AMD debt offsets console gains, just misses estimated profits

[AnnoyedShelf]

Source

"AMD reported a net loss of $36 million or 5 cents per share on revenue of $1.44 billion. Revenue climbed 24 percent, while AMD reported a wider loss of $56 million a quarter ago. Those results included debt payments of $49 million, which ate into AMD’s earnings; otherwise, the company would have reported a non-GAAP operating profit of $67 million."

 

"AMD’s efforts to secure wins in all three major game consoles continues to pay off. The  company’s Graphics and Visual Solutions business reported a 141 percent increase in revenue from a year ago, driven by the semi-custom chips AMD builds for each console box."

 

"Otherwise, things weren’t so bright: Revenue in the Computing Solutions Group dropped 20 percent from a year ago, to $669 million, as microprocessor unit shipments declined. Specifically, notebook processor sales rose, while AMD sold fewer desktop processors and chipsets."

 

"Aside from the console revenue, GPU revenue declined as well, partially offset by a rise in chips sold into graphics workstations and add-on cards."

 

Well this is a little saddening. Poor AMD can't catch much of a break.

[aom]

Source

Well this is a little saddening. Poor AMD can't catch much of a break.

At least they are catching up to their debt, it has been like this for some time now, so they may not be doing so hot but they are slowly rising up. Not that sad at all but a pretty good thing

[Toxiclegend]

This sucks, I use Intel and Nvdia but if AMD push both then we get better products, hopefully this resolves itself though.

[Altecice]

Im blaming most of that 20% drop down to the R9 series reference coolers and the long delay between ref/non-ref.

[harrynowl]

In other words consoles and mac pro sales are keeping AMD afloat.

[Toxiclegend]

In other words consoles and mac pro sales are keeping AMD afloat.

 

It's a sad time when you realise this is true.

[AlwaysFSX]

In other words consoles and mac pro sales are keeping AMD afloat.

They need decent processors to make money.

[flibberdipper]

In other words consoles and mac pro sales are keeping AMD afloat.

Probably.

[Toxiclegend]

They need decent processors to make money.

 

Let's face it AMD isn't bad at all, it's cheaper but works just as well as anything else, yes it runs hotter and might draw more power but even with good products they have lower margins because they out price their competition

[AlwaysFSX]

Let's face it AMD isn't bad at all, it's cheaper but works just as well as anything else, yes it runs hotter and might draw more power but even with good products they have lower margins because they out price their competition

Doesn't mean it needs to chug in single core applications.

[RelentlessAF]

The explosion of miners buying A TON of their cards makes this seem odd to me. Are they really doing that bad in sales that they are in debt? I think a good step forward would be a lot more investment in R&D like Intel and make the AMD FX proccessors more competitive in per core performance. Another bone head move is the dedication to the APU, a device way to far behind to warrant that kind of effort. Maybe in 8 or so years when better GPU integration exists? As of now they are bad GPU's and CPU's making them kind of a pointless buy for anyone but a budget builder.

[AnnoyedShelf]

Let's face it AMD isn't bad at all, it's cheaper but works just as well as anything else, yes it runs hotter and might draw more power but even with good products they have lower margins because they out price their competition

AMD CPU's are great, I'll agree with you on that.  But they can't match the raw performance of an Intel Core i7 CPU by any means.

[AnnoyedShelf]

The explosion of miners buying A TON of their cards makes this seem odd to me. Are they really doing that bad in sales that they are in debt? I think a good step forward would be a lot more investment in R&D like Intel and make the AMD FX proccessors more competitive in per core performance. Another bone head move is the dedication to the APU, a device way to far behind to warrant that kind of effort. Maybe in 8 or so years when better GPU integration exists? As of now they are bad GPU's and CPU's making them kind of a pointless buy for anyone but a budget builder.

Their GPU's aren't bad, and APU's are actually a better platform than you think.

[Toxiclegend]

Doesn't mean it needs to chug in single core applications.

 

I agree with that, Intel isn't perfect either nor Nvidia. (4770k GTX 770 nofanboyhatekkthanks)

 

 

The explosion of miners buying A TON of their cards makes this seem odd to me.

 

Why? AMD sold the cards to the vendors at the same price, the retailers just bumped the prices not AMD.

 

AMD CPU's are great, I'll agree with you on that.  But they can't match the raw performance of an Intel Core i7 CPU by any means.

 

No that's why enthusiasts and 99.9% of all highly demanding systems like work stations etc all use Intel. I've never really seen AMD to really push for that though, I'm sure they could.

[RelentlessAF]

Their GPU's aren't bad, and APU's are actually a better platform than you think.

I've seen many a build with an APU that were probably better off just getting a dedicated of either. Also when you do make the jump to a dedicated graphics card it's make the money spent on it seem like your only getting half the product. The CPU side is obviously going to suffer when sharing the same socket with Graphics Processors so it just seems like an odd direction to take. Again something that in the future with more R&D could easily turn around.

[Fred Castellum]

AMD Stock drop -19.47% atm.

[RelentlessAF]

Why? AMD sold the cards to the vendors at the same price, the retailers just bumped the prices not AMD.

Because of the sheer amount of stock they were moving. A lot of manufacturers can only dream of such an explosion of product moving in a given time. So much so they started running out, something that can't be said for Nvidia. It just seems odd, especially as a company that's been in the game for so long they should know what cards to lay down and when.

[harrynowl]

The explosion of miners buying A TON of their cards makes this seem odd to me. Are they really doing that bad in sales that they are in debt? I think a good step forward would be a lot more investment in R&D like Intel and make the AMD FX proccessors more competitive in per core performance. Another bone head move is the dedication to the APU, a device way to far behind to warrant that kind of effort. Maybe in 8 or so years when better GPU integration exists? As of now they are bad GPU's and CPU's making them kind of a pointless buy for anyone but a budget builder.

The debt is an ongoing problem, the company almost sank when they bought ATI for $6bn in 2007 (if i recall correctly). 

 

AMD simply don't have the money to invest in R&D like Intel, to become competitive in per core performance they'd need to catch up over 7 years of not actually making any performance gains (they haven't improved IPC since the K10 architechture and the agena core).

 

The problem is the OEMs don't want to shift Desktop production to APUs because people see a machine with Core i3, i5 or i7 and know what they're buying. When someone sees AMD A10 on a machine they wonder "what the heck is that? is it good?", people buy what they're familiar with. We that build our own desktops are a very small part of the market and are not really enough on our own to make much of a profit margin.

[RelentlessAF]

The debt is an ongoing problem, the company almost sank when they bought ATI for $6bn in 2007 (if i recall correctly). 

 

AMD simply don't have the money to invest in R&D like Intel, to become competitive in per core performance they'd need to catch up over 7 years of not actually making any performance gains (they haven't improved IPC since the K10 architechture and the agena core).

 

The problem is the OEMs don't want to shift Desktop production to APUs because people see a machine with Core i3, i5 or i7 and know what they're buying. When someone sees AMD A10 on a machine they wonder "what the heck is that? is it good?", people buy what they're familiar with. We that build are own desktops are a very small part of the market and are not really enough on our own.

That seems like more of a marketing problem, yeah intel is a familiar face to the average consumer but marketing goes a long way. If they put up ads and commercials comparing the latest AMD APU's to intel CPU's people will go in with a more open mindset, ask questions and make a more informed decision.

[AnnoyedShelf]

I've seen many a build with an APU that were probably better off just getting a dedicated of either. Also when you do make the jump to a dedicated graphics card it's make the money spent on it seem like your only getting half the product. The CPU side is obviously going to suffer when sharing the same socket with Graphics Processors so it just seems like an odd direction to take. Again something that in the future with more R&D could easily turn around.

You make an excellent point, but with the performance gains I've seen in the Kaveri chips, I think APU's have a good chance of becoming the norm for medium-casual users.  I don't see it ever becoming a thing for people who want the most performance though.

[RelentlessAF]

You make an excellent point, but with the performance gains I've seen in the Kaveri chips, I think APU's have a good chance of becoming the norm for medium-casual users.  I don't see it ever becoming a thing for people who want the most performance though.

True, but a good market to aim it towards will also be the general consumer, APU's are a lot cheaper than a intel/ Nvidia combo laptop and if they have pretty damn good performance for cheaper that will kill intel's laptop sales. In my opinion that will take a bit more time and commitment of the magnitude they are gravitating towards at a different time. AMD staying afloat is good for the advancement of computer technology so it would be a real shame to see them fail.

[Misanthrope]

I wouldn't say "poor AMD" if you look at the timeline, what have they released since late 2013 with the RX series? They probably had that tech for a while. Their processors? Yeah they haven't released anything truly new since 2012. Somewhere in 2012 and 2013 they got the deals in place for the consoles and they relied a bit too heavily on those or didn't ask for enough upfront money to build them, in any case they literally haven't done jack shit ever since.

 

So in fact if you ask me, I'd blame AMD for being yet another PC company that bows down to the will of the console and leaves PC enthusiasts and gamers waiting around with nothing better than stupid 200W TDP processors that are virtually unusable by most people and even most enthusiasts. They think they can remain competitive by just undercutting prices? It works great for me building as going for a 6300 or 8320 really pays off but as expected they're hardly making a fucking penny from it.

 

[harrynowl]

You make an excellent point, but with the performance gains I've seen in the Kaveri chips, I think APU's have a good chance of becoming the norm for medium-casual users.  I don't see it ever becoming a thing for people who want the most performance though.

The performance gain in the 7850K doesn't outweigh the large increase in pricing for most people

 

That seems like more of a marketing problem, yeah intel is a familiar face to the average consumer but marketing goes a long way. If they put up ads and commercials comparing the latest AMD APU's to intel CPU's people will go in with a more open mindset, ask questions and make a more informed decision.

Probably. Where I work we sell an AMD desktop and an Intel Desktop at the same price (399). The AMD is quite a bit better in terms of overall performance but people buy the Intel because that's a brand they see elsewhere. That's why the "Intel inside" thing is genius in my opinion because that's what people remember. 

[Toxiclegend]

Because of the sheer amount of stock they were moving. A lot of manufacturers can only dream of such an explosion of product moving in a given time. So much so they started running out, something that can't be said for Nvidia. It just seems odd, especially as a company that's been in the game for so long they should know what cards to lay down and when.

 

What happens if they are selling some of their top end cards at a loss though? Like Sony did with the PS3 to start with? Then the more they sell they more they loose. That might have fucked them over completely if they was planning on letting the lower end cards balance it out for the people on a budget.

 

The debt is an ongoing problem, the company almost sank when they bought ATI for $6bn in 2007 (if i recall correctly). 

 

AMD simply don't have the money to invest in R&D like Intel, to become competitive in per core performance they'd need to catch up over 7 years of not actually making any performance gains (they haven't improved IPC since the K10 architechture and the agena core).

 

The problem is the OEMs don't want to shift Desktop production to APUs because people see a machine with Core i3, i5 or i7 and know what they're buying. When someone sees AMD A10 on a machine they wonder "what the heck is that? is it good?", people buy what they're familiar with. We that build are own desktops are a very small part of the market and are not really enough on our own.

 

You're right even about the debt I think, when they got ATI they used everything to get that deal to go through, like Virgin when they brought NTL they bankrupt NTL to finance the underground cables for the TV, phone and internet.

Yes people also need to be more educated when it comes down to AMD vs Intel because a lot of older people who buy a PC for their house will go to the shop and see Intel and know that instant what they get, the service reps should tell them that AMD will work etc etc, I had this same discussion with my boss when I built new PCs for work, he told me a budget I built 5 new PCs on that budget and he asked who are AMD I told him not to worry basically.

 

You make an excellent point, but with the performance gains I've seen in the Kaveri chips, I think APU's have a good chance of becoming the norm for medium-casual users.  I don't see it ever becoming a thing for people who want the most performance though.

 

APU technology does have a good chance of being the normal thing for people just wanting to play LoL or Dota, or WoW or CS:GO for that matter and also casual gamers. I think the technology though wasn't designed for this purpose, it was for mobile and laptop use so they can skip a dedicated GPU in laptops and run better and probably cooler for those people just wanting to do every day stuff.

[RelentlessAF]

Probably. Where I work we sell an AMD desktop and an Intel Desktop at the same price (399). The AMD is quite a bit better in terms of overall performance but people buy the Intel because that's a brand they see elsewhere. That's why the "Intel inside" thing is genius in my opinion because that's what people remember. 

I know it usually doesn't work but a good thing would be to inform customers of the better overall performance the AMD desktop will provide, majority of the time they won't listen but it will still impact their future thoughts when buying a computer. Also you sometimes can convince people to switch regardless of familiarity as well. It's always best to try to get the most for your money and not really care what brand it comes from. Unless you're like me who only buys Nvidia GPU's for a reason I can't explain, I never even bought them in the old days I loved my old Radeon