• Welcome to TechPowerUp Forums, Guest! Please check out our forum guidelines for info related to our community.
  • The forums have been upgraded with support for dark mode. By default it will follow the setting on your system/browser. You may override it by scrolling to the end of the page and clicking the gears icon.

Bloodbath for AMD at the Stock-Markets, Company Struggles to Survive

Wile E said:
When it comes to manufacturing tech, yes they most certainly are. Intel is almost always 1 process ahead of them. For instance, Intel has been manufacturing on 45nm for how many months now? AMD has yet to release a 45nm cpu. Keep going back and you'll see that AMD is consistently behind Intel in this area. Intel released 65nm back in the Presler/prescott days, a time AMD was still on 90nm. AMD did not release a 65nm CPU until Brisbane, ages and ages after Intel.

The larger processes AMD is using costs more to manufacture, because yields are lower. That is part of the reason they are losing their asses in the stock market. Their manufacturing tech is behind, making their margins much lower.



K8 does not, in any way, perform better than Core2 in day to day use. If it did, you were comparing a really low end Core2, to a higher end AMD. IF anything, it's in gaming that you can't tell the difference. CPU makes little or no difference in 99% of modern games.
Click to expand...

Might just be me but some of my friends who've switched to intel have said the same thing. No we ARENT talking about benchmarks. We are talking about general use, example loading times for windows etc.

Yes, AMD's low atm is partially due to weak advertising... its one part which really is their achilles heel. Back in the K8 days I didn't see AMD even bother to advertise its products to a substantial extent, even though Intel CLEARLY was crapper. However, the consumer didn't know that. The average consumer didn't even know about the performance difference; how their low ends were faster than even intel's top end...

That is one example of why AMD is suffering at the moment...

ATi since the merger, well has just gone quiet in terms of advertising.


Funny how the actual company doesn't really matter when it comes to the financial standpoint :rolleyes:
 
tkpenalty said:
Might just be me but some of my friends who've switched to intel have said the same thing. No we ARENT talking about benchmarks. We are talking about general use, example loading times for windows etc.

Yes, AMD's low atm is partially due to weak advertising... its one part which really is their achilles heel. Back in the K8 days I didn't see AMD even bother to advertise its products to a substantial extent, even though Intel CLEARLY was crapper. However, the consumer didn't know that. The average consumer didn't even know about the performance difference; how their low ends were faster than even intel's top end...

That is one example of why AMD is suffering at the moment...

ATi since the merger, well has just gone quiet in terms of advertising.


Funny how the actual company doesn't really matter when it comes to the financial standpoint :rolleyes:
Click to expand...
The difference in Loading times for Windows can be attributed directly to the different mobos. My AMD rig does boot faster, but it also doesn't have a RAID array, or nearly the same amount of features as my Intel board. But the Intels I have are plainly faster in usage for everything else compared to my 6400+. My intel cpus consisted of an E6420, E6600, E6750, Q6600, QX9650.


But back on topic: Yeah, I agree, the lack of advertising has to play a major role in all of this as well.
 
Wile E said:
The difference in Loading times for Windows can be attributed directly to the different mobos. My AMD rig does boot faster, but it also doesn't have a RAID array, or nearly the same amount of features as my Intel board. But the Intels I have are plainly faster in usage for everything else compared to my 6400+. My intel cpus consisted of an E6420, E6600, E6750, Q6600, QX9650.


But back on topic: Yeah, I agree, the lack of advertising has to play a major role in all of this as well.
Click to expand...

Derailing topic: I remember the time when you were an AMD fanboi. What happened to that? :cry:
 
the other determining factor is how many apps are being launched during boot.
 
tkpenalty said:
Derailing topic: I remember the time when you were an AMD fanboi. What happened to that? :cry:
Click to expand...

I was never a fanboy of either. I just buy what performs better for what I want to spend. When and If AMD ever regains the crown, I'll be jumping back. In fact, I can't wait for that to happen, because that should bring the high-end prices down to a reasonable level. I also wish my AM2 board would take a Phenom. I'd slap a 9850 or 9950 in there in a heartbeat.
 
what is your AM2 board?
 
DFI NF Ultra II M2
 
Wile E said:
When it comes to manufacturing tech, yes they most certainly are. Intel is almost always 1 process ahead of them. For instance, Intel has been manufacturing on 45nm for how many months now? AMD has yet to release a 45nm cpu. Keep going back and you'll see that AMD is consistently behind Intel in this area. Intel released 65nm back in the Presler/prescott days, a time AMD was still on 90nm. AMD did not release a 65nm CPU until Brisbane, ages and ages after Intel.

The larger processes AMD is using costs more to manufacture, because yields are lower. That is part of the reason they are losing their asses in the stock market. Their manufacturing tech is behind, making their margins much lower.



K8 does not, in any way, perform better than Core2 in day to day use. If it did, you were comparing a really low end Core2, to a higher end AMD. IF anything, it's in gaming that you can't tell the difference. CPU makes little or no difference in 99% of modern games.
Click to expand...


Hey, I didn't write about their manufacturing process. See what I wrote,
"FYI AMD manufactured initial days procs for Intel. AMD innovated lots and lots of things in the proc world. A64 - what do you think, this idea was pulled out of your a..? Power saving features - who pioneered that? Full 1080P - who achieved that? Integrated memory controller was such a hit that Intel is forced to implement in their CPUs."

You agree on that? That is technical advancement. Intel suck at it. Why do you think Intel went to 65nm? Because they were shit scared that their prescotts will explode, they need to bring down their heat output, so they can increase their frequency and OEMs won't f....g complain about using better thermal management solutions. Yeah well they continued on their 45nm path because they had money.
 
suraswami said:
Hey, I didn't write about their manufacturing process. See what I wrote,
"FYI AMD manufactured initial days procs for Intel. AMD innovated lots and lots of things in the proc world. A64 - what do you think, this idea was pulled out of your a..? Power saving features - who pioneered that? Full 1080P - who achieved that? Integrated memory controller was such a hit that Intel is forced to implement in their CPUs."

You agree on that? That is technical advancement. Intel suck at it. Why do you think Intel went to 65nm? Because they were shit scared that their prescotts will explode, they need to bring down their heat output, so they can increase their frequency and OEMs won't f....g complain about using better thermal management solutions. Yeah well they continued on their 45nm path because they had money.
Click to expand...
You only addressed one aspect of tech. I addressed another. While AMD has served us some rather large tech advancements, their manufacturing tech has always been behind. That little fact is hurting them pretty badly now.
 
must company's fight amd , cuz it the no 1 competitive , time to support amd guys it is better for as
 
the old expect thing is amd reach the no1 seals with ati 4xxx , but the game play of nvidia which is called physics heart amd , and amd go no ware cuz only agiea made physics ,amd help people to got better rig in minimum price , god bless amd
 
you know something intel doesnt do as much adverts either. My brother still thinks his Turion x2 is slower than a P4, he still thinks an Intel Pentium4 is king no matter what i tell him. I remember the Intel commercials
 
*ahem* without.... giving away just how much money I may or may not have... how much would AMD be needing to be bailed out? Anyone know?
 
 
Ketxxx said:
*ahem* without.... giving away just how much money I may or may not have... how much would AMD be needing to be bailed out? Anyone know?
Click to expand...

US $ 850 million or a processor that makes Intel QX9770 look like ENIAC. Whichever comes first.
 
candle_86 said:
http://youtube.com/watch?v=oL8y-u96jo4&feature=related
http://youtube.com/watch?v=JeI7wxpqKtI
http://youtube.com/watch?v=H4O4HFgVMbc&feature=related
http://youtube.com/watch?v=lE3QDQz-QTI&feature=related
http://youtube.com/watch?v=51SY7y6ovzU&feature=related
http://youtube.com/watch?v=4z1kDFN6z74&feature=related
http://youtube.com/watch?v=1UMrDaEk170&feature=related

looking at these 4 which advert do you think is best, some of the ones i remember for advert for intel

AMD;s
http://youtube.com/watch?v=7MQgAmFWiWY
http://youtube.com/watch?v=fk-2ic2BoZw&feature=related
http://youtube.com/watch?v=lGnhgH_TPCQ&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2mLysjIFOPE&NR=1

what i found on youtube this is why they hurt though the AMD one for the Athlon is funny
Click to expand...

The AMD ads dont make sense... Intel's do.
 
btarunr said:
US $ 850 million or a processor that makes Intel QX9770 look like ENIAC. Whichever comes first.
Click to expand...

Hmm.... I don't have THAT much obviously, but I could possibly bail them out for a respectable percentage... I dunno. Betting on any AMD horse is risky these days I don't want to lose what I inject into them, I may as well burn it or flush it down the bog myself.
 
Any money put on Amd atm is risky cus the chances of losing are great but hopefully given some time AMD will come good.
 
I think AMD will be fine because a lot of people see the good deal in their stock and will want to buy it giving AMD more money.
 
Wile E said:
When it comes to manufacturing tech, yes they most certainly are. Intel is almost always 1 process ahead of them. For instance, Intel has been manufacturing on 45nm for how many months now? AMD has yet to release a 45nm cpu. Keep going back and you'll see that AMD is consistently behind Intel in this area. Intel released 65nm back in the Presler/prescott days, a time AMD was still on 90nm. AMD did not release a 65nm CPU until Brisbane, ages and ages after Intel.

The larger processes AMD is using costs more to manufacture, because yields are lower. That is part of the reason they are losing their asses in the stock market. Their manufacturing tech is behind, making their margins much lower.
Click to expand...

woah now AMD's manufacturing tech is miles ahead of intels! even intel themselves have said there is no way in hell they could have made something as complicated and large as phenom on 65nm. AMD has the best manuf specs of any company right now.
 
cdawall said:
woah now AMD's manufacturing tech is miles ahead of intels! even intel themselves have said there is no way in hell they could have made something as complicated and large as phenom on 65nm. AMD has the best manuf specs of any company right now.
Click to expand...

Who cares how complicated the design is. The phenom is slow, that's all what I care about. The phenom can not or hardly be overclocked, that's what I care about.
 
Early Phenoms couldnt be OCd. Later revisions that changed. I seen Phenoms of 3GHz+ in the wild. The whole reason Phenoms aren't miracle clockers is because their too complex for the space the cores are squished into.
 
Ketxxx said:
Early Phenoms couldnt be OCd. Later revisions that changed. I seen Phenoms of 3GHz+ in the wild. The whole reason Phenoms aren't miracle clockers is because their too complex for the space the cores are squished into.
Click to expand...

I love how that's phrased . . . like you've been out on safari or something :laugh:

do you have a special on Discovery that will be airing sometime soon? :toast:
 
Ketxxx said:
Early Phenoms couldnt be OCd. Later revisions that changed. I seen Phenoms of 3GHz+ in the wild. The whole reason Phenoms aren't miracle clockers is because their too complex for the space the cores are squished into.
Click to expand...

Look, in order for AMD to compete with Intel, they have to release CPU's that are as fast or can be as fast when overclocked, and that's not the case. In many shops the Black Edition CPU's are more expensive then the Q6600 and E8400 and they can not be overclocked to the same speeds.

The Phenoms are a joke. Released such a long time after the intel Q CPU's and they are slower and can not be overclocked as high. Sorry. But only a fanboy or a ignorant consumer would go for AMD at this time.

I would love it if AMD was better, they just arent, you know that very well.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top