AMD's Spider snagged in its own web
Analysis Pricing is a problem
THE INTRODUCTION of AMD's "Phenom" range of CPUs still leaves it lagging behind Intel. That appears to be the concensus view of hardware reviewers who have compared like to like.
But worse than that is that Intel has forked AMD by its pricing. According to Tarinder Sandhu at Hexus.net, for example, is that it has to lower the price of the Phenom 9600 to at least £135 to give it a chance against Intel's 6600. That costs £165 for an overclocking 2.4GHz part. Sandhu said the AMD chip is a year behind Intel, and Intel has already moved to 45 nanometres.
AMD has tried to argue all year that its design is better architecture than Intel's - but basically this is an argument that doesn't go down a storm with people who want more speed at less cost.
There's also the question of supply - we've noted that during this year the AMD marketeers have relied more on decks of Powerpoint slides than delivering real products. The firm is obviously in some considerable trouble.
But we'd argue that trouble is largely of its own making. After its architecture threw Intel into disarray, AMD had a clear two year window in which to press its technological advantage, but signally failed to do so.
Further, the acquisition of ATI was clearly a terrible mistake, and it's only with the SEC filing last week that we discover how much it really cost, in terms of agreements with the Canadian government, the money it has to dole out to IBM for R&D, and the rest.
Being in the semiconductor business is an expensive business and the AMD SEC filing showed that even with an injection from an Abu Dhabi government VC, there's still a considerable way for the firm to go to stop bleeding money.
Wait, that SEC filing shows that AMD already has $5 billion in debt, and obligations to a host of organisations which make it far from certain that it can claw its way back.
If 2004 and 2005 were horrid years for Intel, it's evident that 2007 is worse for AMD. Right now we're not at all certain that it has much chance of catching up with Intel - and that can't be good for the industry in general. µ
L'INQ
Hexus
Comments
erm, help me out here!
So, we all have to buy crappy AMD processors from now on ok.About the only thing worth looking at from the company right now is the graphics cards! so i think the acquisition of ATI is the best thing it ever did. Without it, the best thing about phenom wouldn't be there either 790fx!, just a shame you have to have a phenom with it though isn't it.
I truly wonder what amd actually did in 2006, for like the whole year!!!
they totally trumped intel with dual core, and totally pointless 64 bit, and 6 months later should have been out with quad core 939. Forget am2, totally pointless exercise. They said they could have done ddr2 on 939!!!
Fire those chips out, and get a fab to 45nm quick, and then crank out these phenoms dirty cheap, whilst your 2+2 glued 65nm quads struggle alittle on age. and take the mobile market with the first proper quads.
I would disagree
AMD has lacked the execution, that can't be disagreed with. But in the end its still got a chip that can with over clocking match an Intel chip that is a process shrink ahead of it.It could have been better no denying it. and they will have to tough out a year. But in the end the tech is good, and the platform has come together. In terms of cash $5 Billion in debt is nothing, especially if its in dollars, the exchange rate will mean that shrinking all time.
If they can get product out and keep the speeds up, Intel knows that they will be forced to keep a die shrink ahead of AMD just to allow their chips to be faster!
It arent over yet :)
er
Surely this competes with the Q6600? Not the E6600? What with it being a quad-core and all.Its all a Lie!!!
Hello everybody!Just wanted to say that Intel & AMD are bound by their secret agreements. AMD trumped Intel but did not go far enough to make the kill! Similarly, Intel shall give AMD some tough time, but, they both want to rule the market. The truth is that x86 processor architecture is getting long in the tooth and no matter how you extend it (AMD64, SSE2/3/4/5, .... ) it has to go! How many cores do you really need??? Its time for something revolutionary rather than evolutionary! I think that the so called "gaming" consoles can be a good starting point considering their extreme performance in graphics and multimedia apps and somewhat OK performance in others all the while costing less than PCs in general.
Come back Alpha .... !!!
Boo Hoo
This gets so sickening. AMD is the smaller company. Intel does everyting they can to trip them up financially. All people do is complain.Most people deserved the outrageous prices Intel charged for so long and now the word is that they will RAISE prices now that Phenom isn't faster.
Great job OEMs. You could have easily tok more AMD chips. But no I forgot, If you did that and then needed extra inventory from Intel, they'd stick a cattle prod up your a s s.
Way to go regulatory agencies. No wonder I don't want any friends.
AMD downticks
Has anyone else noticed that AMD's stock has dropped -3.165% in the first three trading hours today, on what is purported to be AMD's day in the spotlight?Half full or Half empty ?
Classic case of guessing right now. Is the glass half full or half empty ? I have been an AMD fan for years but I have to admit; it is do or die time. Unless AMD has something up it's sleeve within 2008 I see them as a low buget second rate chip trying to survive from the cheap market. (and taking ATI along for the ride). RIP"$5 Billion in debt is nothing,"
Ask the share holders if $5 Billion in dept is nothing, at $12.23 a share it appears to be. The exchange rate come on, at $5 billion loss it isn't going to make that much difference what the exchange rate is. Anyway you look at it, it's a lot of cash and it's going to be hard for AMD to survive the next few years.distorted comments
It's truly amazing how people often are convinced of their knowledge when all they have are distorted views not even of the presence, but of the past...To LFP above... and the quote "forced to stay a die shrink ahead":
Read the Phenom review on anandtech!
Here is the key excerpt:
"Phenom isn't faster than Intel's Core 2 Quad clock for clock. In other words, a 2.3GHz Phenom 9600 will set you back at least $283 and it's slower than a 2.4Ghz Core 2 Quad Q6600, which will only cost you $269."
AND both parts are 65nm! (not to be confused with the QX9650 45nm part)
It's time to update your views!
Whoever still thinks that AMD's chips can easily be overclocked and intel's can't... and that on the same die shrink AMD is faster... lives in the past or has a serious LAG when it comes to information processing.
I am subject to lag and distorted views myself, I am sure, but at least the closer you are to the industry, the less lag and distortion your views will suffer.
Objectively I think one can say that netburst mistake on 90nm was one era, and AMD's trouble with 65nm is the present... How 45nm will shape up for both companies, nobody knows yet that I know of...
Thinking that things just repeat itself the same way with every die shrink is pretty flawed.
Odd
It IS a bit perplexing how both ATI and AMD's technology does indeed have advantages to intel and nvidia, and yet they lose the race in all tests.It makes you wonder why, are they simply putting in stuff at critical points that stop the advantages from shining through?
Or are they focusing too much on the large picture instead of the details, getting those individual parts to run smoothly and work together.
Thanks for the Memories Hector!!!
Hector Ruiz strikes again! Check out this guys absolute compnay destroying past. What a total F up on AMD's part to hire this moron. Now they are at risk of losing their entire company over him. Way to go.All true, buuuuut....
AMD's stock lost 4% today, but Nvidia lost more than 6%. Their downturn can be partially explained by a larger market segment drop.Everyone knew that absorbing ATI would be a massive drain on the company, but their long term plan is still worthy of support.
Who wants to consider going back to a one-company provider of x86 chips. Face it - this chip fight will go on for years to come, and that's all the better for us.
Advantages?
AMD doesn't have advantages. It's more advanced but the balance is all wrong. It has too many advancements which are not needed and thus wasting valueable transistor space.It's better to something simple well, that something complicated badly.