Slashdot Mirror


AMD Loses $1.2 Billion and Its CEO

Barence writes to mention that after seeing almost $1.2 billion in second quarter losses, AMD's CEO has resigned. Stepping up to fill his shoes will be Dirk Meyer, previous company president and COO. "Only two years ago, the company held a processor performance lead and was making serious inroads into Intel's market. However, AMD failed to keep pace with Intel's Core technology, and it once again surrendered its performance crown at the dawn of the multicore era. Those problems were exacerbated by the bungled launch of the Barcelona processors, which prompted Ruiz to make a frank public apology last December."

57 of 373 comments (clear)

  1. i hope they keep up by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The last thing i want is an intel/ms only world. Bad enough MIPS and PPC have gone the way of the dodo more or less. AMD is the last bastion of creativity in CPUs.

    1. Re:i hope they keep up by mrchaotica · · Score: 4, Informative

      I don't want to see AMD fail either, but remember: we'll always have ARM.

      --

      "[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz

    2. Re:i hope they keep up by Mordok-DestroyerOfWo · · Score: 5, Funny

      Thank heavens for the second amendment!

      --
      "Never let your sense of morals prevent you from doing what is right" - Salvor Hardin
    3. Re:i hope they keep up by dedazo · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Not to worry. History (or the Slashdot version of it at least) will remember AMD being taken down by the evil Intel, and things like AMD having taken to lead in the desktop CPU market or the fact that buying ATI was a phenomenal mistake will be ignored.

      Companies don't die, they're just taken down viciously by companies we don't like.

      --
      Web2.0: I love when people Flickr my cuil and digg my boingboing until my google is reddit and I start to yahoo
    4. Re:i hope they keep up by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      But intel makes processors for Macs now. According to /. rhetoric, they thus cannot be evil.

    5. Re:i hope they keep up by xhrit · · Score: 3, Interesting

      We have the Cell.
      Long live Transmeta.

    6. Re:i hope they keep up by GameboyRMH · · Score: 4, Funny

      They can pry my DS from my cold, dead hands!

      --
      "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
    7. Re:i hope they keep up by larry+bagina · · Score: 4, Interesting

      desktop PPC is an evolutionary dead end, but it's still in consoles, embedded, and servers.

      --
      Do you even lift?

      These aren't the 'roids you're looking for.

    8. Re:i hope they keep up by Korin43 · · Score: 4, Funny

      No, you're behind the times. That was LAST year. This year, everything Apple does is evil and non-creative. Get with the times man!

    9. Re:i hope they keep up by alan.briolat · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Speaking purely as a cynic, Intel were dragged into having to innovate by somebody (AMD) producing something better and also instruction-set compatible. That meant they had to invest some money in R&D rather than continuing to push their fairly abysmal P4 line because there was no choice. The emergence of AMD as a serious contender is what has done the industry good in this instance.

      I'm sure that without actual competition, we'd be in the usual position (again) of a company not bothering to innovate because their profit margins are fatter without doing so.

      --
      I swear we should be allowed to give mod points to sigs... "-1, Offtopic"
    10. Re:i hope they keep up by XPACT · · Score: 3, Interesting

      AMD had first the 64-bit x86 processor for the mass market. Unfortunately there was no Windows 64 bit to force the market to adopt the 64-bit processing for every day needs. Or may be Intel and Microsoft are in the same bed.

    11. Re:i hope they keep up by Kneo24 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      And how exactly was buying ATI a mistake? Every since AMD bought ATI, ATI's driver support has became significantly better. ATI cards have usually had better hardware than NVidia's cards. With the improvement in Driver support plus the better hardware and at lower prices (I hope AMD isn't losing money for the lower cost of these cards), ATI is now finally king of the hill in the GPU segment.

    12. Re:i hope they keep up by Cocoshimmy · · Score: 5, Informative

      um...there is a 64bit version of windows, XP64, which Microsoft developed specifically for AMD's 64bit processors since at that time Intel was still pushing Itanium. This was available for public consumption not too long after AMD's processors were released and at that time only ran on AMD processors since they were the only producer of 64bit x86 processors. There is also a 64bit version of Vista available which runs on both Intel and AMD CPUs.

  2. Stocks fall by Drakin020 · · Score: 4, Informative

    It appears their stocks have dropped 12% on this news.

    http://finance.google.com/finance?client=ob&q=NYSE:AMD

    --
    The greatest revenge in life is massive success.
    1. Re:Stocks fall by TubeSteak · · Score: 5, Informative

      Remember, there is no way to properly value this company, the proper valuation is NEGATIVE because that's what profits are.

      That's one of the dumber things I've heard today and it only holds true if you assume AMD is going to keep losing money until they have to sell off their desk chairs & keyboards in a bankruptcy auction.

      There is a lot more to valuing a company than "omg they lost GigaBucks this quarter!!1"

      The two basic numbers to work with are:
      A) whatever investors think it's worth
      B) what the company's assets and fundamentals represent

      A lot of times A is less than B.
      The attempted Microsoft buyout of Yahoo is a good recent example.
      Yahoo shares were/are trading in the low $20s even though MS offered in the low $30s

      --
      [Fuck Beta]
      o0t!
    2. Re:Stocks fall by IronWilliamCash · · Score: 3, Informative

      Remember, there is no way to properly value this company, the proper valuation is NEGATIVE because that's what profits are

      You sir could not less understand what you are talking about by making that kind of statement. Losing money during one quarter means nothing, even during one year, giving this company a negative stock value like your saying, would make them have to pay you to get stocks. Meaning the company would be worth a negative amount with all it's assests combined. If that was the case they would be bankrupt long ago because no one would invest in that kind of company.

    3. Re:Stocks fall by alexander_686 · · Score: 3, Informative

      Not true. A zero [or near zero] just means that the people who hold the equity have nothing left at stake. The company can have assets [liablities are normally higher at this point], employees, IP, product, etc. At this point the shareholders are pushed out and the bondholders take over. Take a look at K-Mart [now Sears] as an example. K-Mart went bust, bondholders took over [and became equity holders] and then they bought Sears.

    4. Re:Stocks fall by besalope · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I very much DO understand what I am talking about by making that kind of statement. Negative profits, massive debt.......AMD loses more per share than many companies make, and they haven't made profit in a long time.

      No apparently you don't understand. In most cases debt financing of a company is cheaper than equity financing. With AMD trying to get back on its feet after the ATI debacle, lower Cost of Capital is the best approach. Their Debt to Equity ratio is also skewed due the drop in their stock price. If you actually looked at their financial statements, $920 million of the loss was from divesture of their Handheld and DTV product businesses. Between the R770 taking the lead in the graphics division with extremely competitive pricing aimed at quick market and deep market penetration and the overall server market constantly moving towards better power efficiency and integrated systems, AMD is fine and on track towards a recovery between Q3 and Q4.

  3. Fix it! by raijinsetsu · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I fell in love with AMD many years ago. They had the price and performance edge, and were also more stable than Intel. I think they need to take a step back an evaluate what the hell they're doing. They need to find a way to pull out of the competition while they clean up their act so they can start giving their customers what they want: cutting edge technology. I've read many articles about proposed AMD technologies, but I haven't seen many come to light (glueless HT, is one that comes to mind). Clean up your act!

  4. Don't let the door hit you Hector by gr8_phk · · Score: 4, Funny

    Back at MOT (now freescale) I hear they called him Hector the Sector Director. People were happy to see him go. After his time at AMD, I'd call him "Hector Ruinz".

  5. Buying ATI = idiocy by Spy+Handler · · Score: 5, Insightful

    if instead of buying ATI, the dude spent the money on R&D and actually coming out with products that can compete with Intel CoreDuo, he might not be resigning...

    1. Re:Buying ATI = idiocy by moosesocks · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The problem was that Intel wasn't spending money on products that could compete with CoreDuo. They got really, really, really lucky.

      The Core line of chips were originally developed as low-power laptop chips based around an older technology than Intel's "mainstream" chips of the day. Intel's roadmap up until very recently focused on further development of the Pentium 4 and Itanium lines (both of which ultimately proved to be unsustainable)

      One of Intel's development teams in Israel saw the huge potential that the old Pentium III architecture had to be fast and power-efficient, when coupled with a more modern manufacturing process. In the end, the low-end power-efficient chips began to outperform their power-hungry Pentium 4 desktop offerings, and Intel quietly rebranded the line, and began to offer the Core chips as their flagship desktop offering.

      Intel also made a great many mistakes with the development of Itanium, and their reliance on RAMBUS (which was proprietary, expensive, and actually slower in many cases than plain old DDR SDRAM). Their failure to embrace x86-64 could have also easily spelled disaster for the company. In terms of 64-bit development, AMD has always been the clear leader.

      Intel should be counting its blessings, as they've made far more missteps than AMD have. Fortunately for them, they have a massive marketing team and extensive manufacturing facilities, both of which AMD lack.

      Hopefully AMD can make something out of their R&D relating to GPGPUs, and stay viable as a competitor.

      --
      -- If you try to fail and succeed, which have you done? - Uli's moose
    2. Re:Buying ATI = idiocy by MightyMartian · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Intel should be counting its blessings, as they've made far more missteps than AMD have. Fortunately for them, they have a massive marketing team and extensive manufacturing facilities, both of which AMD lack.

      But more importantly, lots and lots and lots of money. Intel had the financial wiggle-room to come back from some rather colossal errors over the last decade. AMD simply did not. It could stay competitive providing it had a focused plan, but the ATI deal was precisely what AMD could not afford.

      --
      The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
    3. Re:Buying ATI = idiocy by Otter · · Score: 5, Insightful

      One of Intel's development teams in Israel saw the huge potential that the old Pentium III architecture had to be fast and power-efficient, when coupled with a more modern manufacturing process. In the end, the low-end power-efficient chips began to outperform their power-hungry Pentium 4 desktop offerings, and Intel quietly rebranded the line, and began to offer the Core chips as their flagship desktop offering.

      I'd hesitate to call that luck, let alone "really, really, really lucky". It sounds like terrific teamwork by engineering, production and management.

    4. Re:Buying ATI = idiocy by moosesocks · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I'd hesitate to call that luck, let alone "really, really, really lucky". It sounds like terrific teamwork by engineering, production and management.

      I'd agree 100%. Intel's R&D group in Israel pulled off a small miracle with their work, and should be highly commended for it. However, from what is publicly known, it seems as if it were almost a sort of "skunk works" project, largely independent of the main R&D efforts of the company. I don't think that there was terribly much being expected from them, and the fact that they were able to deliver an extremely viable product was a fortunate coincidence.

      Intel's main R&D efforts were terribly misguided. It was common knowledge that RAMBUS Itanium, and the P4 line all had serious limitations, and yet Intel continued pushing forward with these products.

      --
      -- If you try to fail and succeed, which have you done? - Uli's moose
    5. Re:Buying ATI = idiocy by A+beautiful+mind · · Score: 4, Funny

      It sounds like terrific teamwork by engineering, production and management.

      Oh, you mean luck!

      --
      It takes a man to suffer ignorance and smile
      Be yourself no matter what they say
    6. Re:Buying ATI = idiocy by Otter · · Score: 4, Insightful

      But the Israeli group *did* exist, they *were* given the autonomy to do that work, the management *did* recognize the merits of it and decide to change course, and the production people *did* make it happen! That's not luck! If you don't understand how remarkable all of that is, you've never worked for a huge company.

      What you people all seem to be arguing for, putting all your eggs in one basket and having it work out as you'd planned -- *that* is luck!

  6. Get 'em while they're cheap by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Better grab those Intel processors while they're cheap, because once AMD goes under, you just know Intel will return to the good old days and jack prices up through the roof.

    Must be nice having no competition in the market.

  7. Harder, Better, Faster, Stronger by damonlab · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I bought and recommended AMD products up until a few years ago. I did that then because they had the fastest / better CPUs on the market at that time. During the last few years I have went with Intel because they have the better products now. If AMD wants my future business, they need to come out with something that beats what Intel has.

    1. Re:Harder, Better, Faster, Stronger by John+Jamieson · · Score: 4, Informative

      Sure, but you are part of the 3% that buys leading edge products.(right?) As long as you are in the mainstream BOTH have strengths and weaknesses.

      As long as you are buying a low-mid priced system, AMD competes with intel. If you are a gamer, all that really counts is the Video Card anyway.

      And don't get me started on the Intel Chipsets... remember when they were king? Well, my Core2Duo Centrino laptop chipset has so many bugs... The video performance under Vista and Linux STINKS big time. (WinXP is decent, but not near AMD/ATI's level with the 780g chipset, that chipset rocks )

      AMD is a bit weaker on Laptops now, they have new silicon coming that will change that.

       

  8. Doomsday? by Trayal · · Score: 3, Insightful

    What's with all the doom and gloom predictions and massive stock declines every time one of the 'underdog' companies (AMD, Apple, etc.) has a rough year? These up and down cycles are a natural part of business. AMD still has a lot going for it, and a lot to offer, even if they don't currently hold the technological 'edge' in the x86 market. Given a few years, the picture between Intel and AMD may well switch again - unless too many investors bail out prematurely, of course.

    1. Re:Doomsday? by tyler.willard · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Such doom/gloom FUD encourages investors to flee, bringing the FUD to fruition.

      There is only one case where fleeing investors, and thus dropping stock prices, affects a company: if they need to issue more stock to raise more capital.

      Other than that the stock price doesn't hurt the company since it's already been sold (during the IPO).

  9. Enough time to turn around? by Junta · · Score: 3, Interesting

    As it stands, it's pretty dire. The question is, can AMD turn around and match the 45nm process with a decent design before the Nehalem generation? I wonder that explicitly because the last bragging point they have is their interprocessor architecture and memory controller, which Nehalem matches. If Intel releases that and the rest of AMD's tech remains as disadvantaged as it is, watch for some of the 4-socket and above space that AMD still has some sway in move to Intel.

    --
    XML is like violence. If it doesn't solve the problem, use more.
    1. Re:Enough time to turn around? by MightyMartian · · Score: 3, Interesting

      My feeling at this point is that AMD is hosed. About the only thing we can hope for is that regulators block Intel from buying them when it finally becomes clear that the show is over. Any other big multigazillion dollar companies with a few billion to spend who want a chip manufacturer? I'd say IBM, but their interests seem to be elsewhere.

      --
      The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
  10. Re:Don't invest in AMD... by MightyMartian · · Score: 4, Interesting

    It's up to the shareholders to hold the company to the fire. I have no idea why every shareholder of every company out there isn't forcing the companies to put in performance clawbacks. Imagine if a CEO were faced with the possibility of having to return their bonuses, and maybe even a portion of their salaries, if the company did a nosedive like AMD has. But since shareholders are either too stupid or too frightened to start pushing their weight around, this CEO bonus crapola continues. Oh well, I'm not investing in AMD, so if they want to pay a fucking retard millions to screw their share value, then my hats off to them.

    --
    The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
  11. AMD by mlwmohawk · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I love my AMD systems. What the hell? How can you have a GREAT product, market share, and blow it as often as AMD has.

    I hope they can come back. ATI was such a mistake, EVERYONE knew it was, I shake my head at what passes for management or vision these days.

    You just know the guys that destroy good companies get many millions of dollars while the stock holders get shafted and the stake holders get ignored.

    1. Re:AMD by Bj�rn · · Score: 4, Insightful

      ATI was such a mistake

      If the future is an integration of CPU and GPU, ATI might have been a necessary, if expensive, purchase for AMD. Also note that what AMD got was not just the ATI graphic cards, but also the chipsets. The support chipsets were always AMD's week spot.

      --
      Never express yourself more clearly than you are able to think. --Niels Bohr
  12. Re:What about the video cards? by pdusen · · Score: 5, Insightful

    AMD is fine. They are having a rough spot that is worse than the ones Intel goes through due to Intel being far more diversified. People in these comments touting the death of AMD are being melodramatic.

  13. If I lost $1.2 billion... by afabbro · · Score: 5, Funny

    ...I'd try to think where I'd last seen it and look there.

    In this case, AMD should be looking at 2005.

    --
    Advice: on VPS providers
  14. old CEO was from Motorola by Dan667 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    The way they mis-managed their semi-conductor division pretty much made that the kiss of death. Great technology and good folks there at both AMD and Motorola, but folks that use to be Motorola Management might as well run around in a bunch of robes chanting for their ability to screw things up.

  15. Re:For me, it's all about the graphics. by Dan93 · · Score: 3, Informative

    CPU != GPU

    He was probably talking about the Intel GPU.

  16. Timing is everything by buddhaunderthetree · · Score: 5, Informative

    Hmmm, perhaps just a coincidence but the EU has just expanded it's anti-trust investigation into Intel.

    http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20080716-report-eu-to-expand-intel-antitrust-investigation.html

    --
    "Technology.....the knack of so arranging the world that we don't have to experience it." Max Firsch
  17. Re:Don't invest in AMD... by smooth+wombat · · Score: 5, Informative

    I have no idea why every shareholder of every company out there isn't forcing the companies to put in performance clawbacks.

    Because it is the Boards of these companies that set pay policies, not shareholders. Further, it is all but impossible to get a measure on the proxy vote to force the Boards to change pay policy. The best one can hope for is to make a 'recommendation' to the Board to change pay policy.

    Unless is it is specifically stated somewhere in the corporate bylaws, the final decision as to executive compensation rests with the Board, not the shareholders.

    --
    We will bankrupt ourselves in the vain search for absolute security. -- Dwight D. Eisenhower
  18. That would be interesting.. by Junta · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Though I doubt it would ever happen.

    IBM buys AMD, uses circumstances to:
    -Advance the fab capabilities of AMD generally (hopefully invest to actually keep up with Intel instead of lagging by a year or so)
    -Release a Cell processor variant, replacing the PPC core with an x86 core.

    It seems far fetched, but at the same time, the #1 supercomputer is already an AMD/Cell hybrid (two Cell processor packages for every AMD package). However, I wouldn't anticipate that core being any more performance than the PPC core, just a different instruction set. It *could* really cause some grief for intel if it caught on though. The ability to run Windows and games like normal (maybe with a penalty), but SPU enabled software could really make for some amazing media manipulation and incredible games.

    --
    XML is like violence. If it doesn't solve the problem, use more.
    1. Re:That would be interesting.. by mr_mischief · · Score: 4, Interesting

      If the fab tech is the biggest issue, TSMC or Chartered would be a natural match. They do contract chip fab for everything from DRAM to CPUs, including the XBox CPUs and some AMD CPUs (Chartered) and some of AMD's ATI GPUs and chipsets (TSMC).

      It'd make sense that if you're keeping your equipment busy making stuff for a customer, you'd want to keep that revenue. The best way to ensure that is to start making the same products for yourself.

    2. Re:That would be interesting.. by LWATCDR · · Score: 3, Insightful

      "Remember that IBM is forbidden from selling CPUs for home desktops."
      Huh?
      Since when? IBM made the PPC for Macs for years.
      So where is your documentation on this?

      --
      See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
  19. Re:The beginning of the end for AMD by Spatial · · Score: 5, Informative

    I guess when a mediocre CPU manufacturer merges with a mediocre GPU manufacturer this is what you get.

    At the moment AMD's GPUs are the best value you can get. The Radeon HD4850 and 4870 are exceptional cards while Nvidia seems to have botched their latest line - although they're faster, they're hideously expensive for only moderate performance gains above AMD's parts, and have very large power needs. And just for the record, every GPU I've bought has been an Nvidia one. I'm no AMD/ATI fanboy.

  20. Re:For me, it's all about the graphics. by serviscope_minor · · Score: 4, Informative

    I didn't even know Intel made graphics cards!

    Only integrated graphics, as far as I know.

    The Intel integrated graphics is Crap. This is well documented. Not only is the hardware somewhat anemic, Intel does not give the engineers time to workaround all the bugs, so the drivers never mature to the state they should be in.

    The hardware is low-end (and low power, which is good). The drivers ahve always proven rock-solid to me. And all the features work out of the box with no tweaking. There was a bug related to screens larger than 2048x2048 for 800 series chips. This is well documented in xorg, and is unlikely to be fixed. What awful bugs are there in the 900 series? I've never had a graphics related crash from any Intel GPUs.

    --
    SJW n. One who posts facts.
  21. Re:Don't invest in AMD... by afidel · · Score: 4, Interesting

    It's simple, the board of directors of most companies who are the ones setting things like CEO contracts are full of CxO's of other companies. It's felt that there is a major quid pro quo going on where the board of one company raises the pay for executives then the senior executives at company A talk to their friends who sit on the board of the companies B,C,D where the board members of company A are executives and increase the salary of the executives at B,C,D.

    --
    There are 4 boxes to use in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order. Starting now.
  22. Re:Huh? by serviscope_minor · · Score: 4, Insightful

    If you haven't tried the new ati linux driver (yes, it's a binary blob, waaah) then you should. Ever since AMD took over, it's gotten a lot better.

    What's with the "waaaah" comment? These days, I steer clear of binary drivers. I spent many years on proprietary hardware with binary drivers. I have used binary blobs in Linux as well. I have consistently found that open drivers provide a better experience, with more stability, better implementation/larger quantity of features, and greater longevity of the hardware, since support stays around. Binary drivers (and closed software too, as it happens) have always come back to bite me sooner or later. Are you saying I should:

    1) Ignore my years of previous experience

    2) Support manufacturers who do not supply products I like

    because you think I'm needlessly complaining?

    --
    SJW n. One who posts facts.
  23. Re:For me, it's all about the graphics. by k-zed · · Score: 3, Informative

    Haven't experienced a crash yet? Then try a dual monitor setup with an intel 945 (even when it works, it actually often draws garbage all over the screen... I haven't seen something like that since the DOS days).

    The xorg intel drivers suck - but "luckily", they can't possibly suck as much as the ATI drivers... which are still, after all the open sourcing and linux support and whatnot, completely unusable. (At my company, we do some end-user linux OpenGL devel, and after a few weeks experimentation, we now shamefully have a company-wide "buy nvidia only" policy. We honestly just couldn't get the ATI drivers to work (on dual monitor setups; with a single monitor they're somewhat better). How does that work out for the corporation bottom line, guys?)

    --
    we discovered a new way to think.
  24. Re:The beginning of the end for AMD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    Just for the record AMD/ATI technically have the fastest single board Video card on the market smashing nvidia on pure raw power 2.4TFLOPS admittedly their is some creative thinking behind it but it is the king

    http://www.hexus.net/content/item.php?item=14178&page=1

     

  25. It's all about the architecture by jdb2 · · Score: 4, Informative
    Back in 2003, when rumors were circulating about an AMD "K9" processor, everyone thought that a new, revolutionary, designed from the ground up processor architecture was in the works. Actually, it was. AMD was designing an *8-issue superscalar OoOE* 64-bit x86 processor. Basically the Alpha EV8 reincarnated in the form of an x86 chip. ( remember that AMD inherited a substantial portion of the Alpha design team after DEC was swalloed up by Compaq )

    Unfortunately, as usual, management could only see 6-months ahead and the chip was canceled in favour of a 64-bit processor that was cheaper and easier to design and consequently would increase short-term revenue.

    The processor that was hailed as a "revolutionary" x86 design, the Opteron, was, in fact, *directly* based off of the *K7* design. It was basically a K7 with a beefed up datapath, support for SSE2 and other miscellany, an on-board memory controller, and a high speed serial point-to-point interconnect as a replacement for the front side bus ( Hypertransport ) bolted on.

    Now, you would think that the new Barcelona architecture was a great innovation, but not so much. It, like the Opteron, is a heavily leveraged design based off of the previous processor generation, namely the K8.

    To get to the point, the fact is that AMD never truly created a new processor architecture -- they never truly innovated beyond bolting new crap onto old designs. In fact, the basic architecture of AMD's latest design, when you boil it down, is the same as the *K7*. Barcelona is just a ( very ) beefed up K7.

    When you keep designing architectures like this you eventually hit a wall and start to stagnate due to the law of diminishing returns. So, while AMD basically did nothing essentially new with their architecture over the years, it gave Intel ample time to design, *from the ground up*, 5 new processor architectures : The Pentium-M, Core, Core 2, Nehalem, and Atom.

    AMD's worst mistake was the cancellation of the Alpha EV8 inspired "K9" in 2003. Now they are paying for it.

    jdb2

    1. Re:It's all about the architecture by AnObfuscator · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Back in 2003, when rumors were circulating about an AMD "K9" processor, everyone thought that a new, revolutionary, designed from the ground up processor architecture was in the works. Actually, it was. AMD was designing an *8-issue superscalar OoOE* 64-bit x86 processor. Basically the Alpha EV8 reincarnated in the form of an x86 chip. ( remember that AMD inherited a substantial portion of the Alpha design team after DEC was swalloed up by Compaq )

      Unfortunately, as usual, management could only see 6-months ahead and the chip was canceled in favour of a 64-bit processor that was cheaper and easier to design and consequently would increase short-term revenue.

      No, they canceled it because it was over-ambitious and couldn't work. The thermals of the design were impossible to manage, and the frequency scaling was predicted to be horrible.

      No halfway-successful CPU company thinks "6 months down the road" like you claim. CPUs take years to design, tape-out, and manufacture, and CPU company management knows this.

      The processor that was hailed as a "revolutionary" x86 design, the Opteron, was, in fact, *directly* based off of the *K7* design. It was basically a K7 with a beefed up datapath, support for SSE2 and other miscellany, an on-board memory controller, and a high speed serial point-to-point interconnect as a replacement for the front side bus ( Hypertransport ) bolted on.

      ... not to mention AMD64, a new ISA based on x86 -- something Intel wrote off as "impossible". It includes 2x the number of GPRs (from 8 to 16), and eliminates tons of legacy cruft instructions from x86.

      The "mode switching" behavior that allows K8 to switch between 32bit and 64bit modes on the fly is pretty impressive, as well.

      So, while AMD basically did nothing essentially new with their architecture over the years, it gave Intel ample time to design, *from the ground up*, 5 new processor architectures : The Pentium-M, Core, Core 2, Nehalem, and Atom.

      AMD's worst mistake was the cancellation of the Alpha EV8 inspired "K9" in 2003. Now they are paying for it.

      jdb2

      What the fuck? Pentium-M, Core, Core 2, etc are not "revolutionary, from the ground up" architectures. In fact, the basic architecture, when you boil it down, is nothing more than a "very beefed up" P6 -- AKA Pentium Pro -- which predates even K7.

      I don't disagree that K9 is a disappointing warm-over of K8, but truely "new" cpu architectures don't come around all that often. Power6 is "beefed up" Power5, which is "beefed up" Power4, etc. A good architecture can last a very long time, and it's wasteful and dangerous to throw out a proven design for an unproven "new" design -- see NetBurst for an excellent example.

      --
      multifariam.net -- yet another nerd blog
  26. EU Antitrust Charges. Don't blame the Victim. by Erris · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Thank heavens for representative government that works better than our own. The EU has been watching Intel for more than 8 years and already has outstanding charges that Intel thwarted AMD sales by selling at a loss. We've all seen how they crushed OLPC. Good for the EU for doing something, we can only hope it's not too little too late given worsening economic conditions.

    The story's "AMD sucks" slant is puzzling. Advantages come and go, but AMD has almost always been better for number crunching since 2000. They also have had significantly better interconnects and architecture for multi core processors. It's like blaming the victim.

    Another factor in this sad story is the Vista failure which has hurt all hardware sales. In the last year or so, we've seen spectacular bargains like $500 and less dual core laptops on clearance and the collapse of CompUSA and other big box stores. AMD will suffer more in this downturn because it comes as they were gaining share.

    --
    DMCA, Hollings, Palladium. What might have sounded like paranoia is now common sense.
  27. Re:STFU Lin-sux user. by jslater25 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I didn't realize that you could both 'Think Different' and 'Think APPLE'. Isn't that pretty much polar opposites? Once you an Apple fanboi, always ....

  28. Re:Don't invest in AMD... by MarkvW · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Corporate management and boards of directors comprise an overcompensated incestuous club that everybody wants to join. There won't be any change--politicians want to be in on the club too. Fat brain-damaged companies can be beaten by leaner companies, but as soon as prosperity pokes its head into the lean company's corporate boardroom, most management hurries off to join the club. Who can blame them? They want to be rich, too!