AMD to go Bye-Bye???

[alkemyst]

I am beginning to think such publications are paid to write poorly about other's competition.

All it takes is a couple silver hairs to hear about a potential bad deal, then every bingo parlor has a large poster put up about it.

 

[sak]

Ok i dont know if AMD's going to survive...i sure hope it does..i gave up on AMD before the Athlon came about.....

but hey i love them..the problem is the AMD has to start sell their chips not just to ppl like us Techie's but to business..like Dell..those idiots who just use Intel...(just think how cheap their computers would be if they use AMD)...

Unless they get over that hump of IT managers who only see as Intel and then DELL as their solution AMD will have a hard time....not thats it will go belly up...but they have to get into this big business market to make any dent into Intels market share...

but the problems is that most of the IT managers, a lot of non techie's and to an extent the sales person at best buys, circuit city, etc. think intel is better, and push intel a lot more than AMD.

Intel has the aura like Sony, or BMW. Everyone seems to love their products no matter what...even thought the might be blowted in price.

 

[majewski9]

First off the fact that AMD could ever be acquired by VIA and Nvidia is a joke since AMD is many times their size. Second AMD has been around since 1969 and has been in much tighter spots. Third dont assume that Intel isnt immune to the recession as well.

OK and Dell has been looking at opteron servers since Intel really missed the mark with Itanium. I would love to see a Dell AMD machine, but they have several other major PC companies supporting them and dont neccessarily need Dell's deep pockets. Firstly HP/Compaq which is bigger than Dell has several AMD lines. Micron and Sony as well have many Athlon machines. I know major manufacturers like Gateway and IBM dropped AMD during the 1.4 ghz limit days of the Thunderbird. Gateway was especially hurt since the AthlonXP turned out to be a resounding success. So I dont think any companies are going to drop AMD. During the days of the Thunderbird domination Intel sold Dell Intel chips below cost just to keep them all Intel!!! Dell sells a lot of PC's and AMD should try their hardest to get some of that Dell cash. Dell seems to only flirt with AMD to get Intel jealous but I think the Opteron is tempting to resist for Dell.

I blame this current funk on AMD. They need to stop relying on VIA chipsets which I think AMD will start relying on Nvidia in the future or maybe become a chipset manufacturer with the Hammer permanetly. They need to reduce manufactring problems If they didnt have so many problems we'd have AMD AthlonXP+ 2800's right now as well as Barton and Hammer.

On the plus side AMD has really beaten Intel to the 64 bit acceptance. Itanium is far to costly and just a poor design to ever gain acceptance. Intel could never push the Itanium into the low/mid end
of servers or desktops. Now AMD get your act together and drop the Hammer!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[Maverick]

Getting the business customers is key to gaining the upper hand in the consumer market. Dell blows everyone out of the water because they make lots of profits in the server market then pass the savings down to consumers, therefore offering lower prices than anyone else for the same quality. AMD could do the same thing if they got people to buy into their server class chips. Hopefully they'll throw more focus on that.

 

[Nemesis77]

Originally posted by: majewski9
First off the fact that AMD could ever be acquired by VIA and Nvidia is a joke since AMD is many times their size.

Size has nothing to do with it. If NVIDIA is worth more, they could very well buy AMD.

FYI:

Sales
AMD: 3.22B
NVIDIA: 1.88B

Market-cap
AMD: 1.10B
NVIDIA: 1.18B

NVIDIA is already worth more than AMD is.

 

[Alptraum]

Size has nothing to do with it. If NVIDIA is worth more, they could very well buy AMD.


Yep, "size" has almost nothing to do with it, it's the cash that matters. Look at the AOL Time Warner deal if you want an example.

 

[AkumaX]

the hammer will flop. there's no way the performance increase could be the same in order to "save" amd. think about amd's k6-3. it had nothing on pentium. NOTHING. (great cpu though, o/ced mine to 650 ) now, go from k6-3 -> athlon. BIG DIFFERENCE. that's what gave them their biggest push. now there's no way we'd see something as drastic as thoroughbred -> hammer. aint gonna happen

 

[majewski9]

Originally posted by: Nemesis77

Originally posted by: majewski9
First off the fact that AMD could ever be acquired by VIA and Nvidia is a joke since AMD is many times their size.

Size has nothing to do with it. If NVIDIA is worth more, they could very well buy AMD.

FYI:

Sales
AMD: 3.22B
NVIDIA: 1.88B

Market-cap
AMD: 1.10B
NVIDIA: 1.18B

NVIDIA is already worth more than AMD is.

look at amd sales 2 billion more!!! Size really really really matters!!! AMD probaly has many more times the employees as Nvidia. I cant possibly see that Nvidia would have the deep enough pockets to buy a company that sells 2 billion dollars more of product. Whats next Mandrake buying Microsoft? Stock price doesnt have anything to do with it per say. If anyone wanted to buy out AMD it would be Intel but not even their pockets are deep enough. AMD is a fortune 500 company and has many many domestic and foreign employees. . This is why Nvidia is worth more! They have less employees. Just because they have more money? You need to take an economics course!!!!!!!!!

Dont you think if Intel could they would buy AMD? You people are retarded!!!

 

[RanDum72]

The U.S. market is stale right now in terms of sales of computer parts. At least AMD is trying to tap the Chinese market, where they will have an advantage in terms of pricing and value. Story here.

 

[ElFenix]

amd has enough cash to survive at their current loss rate for about a year. as for the difference between hammer and athlon in comparison to k6-3 to athlon... well, k63 was an enhanced 5th gen core, athlon is an enhanced 6th gen core, and hammer looks like its an evolutionary step on that. a lot of the performance is going to depend on how well their speculation algorithms work. intel's work really well, amd's aren't as good. the added cache in hammer will allow it's prefetch to work a bit better, and the built in mem controller (especially if it gets updated regularly) should keep them from the via crap that was revealed by ace's.

 

[Alptraum]

look at amd sales 2 billion more!!! Size really really really matters!!! AMD probaly has many more times the employees as Nvidia. I cant possibly see that Nvidia would have the deep enough pockets to buy a company that sells 2 billion dollars more of product. Whats next Mandrake buying Microsoft? Stock price doesnt have anything to do with it per say. If anyone wanted to buy out AMD it would be Intel but not even their pockets are deep enough. AMD is a fortune 500 company and has many many domestic and foreign employees. . This is why Nvidia is worth more! They have less employees. Just because they have more money? You need to take an economics course!!!!!!!!!

Dont you think if Intel could they would buy AMD? You people are retarded!!!


Well...Somebody here does need to take a BASIC economics course, and its not Nemesis77. Number of employess and to a lesser extant sales has nothing to do with wether another company can buy another. When it comes to examples of what you think of as "smaller" companies buying "bigger" ones there are only about...5 gazillion examples. Granted thats a bit of an overstatement but you are totally wrong. If you want a very obvious example refer to the AOL/Time Warner deal like I said. And if you want to take the time to actually learn how the business world works there are many more examples like that. And just looking at a larger sales figure is as pointless as looking at number of employees. Your statement about stock price having nothing to do with it is WAY off also. Anyways, do some homework.

EDIT = And as far as Intel buying AMD goes Intel has a bunch of reasons to not want to. Some of the bigger ones =
1.) The FTC would almost certainly block a sale of AMD to Intel.
2.) Intel wants AMD around. If nothing else to at least maintain the appearence of competition.

 

[majewski9]

Alptraum im sorry you are completly right. Wasnt AOL time warner a merger? hmm wasnt it a preventive merger from aol's standpoint as well. I didnt say stock price had nothing to do with a buying out of a company. I said AMD's stock price is irelevant to that of Nvidia or Intel. READ READ READ my words and dont misquote me.

Smaller companies can buyout bigger ones or quote merge with larger ones. Usually the larger company has deep debt and the top brass wants to sell their stock for a lot of cash. The smaller company generally has to get outside loans to gain majority shares of stock in the company or has a lot of cash floating around.

It would take a rather large company to buy AMD. I'm talking Intel size if not bigger. Over 5 billion in sales is much more than Nvidia ( www.amd.com ). A company is generally much larger or much more profitable than the company it buys out unless they have outside partners or loans ie Banks. For Nvidia ( absurd ) to buy out AMD it would most certainly to arrange a buyout of AMD stock and other holdings. The deal would be in the billions to AMD stock holders. Billions that Nvidia doesnt have and doesnt have the credit to earn. Why???? They are a much much much smaller company!!!!

An Intel buyout would most likely get blocked by the FTC, but that all depends on how much Intel can throw at congressmen if they wanted to which they cant. All this talk of an Nvidia buyout comes from Tomshardware april fools article anyways. Yeah it is what it was a joke!

 

[alkemyst]

Originally posted by: Ameesh
stab her.[/quote]

 

[Gunnar]

Well if any of you are looking for a rebound on the next generation of AMD's chip, Ill tell you now it isnt happening anytime soon. Here's why:

Its already been said that AMD's success hinges on how many OEM's actually decide to use their new chip in their product lines. Face it, AMD aint gonna be around much longer selling to enthusiasts browsing these boards, were just a drop in the bucket. But things on that side of the coin look increasingly dim, especially because of the HP/Compaq merger.

Dell everyone knows is on the fast track to world domination, apparently theyve signed something something huge with Intel to be exclusive. Its so apparent its sickening. Part of the deal must have been that Dell Dude <hrmpH> has to say during every commercial that the Pentium 4 rocks, or is awesome or some shite. Already, AMD is out of the biggest name in OEM computer supply.

HP/Compaq is going to get mighty slim indeed, they have some marginal solution now, whether it will continue is highly questionable. HP has invested a ton of money in IA-64. A TON. I think that anyone in the know already knows that the entire architecture stems from a paper HP presented on making VLIW more feasible to multiple generations (anyone who does not know why VLIW has been bad before, just ask, Ill include a more detailed reply), they are handling much of the development of the second EPIC core. Final tally is, HP own Compaq, HP designed a new chip, HP killed both PA-RISC and Alpha, HP or Compaq wont use x86-64 a la AMD.

IBM remains, who knows what direction they are going in. It looks like they want to bring POWER to the people.

You know, thats the two top suppliers of OEM stuff generating revenue for Intel. You dont need to be a braniac to figure out this picture looks pretty dim. Maybe theyll scratch out a living on low cost stuff, but that aint where the margins are buddy....

 

[glugglug]

Originally posted by: Gunnar
Well if any of you are looking for a rebound on the next generation of AMD's chip, Ill tell you now it isnt happening anytime soon. Here's why:

Its already been said that AMD's success hinges on how many OEM's actually decide to use their new chip in their product lines. Face it, AMD aint gonna be around much longer selling to enthusiasts browsing these boards, were just a drop in the bucket. But things on that side of the coin look increasingly dim, especially because of the HP/Compaq merger.

DEC (absorbed by Compaq) created the EV6 bus used in the Athlon, and was working on EV8? (hypertransport) - so them going for x86-64 rather than IA-64 (or both) isn't so out of the question.

Dell everyone knows is on the fast track to world domination, apparently theyve signed something something huge with Intel to be exclusive. Its so apparent its sickening. Part of the deal must have been that Dell Dude <hrmpH> has to say during every commercial that the Pentium 4 rocks, or is awesome or some shite. Already, AMD is out of the biggest name in OEM computer supply.

It WAS true in the past that Dell used exclusively Intel. But according to this article, that will very likely change with the Hammer.

HP killed both PA-RISC and Alpha

Compaq pretty much killed Alpha when they bought DEC. Alpha research is said to be revived a bit since the HP merger.

Maybe theyll scratch out a living on low cost stuff, but that aint where the margins are buddy....

Absolutely right. Which is why the Hammer being targeted towards servers is such a great thing.

 

[BFG10K]

I don't think AMD is in any real danger unless the Hammer flops. The 2600+ is a pretty good processor and people have seen evidence of the 2800+ existing so some of them will wait for it. Also AMD still does quite well in producing low cost processors that are quite decent in terms of performance.

I certainly don't want them to go anywhere and I hope they pull through.

 

[SgtZulu]

Hate to burst your bubble but AMD only has enough cash on hand to operate for a year or so.
Unless John Q. Public goes on a computer buying spree,it's entirely possible they'll go the way of the dodo bird.
Just look at their stock price.

 

[socketman]

now there's no way we'd see something as drastic as thoroughbred -> hammer. aint gonna happen

-Partial quote sorry. The author of this quote says the Hammer will not deliver the kind of performance increase that k-6 --> Athlon delivered. Sir, your dead wrong. Hammer will deliver in performance. The real question is will they be able to make enough of them.
Second, If Hammer flops. AMD is probably dead in about 1.5 years. Unless a huge bail out comes their way. If Hammer doesnt flop, they will be ok for a long while. After Hammer they are gonna start differentiating their chips. No more one chip fits all kind of solution. One for desktop, one for lap top etc etc...Should get real interesting if AMD can hang in there.

 

[yokem55]

Which is why the Hammer being targeted towards servers is such a great thing.

Yes, IF AMD can sell a whole bunch of hammers to the high end server market at over $1k each, then AMD won't have much trouble recovering at all. But, the high end server market is an even tougher nut to crack than the buisness desktop market. The server OEMS such as Dell, HPQ, etc all think Opteron is some fantastic technology, but I have big doubts about if thier costumer base will think the same thing, and its the customer base that will make the final decision. Understand, the high-end, big-tin server market is incredbly stodgey and conservative, and x86 chips in general in this market are a tough sell to begin with. Dell, HPQ, IBM, Sun, etc, won't invest into developing servers based on Opteron unless there is customer demand for Opeton based products regardless of how cool/reliable/fast the technology is. No market demand for big-tin Opterons, no big-tin Opteron products developed.

Also, AMD's cost benefits will only get them places in the low-end consumer market. Virtually everywhere else, people and buisnesses are perfectly willing to spend more money (even ridiculous quanities more) to get what they percieve is a "better" product from a "better" brand. And the only way AMD can fix that problem, is Marketing with a capital M. And I don't mean AMD should run more god aweful "AMD Me!" ads. AMD needs good, creative, marketing that does nothing more than promote brand recognition.

 

[Nemesis77]

Originally posted by: majewski9
Wasnt AOL time warner a merger?

Merger, takeover.... Same thing basically. Only difference is that in a merger, both parties want it, in a takeover, the takeover-target does not want to join the other company.

The smaller company generally has to get outside loans to gain majority shares of stock in the company or has a lot of cash floating around.

That's true if they intent to buy the shares with cash. But that's rarely the case. Usually they buy the shares with their own shares. Meaning = the shareowners sell their shares to the company and the company gives them their own shares in return. No cash needs to change hands. By offering shares of NVIDIA to AMD-stockholders, NVIDIA could buy AMD RIGHT NOW. AMD shareholders would get sizeable chunk of NVIDIA in return, but it is possible for NVIDIA to buy AMD. You seem to assume that all transactions are made with cash, when in reality they are usually not.

It would take a rather large company to buy AMD. I'm talking Intel size if not bigger. Over 5 billion in sales is much more than Nvidia ( www.amd.com ).

I'm sorry but you are mistaken. Sales of the company has nothing to do with it, what matter is the market-capitalization (read: net worth of the company). NVIDIA is already worth more than AMD is.

A company is generally much larger or much more profitable than the company it buys out unless they have outside partners or loans ie Banks. For Nvidia ( absurd ) to buy out AMD it would most certainly to arrange a buyout of AMD stock and other holdings. The deal would be in the billions to AMD stock holders. Billions that Nvidia doesnt have and doesnt have the credit to earn. Why???? They are a much much much smaller company!!!!

They do not need to pay them cash! They can offer them shares in their own company. Sheesh, you REALLY need to read about economics! You are way off-base here!

 

[Alptraum]

Sheesh, you REALLY need to read about economics! You are way off-base here!

Heh, yeah. I totally agree with you Nemesis77. These concepts are not rocket science. Just economics 101. I don't think NVidia will or would want to purchase AMD but just because NVidia is as majewski9 puts it a "much much much smaller company!!!!" doesn't mean they couldn't down the road. And as far as mis-quoting you (majewski9) here is what you said =

"Stock price doesnt have anything to do with it per say."

And here is what I said =

Your statement about stock price having nothing to do with it is WAY off also."

I don't see how that is mis-quoting you. For publicly traded companies stock price has a LOT to do with it We are not talking a per share price necessarily either. Which should be obvious. Its all about market-cap.