Tuesday, November 29th 2011

AMD To Give Up Competing With Intel On x86? CPU Prices Already Shooting Up

It looks like the Bulldozer disaster might have been too much of a setback for AMD to recover from. After 30 years of competing with Intel in the x86 processor market, AMD is about to give up, even with the 2009 1.25bn antitrust settlement they extracted from them. Mike Silverman, AMD company spokesman said, "We're at an inflection point. We will all need to let go of the old 'AMD versus Intel' mind-set, because it won't be about that anymore." He was vague on the exact strategy that AMD intends to pursue from now on, though. However, the company is widely expected to make a concerted effort to break into the smartphones and tablets market. The big problem with this strategy unfortunately, is that this arena is currently dominated by many other competitors. On top of that, their arch enemy Intel is also trying to muscle in on this space, hence AMD could find themselves back at square one, or likely even further back. AMD's graphics cards are doing well at the moment though and are quite competitive, so it looks like their expensive purchase of ATI back in 2006, might yet save the company from extinction. If they become primarily a graphics card company, they will inevitably end up a lot smaller than they are now though and that's a lot of lost jobs and personal hardship, along with a monopoly x86 market remaining and all of its negative effects on the market.
The current predicament that AMD find themselves in can only be due to bad management, especially with that massive injection of over a billion dollars. Surely they must have seen the way Bulldozer performance was going years ago? Ultimately, it doesn't matter if they would have scrapped Bulldozer as a bad job and tweaked up the reasonable Phenom 2 instead and called it Phenom 3. It doesn't matter a jot what's actually under the hood, what clock speed it runs at and what you call it. Ultimately, it's comparative real-world performance and price that matters, nothing else. Nothing at all. Back in October, we reported on AMD's projection of a 50% CPU performance improvement by 2014. It was clear as day that this was a non-starter against the high performance competition from Intel, who's products are already 50% faster and more right now, so today's announcement that AMD is giving up isn't really all that surprising, although depressing.

AMD's move is bad news for PC enthusiasts everywhere as Intel will now be left with no competition in the x86 market and be an effective monopoly. We're already seeing the effects of this with Intel processors trending upwards in price and Intel's Sandy Bridge replacements, Sandy Bridge-E and Ivy Bridge, which essentially give the same per core performance as SB, with just a few tweaks to make them "new" products. With more and more computing power being crammed into an ever smaller space, could it be that high powered PCs will become a very small niche market, having been replaced by laptops, very small form factor, low power computers - and games consoles? And what will happen to AMD and NVIDIA when they can't sell high-powered graphics cards in sufficient quantities to be profitable any more? Doesn't bear thinking about, does it?

There's more info, analysis and quotes on this grim situation over at Mercury News.
Add your own comment

156 Comments on AMD To Give Up Competing With Intel On x86? CPU Prices Already Shooting Up

#76
TheGuruStud
Intel pays for this kind of FUD. Don't forget that.They sponsor hardware sites around the globe dedicated to discrediting AMD. Intel CAN NOT stand competition (akin to apple suing everyone).

The most recent bout is with the 6200 opterons. Check out some reviews. Your typical intel shills are hailing it as a big of a disaster as zambezi....yet REAL review sites show it to be faster and HALF the price. LOL.

Anytime you read a review and they leave out test setup details, are mismatching parts, and hurtling insults at AMD like a school child, you know what the game is.
Posted on Reply
#77
Widjaja
random
Well look at the bright side now that AMD have owned up, no more bs marketing performance graphs :laugh:
I guess I missed the bs ones which showed promise.
I viewed a fair few of the Engineering sample results and they unfortunately sucked.
I was hoping it was just the engineering sample processor, BIOS and software causing the poor results I was viewing for a 8 core processor.
Posted on Reply
#78
Inceptor
TRWOV
About the article, the "We're at an inflection point. We will all need to let go of the old 'AMD versus Intel' mind-set, because it won't be about that anymore." quote doesn't mean that AMD will throw the towel with x86 CPUs. They're just saying "Don't expect out next CPU to be a Sandy Bridge killer".
Exactly right.
As to what it means exactly, there is no statement to that effect.

They would have to push on with nearly all of the planning and designs for their 'top end' roadmap, for Opteron development. Also, to provide cpu 'modules/cores' for the APUs. They can easily EOL discreet desktop CPUs after the Piledriver release, thereby increasing manufacturing capacity for their APUs, both low power mobile and higher power desktop design paths. Doing that would probably increase their sales numbers, overall, over the long term.

That quotation above is just stating the obvious. It's marketing PR to correct the mountains of prior PR blunders.
Posted on Reply
#79
Widjaja
Is it me or has the Topic title changed?

AMD for the longest time e.g. K8 processor release have been boasting the AMD64 label.
Even though the software windows released has not been smooth in 64-bit.
About that time it was XP 64-bit.
Posted on Reply
#80
entropy13
TheGuruStud
Intel pays for this kind of FUD. Don't forget that.They sponsor hardware sites around the globe dedicated to discrediting AMD. Intel CAN NOT stand competition (akin to apple suing everyone).

The most recent bout is with the 6200 opterons. Check out some reviews. Your typical intel shills are hailing it as a big of a disaster as zambezi....yet REAL review sites show it to be faster and HALF the price. LOL.

Anytime you read a review and they leave out test setup details, are mismatching parts, and hurtling insults at AMD like a school child, you know what the game is.
Browsing through Google searches there's not that much reviews on the new Opterons, there are two which concludes favorably to the Opterons because of their pricing. The other review sites are more like random blogs, with "reviews" with no graphs at all and more akin to customer feedback in Amazon or Newegg.

Thus you're complaining about a trivial thing.
Posted on Reply
#81
xenocide
TheGuruStud
The most recent bout is with the 6200 opterons. Check out some reviews. Your typical intel shills are hailing it as a big of a disaster as zambezi....yet REAL review sites show it to be faster and HALF the price. LOL.

Anytime you read a review and they leave out test setup details, are mismatching parts, and hurtling insults at AMD like a school child, you know what the game is.
http://arstechnica.com/business/news/2011/11/bulldozer-server-benchmarks-are-here-and-theyre-a-catastrophe.ars

Ars used AMD's own results to prove that their own product was a disappointment. Nothing biased about that. The fact is BD across all platforms underperforms.
Posted on Reply
#82
cyberloner
i am computer man... i always sell amd and use amd....
i am using bulldozer now.... bulldozer is a fast cpu.... just benchmark screw up only...
if software is built to utilize use with bulldozer... i think all benchmark belong to amd...
Posted on Reply
#83
Widjaja
cyberloner
i am computer man... i always sell amd and use amd....
i am using bulldozer now.... bulldozer is a fast cpu.... just benchmark screw up only...
if software is built to utilize use with bulldozer... i think all benchmark belong to amd...
highly likely performance would have turned in AMD's favour since their promotion of AMD64 IF windows and other developers of applications were able to follow suit during that time period.

But unfortunately they did not.
Posted on Reply
#84
NC37
This is Radeon 3870 all over again. If you can't beat em in high end, work the low and mid range. Then come back later with a product capable of challenging the high end.

There is no way AMD can get out of the APU market. They have been and are going to be hit sellers because they can and do compete well with Intel on price and graphics performance. However, their major desktop CPUs...that they could temporarily fold.

I don't think this is a "we quit x86 entirely," deal. This is more like, we're focusing on what we can do well. Which isn't enthusiast level CPUs. Stop worrying about us Intel, we're not secretly planning anything.

Of course what this means is...Intel will stagnate. No reason to push performance higher means they can sit around twiddling their thumbs. When you quit prodding the 800lb gorilla with a poo stick, it eventually goes back to sleep. This is the perfect chance for AMD to refocus and come back after they've gotten their house in order.
Posted on Reply
#85
krisna159
:confused:
i think amd lack of good marketing..if u ask customer in here (my country indonesia,)about AMD product they will answer "what is amd?",people in here just few knows about amd,they only knew intel product line up only..because intel had alot advertising,
Posted on Reply
#86
FordGT90Concept
"I go fast!1!11!1!"
Also to add, Bulldozer will likely come into its own when it transitions to the 22nm. Every other fab AMD uses is completely shit. 90 nm (Athlon 64) was good, 65 nm (Phenom) sucked, 45 nm (Phenom II) was good, 32 nm (FX) sucked. 22 nm is likely to be good.

Of course it won't be able to hold a candle to Ivy Bridge but if you're looking for a cheap processor that's "good enough," AMD has that market pretty well cornered.


krisna159
:confused:
i think amd lack of good marketing..if u ask customer in here (my country indonesia,)about AMD product they will answer "what is amd?",people in here just few knows about amd,they only knew intel product line up only..because intel had alot advertising,
This too. AMD has virtually no brand recognition because they refuse to advertise except on their website (e.g. Ruby) and games (powered by AMD). Neither are effective at reaching the masses and they must change that. AMD's decision to not advertise is the dumbest thing since square wheels.
Posted on Reply
#87
krisna159
i think AMD "should" be use "tick-tock" strategy,build his own fabs,and gest new marketing strategy to sold out buldoser.CMIIW:D
Posted on Reply
#88
laszlo
nothing new as we already had intel monopoly even if don't see it

i think amd will prepare in background something which will be better than current line
Posted on Reply
#89
Vancha
NC37
Of course what this means is...Intel will stagnate. No reason to push performance higher means they can sit around twiddling their thumbs. When you quit prodding the 800lb gorilla with a poo stick, it eventually goes back to sleep. This is the perfect chance for AMD to refocus and come back after they've gotten their house in order.
This seems to be the optimistic view that makes the most sense. Intel will be resting on their laurels for a bit, so now seems like the time for AMD to spend some time reevaluating, retargeting and coming up with a response after whatever the fuck it is that went down there in the past few years.
Posted on Reply
#90
kyussgr
GUYS PRICES HAVE GONE UP BECAUSE...... IT IS CHRISTMAS TIME ONCE AGAIN..... IT HAPPENS EVERY YEAR... COME ON...

AMD has lost the competition with Intel a long time ago. You think that because of Bulldozer AMD will shutdown? 'We' computer enthusiasts will not buy Bulldozers but the 'others' do not have a clue.... They just want buy a PC... They have a budget and they don't mind whether is it says Intel or AMD.. They just want something that costs 500 Euros (less of what we spend on a cpu and mobo alone) and enables them to go on facebook...

How many of us 'overclockers', 'upgraders', 'extreme gamers' are out there? (compared with the rest of computer users)?

What kills AMD the most is the price / performance ratio. The fact that they don't lower their prices after all the negative publicity means that they are selling to the 'WOW 8 Cores!!!' consumers right now. In time they will lower their prices... and more people will be convinced to buy...

To tell you the truth do you think that any gamer who wants to play Skyrim or BF3 will notice any real difference on i5 or Bulldozer? I don't think so...
I am running BF3 multiplayer with everything on high on an overclocked (4Ghz) Core2Duo E8400 (on air) without any problems!!! (with the aid of an gtx570 of course!!!:D)......
I am waiting for Ivy Bridge you see....:D:D
Posted on Reply
#91
de.das.dude
Pro Indian Modder
OH NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeessssssssss
Posted on Reply
#92
entropy13
kyussgr
GUYS PRICES HAVE GONE UP BECAUSE...... IT IS CHRISTMAS TIME ONCE AGAIN..... IT HAPPENS EVERY YEAR... COME ON...
Prices neither go up nor down due to Christmas over here.
Posted on Reply
#93
RejZoR
Either i don't know how to read those charts or something else, but from the looks of it they made the biggest profit this year in the last 6 years.

AMD Fusion is the future and their gfx segment is also very alive. CPU's, quite frankly they really haven't released anything significantly bad ass to have reason for profits really. After Athlon XP and Athlon 64, they are really struggling. They have to make a massive breakthrough for high end or just forget the speed crown and build on budget and mainstream systems. Because quite frankly this is where the money is. If you sell 5000 CPU's for 600 EUR it's nothing compared to 500.000 CPU's for up to 200 EUR.
Posted on Reply
#94
theoneandonlymrk
i dont think intel has anything in the same segment as lano that would even touch it in regular use so to throw it all AMD would be insane plus and despite all this bulldozer is still sold out everywhere so what gives, BS thats what gives, intel fanboy gripped and ran off with BS you intel fanboys are gettin on my tits now i like intel but for fucks sake i never want just intel as a choice


SORT YOUR EFFIN EDITORIAL NEWS out not just this site but all sites need to stop with the permanent spankin of AMD by fanwankers of intel
and regardless of BS's percieved poor benches its no where near as bad as some go on especially considering the unoptimized nature of many benches and os's imho most benches are balls anyway as in most GAME banches BS isnt so bad
Posted on Reply
#95
PaNiC
KainXS
I think Intel just caught AMD off gaurd and now they're paying for it, actually no . . . . they should have stopped developing BD once they saw how bad it was in closed testing

If they stopped and continued the Phenom II line, this would be a different situation

they really stepped on a mine they made themselves.
+1
This is what intel did with larrabee and that's why we got sandy bridge.
Posted on Reply
#96
GSquadron
This news is fake
1. Amd has only 1 competitor Intel on cpu side
2. Amd is the best gpu manufacturer for now
This thread is truly fake, if amd had that low amount of profit, than no gpus at all
neither cpus.... what is more now comes ram which means amd is going high!
Also, i know from my school that companies of diesel always show up as they
don't profit or even loose, but they go on earning a lot of money.
This is made because of taxes, so nothing to do with intel.
Amd will never show up their "real" revenue.
There are even companies like coca-cola which for 12 years here in Albania shows
-500k $ of loss for each year, but if they were loosing than they would not
sell anymore coca-colas.... so it is fake
Posted on Reply
#97
RejZoR
I also like AMD a bit more based on great past experience with Thunderbird and Thoroughbred processors from them and because they sort of feel less how can i put it, "dirty" than Intel. But then i went for 3 Intel CPU's. Now after quite few years i've made a comeback to AMD with their excellent Zacate (E-450) platform. I was really hoping for Bulldozer to succeed but oh well. I hope next one will do it...
Posted on Reply
#98
xenocide
RejZoR
I also like AMD a bit more based on great past experience with Thunderbird and Thoroughbred processors from them and because they sort of feel less how can i put it, "dirty" than Intel. But then i went for 3 Intel CPU's. Now after quite few years i've made a comeback to AMD with their excellent Zacate (E-450) platform. I was really hoping for Bulldozer to succeed but oh well. I hope next one will do it...
That's how it is for me. The first PC I ever built myself had a Athlon XP 2500+ in it (thing was a monster at the time) and I didn't even bother going back to Intel for several years. I went from a 2500+, to an Athlon 64 3200+ (S939), to an Opteron 148 (OCed like a boss), then an Athlon 64 3800+ X2. After that I had to go for a Q6600, it was unbeatable at the time. Haven't had a reason to buy an AMD CPU since, I almost bought a Phenom II 955 X4, but I held out of SB, and boy was it worth it.
Posted on Reply
#99
cdawall
where the hell are my stars
freaksavior
Waiting on Chris cdawall to reply to this.
Had to come up with some sort of good reply...



We have already seen AMD shape a lot of things in the past year ever wonder why AMD is pushing "the future is fusion" so hard? That might be the saving grace along with ATi. I am already seeing it how many intel notebooks for $299 can you play a lot of todays games on? The E-350 series chips kicks some major ass in the low budget laptop market. AMD is taking that over. Coming from my sales at BBY experience those laptops are the ones that sell 15-20 per store every Sunday. Thats just BBY, throw in newegg, amazon and other etailers. Those notebooks are damn near bestselling on every single site. Now move up to the A4 chips with integrate 65x0 graphics on them and you have a budget gamer that can play ALL of todays games with decent settings, throw in hybrid xfire with another 65x0 chip and you have all high settings for under $700. Something intel cannot touch. As drivers mature those chips keep getting better. There is no way the influx of fusion chips is by mistake. AMD is trying to take as much low end market as humanly possible. We may loose the high end with AMD's bulldozer fiasco, but if they can stake a claim in low/midrange markets that is the bulk of home computing. Word of mouth travels better than commercials if one housewife get a FUSION sticker and loves it they all go get one. The top 4 selling laptops at my Walmart right now are all AMD based and under $700. All it takes is one salesman to go hey these perform similar this ones cheaper and games play better.
Posted on Reply
#100
Jonap_1st
LAN_deRf_HA
I don't know about Jakarta but here AMD is only competitive in the $125-180 price point. That may be a popular price point but apparently not enough to survive on.
yeah, in here. low-mid range market are the most profitable one. but sadly though most of people still dont know about how competitive AMD at those price point. so they just brought Intel without knowing there's better option for cheaper price on sub $100 processor..

btw, APU still have a future. so AMD better not leaving cpu market completely..
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment