Slashdot Mirror
AMD Not Trying To Get Its Chips Into Low-Cost Tablets
jfruh (300774) writes "While Intel is going after low-end Android tablets in a big way chipmaking x86 rival AMD is taking a more judicious approach, looking to focus on the high end. 'This idea of contra revenue is foreign to us,' said AMD's CEO, referring to Intel's strategy of selling chips at a loss to boost market share. But will Intel's vast resources keep AMD in its niche?"
from a low end tablet
They're making enough money on their high-end televisions. Let Sony have the low end radio market....
'This idea of contra revenue is foreign to us,'
So they won't be selling weapons to Iran then
by those selling ARM. So why should AMD compete ?
The idea of throwing money away to press AMD out of the market is foreign to AMD.
can AMD even beat ARM? If they licensed ARM and made an SOC based on their Radeon chips, could they compete in that space? My worry is that the margins in that space are so tight I don't think AMD can even try.
Non impediti ratione cogitationus.
The low end tablet market is sewn up by those selling ARM. So why should AMD compete ?
Because low end products have a way of supplanting high end products in time. PCs replaced most mini-computers even though initially they were inferior products. When was the last time you used a mini-computer? If AMD only competes at the high end of the market they run the risk of being slowly crushed as ARM chips become more capable over time. Intel recognizes this threat and is attempting to address it directly instead of pretending it doesn't exists. Even if they do stay at the high end of the market, it's unclear what if any advantage they have that will allow them to remain a product of choice there. Intel and others are perfectly capable of producing high end products too and Intel has a cost advantage over AMD as well.
Stuff like this is a big part of why AMD has remained something of an also-ran all these years.
A product that can't compete without subsidies is worthless. It doesn't get you foot in the door, it just burns cash. Look at the Lenovo k900 design "win". Basically, Intel paid Lenovo to put their chips in the phone, but as soon as the subsidies ran out Lenovo switched to a Qualcomm design.
They have been working on ARM cores but focussing on the 64bit server farm NOT consumer devices.
AMD sold Adreno to Qualcomm.
Okay, Intel chips tend to outperform AMD on a clock-for-clock and core-for-core basis. So Intel has the high end pretty firmly locked in.
And Intel's going after the low end as well.
So where does that leave AMD?
Pretty much with whatever leavings Intel chucks their way?
Chas - The one, the only.
THANK GOD!!!
Actually, intel stopped shipping 'stock' fans with the high end chips (Socket 2011). They expect you to buy it separate. They offer their own model for it, but its an addon.
Good-bye
AMD serves the desktop/server-with-big-TV-Display market very well and should not be questioned. AMD also has a respectable position in the laptop market. The devices AMD's products run in better serve the consumer. They would be well-advised to avoid supplying to tablets altogether.
LOW-END Tablets are very slow with single-core/dual-core SOCs and I have zero patience for the 3-10 second reaction times and 2-4 minutes startup times on LOW-END Tablet GUIs. Low-end tablets also have less-power efficiency since they are old chipsets. Retailers selling the low-end tablets right now are dumping it to the public on a "Take-it-or-leave-it" basis before they start selling the new stuff when the retailers know full-well that these low-end tablets are inadequate for day-to-day requirements. It's unethical IMHO, but consumers are gullible. Tablets are inefficient without a keyboard. The latest trend is to get a bluetooth keyboard which renders the whole concept of tablets pretty much eliminated because keyboards are a necessity and not optional accessory. Tablets are inefficient for senior citizens with lower hearing/sight capabilities. Having to pinch/zoom is a pain in the butt because those suffering from arthritis in the fingers/joints won't like doing that all the time either. Built-in speakers are terrible for seniors to hear with and touching the wrong place with the ears on the tablet results in the phone call being disconnected. Hands-free is better for Seniors.
SIM CARDS/phone chipsets integrated within desktop/server motherboards is a potential market for AMD and its partners, but IMHO wireless should be used as minimally as possible. I am quite certain there are health effects being constantly surrounded by wireless energy everywhere around us, be it bluetooth, wifi or all the different phone/mobile data frequencies. I feel like my hand is being fried in a microwave everytime I use my phone for internet 3G or whenever I am on the phone call with someone long enough. I think it would be preferrable for everyone to use wired as much as possible for security and for health reasons when we are at home.
PCs and mini-computers were fundementally different, applications written for one would, generally, not work on the other.
They are both computers and the functions they serve are no different at all That's like saying a PC and a Mac are fundamentally different because their software was incompatible. The mere fact that software written at the time for one wouldn't work on the other could not be less important. What is important is the job they did. PCs gradually took over all the jobs we once used mini-computers for and the companies that built to those products went away. DEC was bought by Compaq, etc. Companies that come late to the party on the new technology often (though not always) have a hard time catching up. Intel underestimated the growth of mobile chips and now is scrambling to catch up to ARM and it isn't clear if they will succeed. And if Intel is having a hard time I can't see AMD having an easier time of it.
When low end tablets become more powerful: AMD has the products to just slot in and take advantage.
Several flaws with that reasoning. 1) Other companies have competing products already and AMD would have to provide a compelling reason to switch from their competitors who already are in place. Displacing an existing customer relationship is difficult at the best of times. 2) AMD products generally do not have any significant and lasting technological advantage over their competitors. 3) AMD is not the lowest cost producer (that would be Intel) and really cannot compete effectively on price. Intel can easily undercut them on price at almost any time and still make money doing it. 4) What is good enough now will not be good enough in a year and AMD's competitors products will improve in the mean time. Waiting for the market to come to them is a VERY dangerous strategy.
No, AMD is not locking itself out of this market.
There is a very good chance that they are. Given their sadly pathetic track record I'd inclined to be doubtful of their chances until shown evidence to the contrary. AMD has mostly made good products but they generally always seem to be a step behind the curve
AMD Chips are great at converting electricity to heat. I tried an AMD laptop, and that thing ran so hot at IDLE, I thought it would burn my house down
I'am running a FX-6300 CPU.
Dont get me wrong, for the low cost it was such a pleasing purchase, but now i regret it.
The heat, still a issue that plagues AMD:
- I run my CPU at 3ghz (instead of 3.5ghz), turbo mode off. = 35-45 'c at load
- If i run at stock 3.5ghz and all the bells and whistle on = 60-65'c at load.
60'c, although "acceptable" to AMD and the CPU, isnt for me. I want my CPU to last a little longer than a few years.
I think the issue is with the stock heatsink and conductivity. As soon as the cpu is under load, the fan speed increases to max but feels like its doing bugger all.
The funny thing, the compound on the bottom of the heatsink looked like arctic silver 5 to me lol.
If AMD want to seriously think about high end. They need to take some tips from Intel and learn how to deal with heat dissipation. To the point of actually providing a half-decent heatsink that's fit for purpose.
And i'am pretty sure the top metal plate on the cpu is another cause of bad heat conduction.
AMD serves the desktop/server-with-big-TV-Display market very well and should not be questioned.
The conventional PC market is already undergoing a substantial shake-down with people embracing smartphones and tablets in bulk. At the rate Android platforms are evolving, we are only two or three years away from the average phone and tablet being able to handle just about anything the average person might want to throw at them. For many people, current devices have already passed the good-enough milestone. In my immediate family, I am the only one who genuinely needs a PC - both of my sisters and their boyfriends do just about all their online stuff using their phones and own a computer or laptop they hardly ever use anymore and neither of my parents use the PCs I gave them for anything much beyond basic web browsing.
Okay, Intel chips tend to outperform AMD on a clock-for-clock and core-for-core basis. So Intel has the high end pretty firmly locked in.
Interesting to see how this changes. On straight up single threaded workloads, AMD is unlikely to pull even. However, the nanosecond latency with HSA can prove iteresting. So far about the only benchmark actually written for that architecture was the libreoffice calc one. We got to see AMDs APU destroy everything Intel has to offer on that one by a vast margin.
Not everything will work with HSA, but far more things than GPGPU due to the low latecy and large memory space.
SJW n. One who posts facts.
Intel and Asus are launching a quad core Atom Android tablet at 7" for $150 this week.
Help stamp out iliturcy.
Intel now has a monopoly on the general-purpose CPU market. It's Intel or nothing. Could this be a problem with regards to price, and perhaps enforced DRM (if there's no competition Intel are able to dictate what DRM goes on the CPU)?
== Jez ==
Do you miss Firefox? Try Pale Moon.
using fusion powered yotta 3000.
I'm a wishin it was fission...
You have the right to remain sentient. If you give up the right to remain sentient, you will be elected to public office
Still adds up to $400, as opposed to Intel's $800.
To quote AMD (pdf) in their 2014 Q1 earnings, a couple days ago:
We are on track to generate approximately 50% of our revenue from high-growth markets, including embedded, semi-custom, dense server, professional graphics, and Ultra Low-Power client, where we can create differentiated winning solutions by the end of 2015. (...) We used to be a business centered over one stream of revenue, one opportunity, the PC market. Now we've introduced five new ones with our traditional space; that's six key markets where we can leverage our core IP. (...) Now let's turn to our traditional businesses. In graphics, we see strong demand in the enthusiast portion of the market. Our industry-leading R7 and R9 products drove GPU revenue growth year-over-year and sequentially.
In short, they're transforming away from their "traditional" business and of the PC market graphics revenue is going to be significant. AMDs x86 CPUs/APUs are going to be a small part of their business, there's a reason Intel is aiming all the big guns at ARM because AMD has already in their strategy decided to get out of the head-to-head competition with Intel. If you don't believe that, read the above lines again. They couldn't compete with Intel when they bet everything on one horse, now they're riding five others as well? That's a slow exit strategy, milking the CPU/APU revenue to execute their transformation. The FX line is probably already dead, Kaveri/Beema/Mullins will keep AMD present in the consumer market a while longer but the revenue is funneled into all those other key areas.
Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings