AMD almost worth a quarter of what it paid for ATI

[HalGameGuru]

I'd still much rather see AMD split cross-wise between Nvidia and Intel. Nvidia's expressed x86 interest and intentions before, and Intel has tried to make dGPUs before. Give them each the IP and engineers with experience to do it and let them throw money at the problem. It's not good to try to compete against both Intel and Nvidia while being so strapped for cash.

Yeah, but it is compelling TV. It's like watching the Super Bowl or the World Cup, maybe this year little Botswana or Trinidad will take down the big guy and bring home the cup, or maybe there will be some own goals and bad flops. Who knows, but it's entertaining as heck to watch.

[sof006]

I know. I was saying that AMD nowadays only does what ATI used to do : graphics processors.

With the added (which previously didn't exist) poor driver support. ATi had great driver support/role outs in the past.

[Robin88]

AMD needs Zen, but I was looking at AMD's roadmap and if the 40% increase in IPC compared to Excavator is to be believed then it only puts about level with a 5820K/5930K, and while that's a damn sight better than the 8350, I'm worried that it won't be enough to save AMD, and that is all assuming that Intel doesn't increase performance by the time Zen releases.

Zen will have to undercut Intel in price by at least £50 compared to the 5820K for it to be worthwhile buying, and it needs to have all the latest bells and whistles to go with it, but if they do that then making money back on Zen will be almost impossible. At this point it's looking like the only thing that can save AMD is a buyout.

I desperately want AMD to be competitive again, I want to be in the thick of a renaissance of AMD and see what it was like in the glory days of AMD like what they had in the Athlon 64 days and I want there to be real competition in the market again, but as it currently stands it's looking doubtful. Zen will not only have to have high IPC, but high clock speeds, good overclocking headroom and low power consumption for it to succeed, anything less will be dead in the water.

[HalGameGuru]

AMD needs Zen, but I was looking at AMD's roadmap and if the 40% increase in IPC compared to Excavator is to be believed then it only puts about level with a 5820K/5930K, and while that's a damn sight better than the 8350, I'm worried that it won't be enough to save AMD, and that is all assuming that Intel doesn't increase performance by the time Zen releases.

Zen will have to undercut Intel in price by at least £50 compared to the 5820K for it to be worthwhile buying, and it needs to have all the latest bells and whistles to go with it, but if they do that then making money back on Zen will be almost impossible. At this point it's looking like the only thing that can save AMD is a buyout.

I desperately want AMD to be competitive again, I want to be in the thick of a renaissance of AMD and see what it was like in the glory days of AMD like what they had in the Athlon 64 days and I want there to be real competition in the market again, but as it currently stands it's looking doubtful. Zen will not only have to have high IPC, but high clock speeds, good overclocking headroom and low power consumption for it to succeed, anything less will be dead in the water.

As it's a completely different architecture, the cores are much smaller hopefully ameliorating the costs of production a bit, its initial focus will be enterprise, and I doubt they ever had any intention of going dollar to dollar with Intel I think competitive cost to performance will be doable, if all holds true to expectations.

[marldorthegreat]

Nvidia is a juggernaut with money. AMD can't do shit for R&D, that's why the past few generations of cards have been jokes. Nvidia has been ahead for years now. The only reason AMD is undercutting Nvidia in the low-end segment is so they can move any cards. Not because they're good.

Nvidia has not been ahead for "years" Amd has beem on par. The 7970 was the best gpu in 2011 and 2012 and part of 2013.  AMD is constantly innovating, HBM is a great example, AMD had HBM a year before nvidia

[AlwaysFSX]

Nvidia has not been ahead for "years" Amd has beem on par. The 7970 was the best gpu in 2011 and 2012 and part of 2013.  AMD is constantly innovating, HBM is a great example, AMD had HBM a year before nvidia

Lol, no. It's known that Nvidia has held back their cards just to be on par with AMD so they don't just kill them off, and the 680 topped the 7970 in most cases too.. Also, the original Titan was supposed to have HBM but it wasn't even close to being ready for release.

[Tiber1337]

TBH if thermaltake can make the same exact case and sell it cheaper, in a sort of way it means fractal was overcharging for it, not that I'm on TTs side but in the IT world its always about the best bang for buck.

[Agent181]

Just like every time I play 21, bust.

AMD has no idea what they're doing and it's incredibly sad. They need to be bought out if there's any hope for the near future.

The people in charge have no idea what they are doing I met a couple amd engineers and they are as great as Intel engineers that I met last year

They told me how the company was organized and now I know why they are like this, it's the main hq with people in charge and all the engineers plus hundreds of people that are contractors in charge so for every contractor they take a cut from what the company would make so by the time amd receives their part it's almost nothing to what they put in

[AlwaysFSX]

The people in charge have no idea what they are doing I met a couple amd engineers and they are as great as Intel engineers that I met last year

They told me how the company was organized and now I know why they are like this, it's the main hq with people in charge and all the engineers plus hundreds of people that are contractors in charge so for every contractor they take a cut from what the company would make so by the time amd receives their part it's almost nothing to what they put in

Oh I know. AMD has some incredibly smart people working there, their upper management are hopeless though.

[Mr.Dingle]

Lol, no. It's known that Nvidia has held back their cards just to be on par with AMD so they don't just kill them off, and the 680 topped the 7970 in most cases too.. Also, the original Titan was supposed to have HBM but it wasn't even close to being ready for release.

 

Bias much ? ( as in an evidence of this )

[Guest]

Every Fart in the wind signifies the death of AMD if you ask the people on this forum.

[patrickjp93]

Every Fart in the wind signifies the death of AMD if you ask the people on this forum.

That's going a bit far, but the reality is AMD is not in a position to compete, has terrible management levels between the C-Suite and Engineers which bogs down communication and adaptation, and they're hemmoraghing money like mad with a huge chunk of debt due at the opening week of 2019. Meanwhile they have no significant new products until mid-late 2016 and aren't gaining sales and market share ground in the meantime.

[Techhog]

hbm was a flop as it is, the fury hardly performs better than the 390x in a few benchmarks. amd need to pull their finger out and make powerful yet efficient cpus, they might be making cpus and gpus for low end gaming but wheres the stuff for enthusiasts 

I haven't seen any of those benchmarks...

 

EDIT: Now I have. I don't think it has anything to do with HBM, though. GCN just struggles at 1080p.

[Deletive]

He isn't wrong though AMD can't compete with Intel it's simply impossible and anyone who actually thinks they could is dreaming and needs to take their fanboy glasses off.

The only chance of survival is the GPU side and even that is barely doable with how the company is right now.

 

AMD can compete easily with Intel, They are with their iGPU's to some extent, with better CPU's it'll be easy to compete. 

People like you that say it's impossible need to realize, AMD could make something that can compete rather easiily with the right engineers which they have (Jim Keller). CPU architecture aren't some huge rocket science people think it is.

[mr moose]

Every Fart in the wind signifies the death of AMD if you ask the people on this forum.

 

Well, to be honest,  when every fart in the wind is AMD posting $Millions in losses, releasing a card that the enthusiast community is divided over (e.g not a clear winner) and has issues bringing new products to the table without the assistance of other companies (hynix for HBM and monitor/scalar  manufacturers for freesync etc), then it's not exactly unfair that the community doesn't hold a positive view regarding their future.

[AnonymousGuy]

AMD can compete easily with Intel, They are with their iGPU's to some extent, with better CPU's it'll be easy to compete. 

People like you that say it's impossible need to realize, AMD could make something that can compete rather easiily with the right engineers which they have (Jim Keller). CPU architecture aren't some huge rocket science people think it is.

 

Read the iGPU review of the 5775C and you'll realize AMD is already dead...they just haven't gotten in the casket yet.  It's also naive to think 1 person makes a difference at a company.  It takes about 100 engineers (not counting designers or the support it takes to make and sell a product) to bring a CPU to market.  The chief engineer is more organizer than anything else.

[Colonel_Gerdauf]

Every fart in the wind signifies the death of AMD if you ask the people on this forum.

If that is the case, then I think this would illustrate AMD's dilemma:

[Deletive]

Read the iGPU review of the 5775C and you'll realize AMD is already dead...they just haven't gotten in the casket yet.  It's also naive to think 1 person makes a difference at a company.  It takes about 100 engineers (not counting designers or the support it takes to make and sell a product) to bring a CPU to market.  The chief engineer is more organizer than anything else.

Again, Intel iGPU is quite different from GCN's architecture. and we haven't compared it to GCN 1.2 yet either. Intel's iGPU only competes in compute and Physics related things. It can't do tessellation well, it doesn't have geometry engines as all as ACE's. AMD, has the iGPU to compete easily. problem is Intel's is well fed while AMD's is starvign which will change in the future. If AMD's iGPU was fed as well as Intel's it would destroy Intel.

I'm not saying one person makes the difference, but his team will, he has the experience to make something good with the team he's given, These things aren't hard to understand if you have an understand, and you're good at it. It makes all the difference to the rest of the team.

[HalGameGuru]

Well, to be honest,  when every fart in the wind is AMD posting $Millions in losses, releasing a card that the enthusiast community is divided over (e.g not a clear winner) and has issues bringing new products to the table without the assistance of other companies (hynix for HBM and monitor/scalar  manufacturers for freesync etc), then it's not exactly unfair that the community doesn't hold a positive view regarding their future.

To be fair everyone is using Hynix or elpida or someone to source memory, AMD is not alone in that boat, now whether the effort was worth it in the case with HBM... it will probably only come to full fruition with HBM2, but it is so far a hit or miss affair. But, I don't think you can really give them such a negative mark over freesync, it's just their implementation of adaptive sync, Intel may brand their own as well. Competition between freesync and G-Sync is still up in the air, I like the fact there can and are multiple inputs on FS monitors vs GS monitors, but GS was ahead on raw performance, but priced at a premium. I hope to see freesync improve as manufacturers get more comfortable with the implementation and I hope to see GSync drop in price. In the end I see Freesync as the stronger tech due to its ubiquitous scope in future DP implementations, but if GSync can push new features that are by default separate from the DP standard it gives them an advantage all over again. 

[Fred Castellum]

The stock is a buy, depending on possible offers by bigger companies such as Samsung or Microsoft who may be interested in buying AMD. 

 

Don't know if they'd keep the stock independent or merge it into the larger company if they do however. 

[spwath]

Lets see how zen is.

[mr moose]

To be fair everyone is using Hynix or elpida or someone to source memory, AMD is not alone in that boat, now whether the effort was worth it in the case with HBM... it will probably only come to full fruition with HBM2, but it is so far a hit or miss affair. But, I don't think you can really give them such a negative mark over freesync, it's just their implementation of adaptive sync, Intel may brand their own as well. Competition between freesync and G-Sync is still up in the air, I like the fact there can and are multiple inputs on FS monitors vs GS monitors, but GS was ahead on raw performance, but priced at a premium. I hope to see freesync improve as manufacturers get more comfortable with the implementation and I hope to see GSync drop in price. In the end I see Freesync as the stronger tech due to its ubiquitous scope in future DP implementations, but if GSync can push new features that are by default separate from the DP standard it gives them an advantage all over again. 

 

I wasn't giving them a negative mark for he hardware, I was merely pointing out that they need to partner with people to develop it, clearly they don't have enough resources to do freesync on their own like Nvidia did with gsync (all in house), they needed to work with scalar manufacturers and monitor makers.   HBM is not exactly the same seeing as Hynix was already working on it and there are several different versions of the same tech out there, but again it was a way for AMD to develop and move forward without being the sole investor.

 

My post basically is saying AMD is in such a financial rut that they need to co-develop because they don't have the resources to do it on their own.  Not that the technology produced is bad.

[arronleeds]

Amd gets flattened by Intel in every way, you cannot beat Intel.

[HalGameGuru]

I wasn't giving them a negative mark for he hardware, I was merely pointing out that they need to partner with people to develop it, clearly they don't have enough resources to do freesync on their own like Nvidia did with gsync (all in house), they needed to work with scalar manufacturers and monitor makers.   HBM is not exactly the same seeing as Hynix was already working on it and there are several different versions of the same tech out there, but again it was a way for AMD to develop and move forward without being the sole investor.

 

My post basically is saying AMD is in such a financial rut that they need to co-develop because they don't have the resources to do it on their own.  Not that the technology produced is bad.

A lot of the adaptive sync standard was done by them, the most basic underlying tech was already implemented in eDP but there were additions made. As for scalars and monitors, I'm not so sure it was need so much as wanting their focus to be on open vs closed. Why develop it in a closed fashion if you have no intention of barring anyone access to it?

 

But, that ignores that everyone is consorting on new tech. AMD and Hynix are two big names in HBM but not the only names and there were several next gen memory techs being worked on by different groups. Some dwarfing AMD massively.

 

My point is everyone is co-developing, even far bigger players like Intel, Samsung, and Microsoft. I cannot fault the little guy doing something no different than the big guys just because they NEED it more than the big guys do.

 

But, I CAN fault them, and do MASSIVELY, when they make massive asses of themselves by doing things like cutting corners with Bulldozer, CMT, as a tech, will probably never recover on the consumer side, and enterprise side may never see a better opportunity to develop implementations and AMD ruined it.

[Psykomantis00]

WOW. That's pretty bad.