or they might end up dead in the water. Either way, I could see ARM deciding to pounce and buy AMD, or at least be the dominant partner in any merger. It's going to continue to be much harder for AMD to hold strong against Intel and eventually, Intel is going to make a decent chip for tablets, etc.

The only way I don't see these two ending up together at some point, is if some company like Apple or HP were to snatch them up first. Of course as time goes on, that becomes increasingly unlikely as viable competitors in that space would grow. If tomorrow HP or Apple were to buy ARM and lock other competitors out of the next ARM SoC, it would cause a lot of chaos and commotion; but three years down the road, not so much.

 

[nonameo]

brazos is in just about every way superior to atom, yet what do you see more of on shelves? atom. Atom everywhere. Even on newegg, there are only 5 or so fusion netbooks and eleventy billion atom netbooks. Honestly, I don't think there's a CPU that amd could conceivably make that could "compete" with atom simply because of intel's clout.

in other words, AMD's not getting any market share even if they have superior products.

 

[smartpatrol]

I wonder if AMD could license the ARM instruction set and create their own mobile chip that is compatible with the platform, rather than simply using the actual ARM chips.

There are no actual ARM chips. ARM just licenses the design for their chips to other companies. They don't produce CPUs themselves. It is certainly possible that AMD will license ARM technology in the future.

The idea of one company buying another is crazy talk. I can't fathom why ARM would possibly buy AMD or vice versa. ARM doesn't need an x86 license. . . they would be ****ing crazy to try and compete with Intel on their home turf.

 

[Mopetar]

brazos is in just about every way superior to atom, yet what do you see more of on shelves? atom. Atom everywhere. Even on newegg, there are only 5 or so fusion netbooks and eleventy billion atom netbooks. Honestly, I don't think there's a CPU that amd could conceivably make that could "compete" with atom simply because of intel's clout.

in other words, AMD's not getting any market share even if they have superior products.

Atom has been out for quite a while now, whereas Brazos has been out for little more than a single quarter and AMD has said that they're pleased with the sales. I'm guessing that they're selling them about as fast as they can make them.

The big problem is that just as AMD is releasing a netbook chip, the netbook market isn't starting to look all that great. Tablets are the new thing now and both AMD and Intel have been caught with their pants down.

 

[Idontcare]

brazos is in just about every way superior to atom, yet what do you see more of on shelves? atom. Atom everywhere. Even on newegg, there are only 5 or so fusion netbooks and eleventy billion atom netbooks. Honestly, I don't think there's a CPU that amd could conceivably make that could "compete" with atom simply because of intel's clout.

in other words, AMD's not getting any market share even if they have superior products.

It's easy to lay blame for AMD's woes at Intel's doorstep...but look at Apple. Apple competed against both Intel and Microsoft (still do), each virtual monopolies in their respective markets, and yet they managed to strike a very different, very profitable, path for themselves.

The consumer decides AMD's marketshare, not Intel. AMD could play a role in shifting the consumer's desire to buy AMD products, but it would take an actual marketing campaign (colgate toothpaste has more marketing than AMD) and/or a lowering of their prices (they ain't running a charity after all). They aren't powerless.

 

[Blitzvogel]

ARM would screw up our already awesome DAMMIT.

AMD just needs to focus on graphics and improving their CPUs so they can catch up to Intel.

 

[Mopetar]

The consumer decides AMD's marketshare, not Intel.

Part of the reason AMD is in such a bad spot is that for a while that wasn't true.

Now that Intel has stopped with the anti-competitive practices, AMD has a chance, but it's not going to be easy to crawl out of the hole they're in.

 

[Topweasel]

It's easy to lay blame for AMD's woes at Intel's doorstep...but look at Apple. Apple competed against both Intel and Microsoft (still do), each virtual monopolies in their respective markets, and yet they managed to strike a very different, very profitable, path for themselves.

Thought I remember once Bill Gates pumping millions of dollars of capital into Apple once just to keep it afloat.