ensabrenoir.....amazed/confused as to that Amd can come up with some great partners and collaborations and yet theyre still in the red. Are these just seeds for future awesomeness or press smoke and mirrors about naught......

ensabrenoir.....amazed/confused as to that Amd can come up with some great partners and collaborations and yet theyre still in the red. Are these just seeds for future awesomeness or press smoke and mirrors about naught......

TheGuruStudIntel blows billions on Itanic and Larrabee with no issue b/c of the success their "marketing" money has brought them. If AMD had that kind of cash and influence you'd see a very different company.

HumanSmokeIntel's success didn't come from "marketing", it came from the fact that they capitalized on technologies (EPROM, SRAM, DRAM) when other semicon companies were treating the IC industry as a hobby (Motorola, Fairchild, RCA), or whose business became introverted after propeller-heads drove the company instead of strategic planning (National Semi, Zilog). Intel was built on the removal of bubble memory from the market, and some smart intuition leading to industry leading yields ( Gordon Moore's "doping" of silicon gate MOS oxide layers, Dov Frohman's negative voltage "walking out" process), and a fundamental core strategy of driving markets rather than reacting to them. You can play the "what if" game to your hearts content, but the fact remains that Intel's IP between 1968 and 1971 built the company while AMD were still dicking around selling Fairchild's TTL chips, and highlights the difference between a company founded by engineers and one founded by marketing. The last reason is why AMD exists at all, since it was an engineers enthusiasm- namely Intel co-founder Bob Noyce, whose $50K investment in AMD assured its incorporation in the first place.

Intel can (and will) make mistakes. Itanium/IA-64 is a sterling example, but the multiple approaches to the market also yield viable results amid the failures. For every Netburst design ethos there is a P6/Pentium-M/Core development line. This is something AMD have not really copied until it was possibly too late. When their K5 architecture floundered their "Plan B" was buying IP (NexGen), when the original K8 stalled out (with Jim Keller), they drafted in Dirk Meyer and the ex-DEC Alpha team, when their graphics turned up empty, they bought IP (ATI) rather than hiring a team and licencing the IP, when they wanted to get into ARM they bought IP (SeaMicro). When a company stagnates or want to play it safe they buy IP rather than develop it themselves.
AMD aren't in Intel's league, and never really have been. They managed to punch above their weight with some astute engineering decisions and alliances (such as bringing Microsoft and the open source community in when drafting AMD64), but more often than not the spark to keep the company has had to be purchased rather than developed within.

TheGuruStudIn regards to their situation against AMD since pentiums, it's all from their illegal business practices (so called marketing money) and exploiting their already huge bank account/market dominance.

Hi there

Spoke to LG.

Hoping to get 29" and 34" super-wide flat IPS panels early next year with FreeSync which shall be exclusive to OcUK in UK.

So IPS and Freesync, boooooooooooooooooom!

EagleyeAm beginning to hate AMD like most here bcoz the`re always throwing a spanner in the works of Nvidia e.g. G-Sync/Free-Sync, Cuda/HSA-HUMa-OpenCL, Nvidia DX12 support/MANTLE and so on. If AMD don't want to make money, why not let Nvidia make it?

Am wondering if AMD is trolling Nvidia.

AsRockWTF, chances are AMD had both on the back burner and had no option to make them public and if they even were not holding them back because of funds they had to come up with some thing.

I guess your company would of been bust even faster than AMD as it would of just sat there and took it in the ass.