Wednesday, October 8th 2014

AMD Appoints Dr. Lisa Su as President and Chief Executive Officer

Press Release by
Cristian_25H
 Discuss (84 Comments)
AMD today announced that its board of directors has appointed Dr. Lisa Su as president and chief executive officer and member of the board of directors, effective immediately. Dr. Su, 44, succeeds Rory Read, 52, who has stepped down as president and chief executive officer, and member of the board of directors, as part of a transition plan. Read will support the transition in an advisory role, remaining with the company through the end of 2014.

"Leadership succession planning has been a joint effort between Rory and the board and we felt that Lisa's expertise and proven leadership in the global semiconductor industry make this an ideal time for her to lead the company," said Bruce Claflin, chairman of AMD's board of directors. "The board looks forward to continuing to work with Lisa and the rest of the senior management team to build on the company's momentum. I would also like to thank Rory for his many accomplishments and contributions positioning AMD for long-term success by helping to create a strong foundation and clear path to re-establish the company's growth and profitability."
Commenting on her appointment, Dr. Su said, "I am deeply honored to have this opportunity to lead AMD during this important time of transformation. Our world-class technology assets combined with the incredible talent and passion of the AMD team provide us with a unique opportunity to shape the future of computing. I look forward to expanding on the strong foundation we have built under Rory's leadership as we develop industry-leading technologies and products for a diverse set of markets to drive sustainable and profitable growth."

During the last three years, AMD has made significant progress in financial and operational performance. The company returned to non-GAAP profitability and materially diversified its business. Since 2012, AMD has reduced operating expenditures by approximately 30 percent and maintained cash at near an optimal level of $1 billion. AMD also improved its balance sheet by re-profiling its debt with no significant debt coming due until 2019.

Read stated, "I am grateful to have had the opportunity to lead such a talented team and proud of what we have accomplished during such an important chapter in the company's history. Together, we have established the right strategy to enable AMD to continue to grow and transform. I am confident that Lisa is the right leader to drive AMD forward."

Related News

Add your own comment

84 Comments on AMD Appoints Dr. Lisa Su as President and Chief Executive Officer

#26
brian111
Fluffmeister

In short..... fuck that I'm outta here!
That's not Rory Read
Posted on Reply
#27
HumanSmoke
remixedcatif AMD could have gone mobile they should have started back around the original iphone days like the rest did... now it's waaaaaayyy too late.
They could have done that, kept the fabs, and been more profitable... But they blew cash on ATI, and ignored mobile, and now they are paying the price.
It's actually much, much sadder than that. The debt burden AMD took on caused them tosell off their mobile IP to Qualcomm for a paltry $65m. That IP became Adreno - it's no coincidence that Adreno is an anagram of Radeon. Fair to say that Qualcomm came out better on that deal.
brian111That's not Rory Read
No, it's not, it's serial PR embarrassment Roy Taylor. Pity he didn't quit in a show of solidarity with Rory.
Posted on Reply
#28
ensabrenoir
.....Amd as a gpu only company........ can i imagine the i3, i5 and i7 with radeon graphics cores yet?
Posted on Reply
#29
FordGT90Concept
"I go fast!1!11!1!"
I don't think AMD could swoon Intel into doing that but, you never know. Intel just might play along to keep the government/EU off their back. Intel could throw AMD a bone so it doesn't look like Intel offed AMD.
Posted on Reply
#30
GhostRyder
FordGT90ConceptI would still argue not. AMD announced the acquisition of ATI not long after Intel pushed out Core 2 and...slaughtered...AMD. AMD should have backed out of the ATI purchase, put its head down, and focused on answering to Intel's new architectures and promises for more. AMD should have changed from talks of buyout to partnership with ATI allowing them to integrate ATI technology in to AMD dies. AMD maybe, just maybe, would have had the resources and foresight to compete with Intel if they did this instead of getting thoroughly trounced and beaten.

The purchase of ATI basically meant the core of AMD (its foundries) had to be sold because they had no money. Instead of squandering money, AMD should have seized the opportunity to fab other people's chips not unlike TMSC. They could have fought to produce ATI's chips even.

AMD has been a train wreck since the day Core 2 debuted.
Not exactly, there is a lot more to the whole Core 2 Duo being better argument than just it being superior. There was something else at work in the coding world that was rendering AMD architectures useless on certain programs. It made AMD seem significantly worse that it was and has caused a lot of pain to the company which is part of a few unfair business practice suits again Intel corporation.

Of course that is not the case recently but it still was what started.
cadavecaOK guys. It's time.


Vote for me as next AMD president, and I'll take AMD back to profitability, and offer top performance with reasonable pricing. I can't do it alone, but with your help, I'm sure we can succeed.


I'll need some assassins to take out the guys @ Glo-Fo, and to improve yields to levels never seen before on the planet. Also, need to license some tech from Intel, and maybe some fab time.


OK?



:shadedshu:


:lovetpu:
You have my vote! But just remember the people who voted for you and to send a nice donation of something special. Maybe a few R9 X90X's before they come out :D
Posted on Reply
#31
Hilux SSRG
So the new CEO is already on point with a three point process: build great products, build on customers and partnerships, and SHIP ON TIME.

I wish her well and hope she cuts the decision making red tape that hurts big companies.
Posted on Reply
#32
FordGT90Concept
"I go fast!1!11!1!"
GhostRyderNot exactly, there is a lot more to the whole Core 2 Duo being better argument than just it being superior. There was something else at work in the coding world that was rendering AMD architectures useless on certain programs. It made AMD seem significantly worse that it was and has caused a lot of pain to the company which is part of a few unfair business practice suits again Intel corporation.
The lion's share of programs are compiled using Microsoft Visual Studio. Visual Studio doesn't use Intel's compiler. I don't buy that argument at all because the "certain programs" were made by developers that likely went straight to Intel to compile their program (e.g. on Linux). No one should fault Intel for a stupid decision a developer made.

I checked Visual Studio 2005 myself (was out before this lawsuit happened). The IA-64, AMD64, and x86_AMD64 cl.exe contains zero instances of "Intel." All three are copyrighted by Microsoft.
Posted on Reply
#33
GhostRyder
FordGT90ConceptThe lion's share of programs are compiled using Microsoft Visual Studio. Visual Studio doesn't use Intel's compiler. I don't buy that argument at all because the "certain programs" were made by developers that likely went straight to Intel to compile their program (e.g. on Linux). No one should fault Intel for a stupid decision a developer made.

I checked Visual Studio 2005 myself (was out before this lawsuit happened). The IA-64, AMD64, and x86_AMD64 cl.exe contains zero instances of "Intel." All three are copyrighted by Microsoft.
I never said all programs used the compiler but there were some big namebenchmarking softwareand a few programs starting to use Intel Compiler which caused some irregularities. The problem was settled in a lawsuit in favor of AMD because the Compiler specifically checked for a Genuine Intel that the it sports and you see results change. AMD made poor decision lately in the late game for their CPU architectures and the thought that coders would go nuts for heavy multi-threading over single core support which of course resulted in where we are today. There is also the whole being forced out of the OEM market battle that many of the big names being "Forced" into only using Intel based CPU's for quite awhile (well this is a link to the complaint)...

Makes it hard to compete when you get a no before you even knock on the door right?
Posted on Reply
#34
FordGT90Concept
"I go fast!1!11!1!"
Settlements are always in favor of the party that sued. It's effectively a buyoff so it doesn't go to court, become very public, and cost a fortune for both sides. Point is, programs compiled on Intel's compiler are few and far between.

AMD's claim that vendors wouldn't consider their products was true. Intel was fined in the USA and EU for it.
Posted on Reply
#35
GhostRyder
FordGT90ConceptSettlements are always in favor of the party that sued. It's effectively a buyoff so it doesn't go to court, become very public, and cost a fortune for both sides. Point is, programs compiled on Intel's compiler are few and far between.
But it was a thing and swayed people and there were enough that it became known among coders that the compiler was doing something off the wall. On top of that though Intel was also told by the FTC to update their compiler free of charge to the vendors and others using the compiler to get rid of the monopolistic behavior that ensued because of it so it obviously did it.
FordGT90ConceptAMD's claim that vendors wouldn't consider their products was true. Intel was fined in the USA and EU for it.
Yep but its also more of a too late scenario as those fines were basically a slap on the wrist to Intel.
Posted on Reply
#36
FordGT90Concept
"I go fast!1!11!1!"
GhostRyderBut it was a thing and swayed people and there were enough that it became known among coders that the compiler was doing something off the wall. On top of that though Intel was also told by the FTC to update their compiler free of charge to the vendors and others using the compiler to get rid of the monopolistic behavior that ensued because of it so it obviously did it.
That's like Seagate getting sued for using "GB" = 10^9 bytes when Microsoft uses "GB" = 2^30. Microsoft gave the impression people were getting less than advertised capacity and Seagate got sued for using the correct units. Intel should never get sued for making a compiler that is optimized for their processors. Developers that used it intentionally because of that fact should have been sued, not Intel. Courts often don't make the best decisions because they don't fully understand the underpinnings of what is happening. The same could be said of forcing Microsoft to distance Windows from Internet Explorer.

Now everything from hard drives to SSDs, to optical disks have 1 GB = 1,000,000,000 bytes on the label. Well, duh! It's Microsoft's fault and Microsoft, to this day, still does 1,073,741,824 = 1 "GB." Virtually all other operating systems correctly label that as "GiB."
Posted on Reply
#37
GhostRyder
FordGT90ConceptThat's like Seagate getting sued for using "GB" = 10^9 bytes when Microsoft uses "GB" = 2^30. Microsoft gave the impression people were getting less than advertised capacity and Seagate got sued for using the correct units. Intel should never get sued for making a compiler that is optimized for their processors. Developers that used it intentionally because of that fact should have been sued, not Intel. Courts often don't make the best decisions because they don't fully understand the underpinnings of what is happening. The same could be said of forcing Microsoft to distance Windows from Internet Explorer.

Now everything from hard drives to SSDs, to optical disks have 1 GB = 1,000,000,000 bytes on the label. Well, duh! It's Microsoft's fault and Microsoft, to this day, still does 1,073,741,824 = 1 "GB." Virtually all other operating systems correctly label that as "GiB."
It was not optimizing directly for Intel, it was running purposefully bad on anything but intel by looking for the Intel label in the processor. Optimizing because a CPU does things differently to make it better suited for your brand of CPU is a normal thing. Purposely making a product run bad using it because it does not contain the company logo is another. That was what the link about pcmark was about.

If it was just about optimizing, this conversation would not exist because that's just a normal thing I would expect.
Posted on Reply
#38
HumanSmoke
GhostRyderYep but its also more of a too late scenario as those fines were basically a slap on the wrist to Intel.
FordGT90ConceptSettlements are always in favor of the party that sued. It's effectively a buyoff so it doesn't go to court, become very public, and cost a fortune for both sides. Point is, programs compiled on Intel's compiler are few and far between.
AMD's claim that vendors wouldn't consider their products was true. Intel was fined in the USA and EU for it.
The main reason the fines were low was because Intel could easily demonstrate causality as per FordGT90Concept's observation. The revised cross-licence agreement between AMD and Intel allowed AMD to outsource up to 20% of its x86 production to third party foundries. Under Jerry Sanders that wouldn't be countenanced because of the old school attitude that "real" semicon companies don't outsource.
As early as 1998-99 the forums were awash with complaints of channel supply issues. By 2001-02 it was a regular topicamongst industry investors. By 2003-04it was front page news. Intel paid Dell to keep its machines Intel-only, but Hewlett-Packard (the second largest OEM at the time) were an AMD customer and AMD couldn't adhere to the shipping schedule for them.....so what happens, Dell do an about-face when SledgeHammer Athlon64 arrives and sign up for Opteron (and a few months later for consumer Athlon64) - AMD diverts its production to Dell to keep them sweet....Dell goes into a tailspin, and Hewlett-Packard now snubbed by AMD and supply constrained with AMD parts, increases its buy from Intel and becomes the world's largest OEM by sales and revenue both in the server and consumer space.
Posted on Reply
#39
TheMailMan78
Big Member
I want AMD to stay afloat and succeed. More players in the game the better. Competition is the key to innovation.........that and starvation but that's a different argument. ANYWAY lets say AMD, Intel and NVIDIA are all on equal ground for a second. They all have great products and decent prices. From a gaming perspective what is demanding enough to justify any of the latest hardware?

The only thing that even comes close to demanding is 4k gaming. The majority of the market is on 1080p or less and yet NO GAME seems to push the limits even that "low". I'm not mad at any of the hardware makers anymore. I'm pissed at game developers not pushing the current hardware. If the damn game companies would start pushing the hardware we might see some innovation. Sad thing is the hardware segment is so lopsided and the gaming industry sucks, gaming feels stagnate IMO.

Games like Star Citizen are all I've seen that MIGHT bring the pain to our current hardware. But one game is hardly a reason to build a new system.......meh broken record rant over.
Posted on Reply
#40
FordGT90Concept
"I go fast!1!11!1!"
You know how much electricity it would take to run a game like Star Citizen at 4K?

Oh, and Star Citizen runs on CryEngine 3. There's going to be a lot of games coming in the next few years that have similar hardware requirements.


I would love to see AMD be competitive but with each passing year, that seems less likely. :(
Posted on Reply
#42
HumanSmoke
TheMailMan78I want AMD to stay afloat and succeed. More players in the game the better. Competition is the key to innovation.........that and starvation but that's a different argument. ANYWAY lets say AMD, Intel and NVIDIA are all on equal ground for a second. They all have great products and decent prices. From a gaming perspective what is demanding enough to justify any of the latest hardware?

The only thing that even comes close to demanding is 4k gaming. The majority of the market is on 1080p or less and yet NO GAME seems to push the limits even that "low". I'm not mad at any of the hardware makers anymore. I'm pissed at game developers not pushing the current hardware. If the damn game companies would start pushing the hardware we might see some innovation. Sad thing is the hardware segment is so lopsided and the gaming industry sucks, gaming feels stagnate IMO.

Games like Star Citizen are all I've seen that MIGHT bring the pain to our current hardware. But one game is hardly a reason to build a new system.......meh broken record rant over.
Unfortunately for us, the gaming business isn't geared towards a top-down approach, but a bottom-up. Game devs tend to highlight minimum game requirements for a reason. That said, with very few exceptions, major leaps in graphical image quality tend to go hand in hand with IHV gaming programs - game devs being the poster child for institutionalized laziness (well them and whoever greenlights movie sequels). Probably also fair to say that even if devs moved at breakneck pace (as if!) the consumer base still wouldn't be overly satisfied because it only sates one factor of their obsession. 4K is barely upon us and people are already looking at 5K (and 8K), the moment a new graphics series arrives people are champing at the bit for the next one. It's an odd fact that graphics card news posts generate far more traffic than game news posts even though the latter should be the prime mover. We live in an era where immediacy and a near constant bombardment of hardware introduction fuel a never satisfied desire for the next best thing.
If your scenario comes to pass - and to a degree it has- CPUs and GPUs made in the last few years are already more than capable of running 99% of gaming scenarios. What happens if the consumers take a deep breath and assess the situation and realize the emperor has no clothes? A large percentage of the enthusiast community already realize this, but they are more often than not the first to climb aboard the new product train - and in the case of graphics might compound that irony by buying a second, third, and maybe fourth card. Like it or not, the IHV's feed the obsession, but like local meth heads, we are eager participants.

Now, from a personal PoV, I can put up with the psychology of consumerism and even come to terms with being a techno-crack whore - what does my head in is that all the expense of hardware is being channelled into games that have all the creativity and gameplay innovation you'd expect from a team of B-movie sequel screenwriters.
Posted on Reply
#43
GhostRyder
TheMailMan78I want AMD to stay afloat and succeed. More players in the game the better. Competition is the key to innovation.........that and starvation but that's a different argument. ANYWAY lets say AMD, Intel and NVIDIA are all on equal ground for a second. They all have great products and decent prices. From a gaming perspective what is demanding enough to justify any of the latest hardware?

The only thing that even comes close to demanding is 4k gaming. The majority of the market is on 1080p or less and yet NO GAME seems to push the limits even that "low". I'm not mad at any of the hardware makers anymore. I'm pissed at game developers not pushing the current hardware. If the damn game companies would start pushing the hardware we might see some innovation. Sad thing is the hardware segment is so lopsided and the gaming industry sucks, gaming feels stagnate IMO.

Games like Star Citizen are all I've seen that MIGHT bring the pain to our current hardware. But one game is hardly a reason to build a new system.......meh broken record rant over.
Well resolution is a big part of it and in all honesty that seems to be the major reason game developers are getting slowed is because while higher resolution textures become important and make up the game the resolution they have to focus on makes it harder to optimize things. I mean in all honesty the last few years resolutions have just continually swapped. Devs still seem to focus on 1080p it seems especially because the consoles have that focus but it still is making things more and more difficult to make it look good.

I am with you as I wish some games would really push some limits but I guess we are going to be stuck with game limits on top of poor optimizations that make cards seem pitiful.
Posted on Reply
#44
HumanSmoke
jigar2speedPity you are still getting the paid by Nvidia for proxy selling their product, trust me - you are doing a very bad job - far worst than Roy.
Awesome ! You think of that yourself? If so 1. Learn the difference between worse and worst - it makes your posting read like it was penned by a five-year old rather than the ten-year old you obviously are, and 2. Roy "The Future is PhysX" Taylor was also a serial embarrassment for Nvidia prior to being a serial embarrassment for AMD - I guess your support of Roy validates all his words of self-professed wisdom.
Here's a good one- be sure to purr your appreciation to Roy's twitter feed:
"The UK is the only place in the world where anyone talks about AMD or ATI", said Roy Taylor. Surprisingly enough, Taylor's spreadsheets outlined the graphics market share for the last year, but ATI's chips were not there. However, it is estimated that ATI, Intel and Nvidia managed to pump up 366 million graphics chips during last year. When asked about why ATI was removed from the charts, Taylor said that "no one cares".
As for being paid by Nvidia...why would they have to pay anyone? With supporters like you cheerleading for AMD they don't really need to.

Keep taking those shots pal - you know you're awesome
Posted on Reply
#45
remixedcat
If he worked for nvidia he would have the custom status of NVIDIA rep and get the extra sugar for it ;)
Posted on Reply
#46
HumanSmoke
remixedcatIf he worked for nvidia he would have the custom status of NVIDIA rep and get the extra sugar for it ;)
If only! Seems like a waste of money to pay reps when the self-appointed guardians of AMD's reputation turn into frothing-at-the-bung reactionaries at the drop of a hat.

Given Roy's foot-in-mouth condition I'm actually convinced that he still works for Nvidia as a fifth columnist at AMD. Pretty cool for him that he's got AMD fanboys defending him when not so long ago he was telling everyone nobody cares about AMD and ATI.
Posted on Reply
#47
jigar2speed
HumanSmokeAwesome ! You think of that yourself? If so 1. Learn the difference between worse and worst - it makes your posting read like it was penned by a five-year old rather than the ten-year old you obviously are, and 2. Roy "The Future is PhysX" Taylor was also a serial embarrassment for Nvidia prior to being a serial embarrassment for AMD - I guess your support of Roy validates all his words of self-professed wisdom.
Here's a good one- be sure to purr your appreciation to Roy's twitter feed:

As for being paid by Nvidia...why would they have to pay anyone? With supporters like you cheerleading for AMD they don't really need to.

Keep taking those shots pal - you know you're awesome
You call me 5 year old and yet you are the one posting funny gif pic ... LOL

Anyway back to topic: As i said you are doing far worst job than Roy, i never said Roy was doing a good job, its just that he is better paid than you. ;)

Also i never said anything pro about AMD, yet you called me Cheerleader. Remember if anyone digs your comments the picture will be far clear of how you roll on each and every forum...
remixedcatIf he worked for nvidia he would have the custom status of NVIDIA rep and get the extra sugar for it ;)
Heh, you do understand how proxy marketing works right ? Companies like Nvidia, AMD, Intel, SAMSUNG etc have paid shills who would post just like us but postive stuff about their employer companies...
Posted on Reply
#48
jigar2speed
HumanSmokeGiven Roy's foot-in-mouth condition I'm actually convinced that he still works for Nvidia as a fifth columnist at AMD. Pretty cool for him that he's got AMD fanboys defending him when not so long ago he was telling everyone nobody cares about AMD and ATI.
Just like you he is faithful to his employer ... Come on, can you not do better job than this ? Why is Nvidia paying you if you can't even argue on this basic grounds.
Posted on Reply
#49
HumanSmoke
jigar2speedAlso i never said anything pro about AMD, yet you called me Cheerleader
So you jumping on any thread here, at Tech Report, at Anandtech, at anywhere else trying to sweep away any talk about AMD driver issues for example is just a coincidence?
jigar2speedRemember if anyone digs your comments the picture will be far clear of how you roll on each and every forum...
Yep. Posts based on facts rather than whining - pretty much like this thread until you started thread-crapping. If you have an issue with any point I've made in this thread - whether it the facts I've listed, the history I've recounted, or the fact that I somehow shouldn't sympathise with a AMD CEO being scapegoated for the failings of a BoD, then by all means make a constructive post presenting a counter argument or instances where my facts are in error.....it would be more constructive than just popping up and squealing and making false accusations about people being paid by a company.

So far you've adding nothing to the thread topic, and the sum total of your contribution is to hand out personal insults. I'm guessing you won't be changing anytime soon. The fact that you feel the need to post insults in a public forum rather than via PM must stem from some deep seated need to impress someone. Hope that works out for you - I'll have to find out second-hand since I just added you to my ignore list.
jigar2speedi never said Roy was doing a good job
So Roy isn't doing a good job, but don't agree with me that he should quit AMD. Classic.
Posted on Reply
#50
jigar2speed
HumanSmokeSo you jumping on any thread here, at Tech Report, at Anandtech, at anywhere else trying to sweep away any talk about AMD driver issues for example is just a coincidence?

Yep. Posts based on facts rather than whining - pretty much like this thread until you started thread-crapping. If you have an issue with any point I've made in this thread - whether it the facts I've listed, the history I've recounted, or the fact that I somehow shouldn't sympathise with a AMD CEO being scapegoated for the failings of a BoD, then by all means make a constructive post presenting a counter argument or instances where my facts are in error.....it would be more constructive than just popping up and squealing and making false accusations about people being paid by a company.

So far you've adding nothing to the thread topic, and the sum total of your contribution is to hand out personal insults. I'm guessing you won't be changing anytime soon. The fact that you feel the need to post insults in a public forum rather than via PM must stem from some deep seated need to impress someone. Hope that works out for you - I'll have to find out second-hand since I just added you to my ignore list.
LOL, so all you could come up with was i was getting sick of fanboys spinning and derailing the thread.

Oh and btw so far i might have added a little to this thread but I was still able to share valuable inform to everyone to take your comments with a pinch of salt, cause all you have been doing is spreading crap about AMD across all forums and cashing undeserved cheques from Nvidia.

Don't trust me, just search on google for this dude's comment.


EDIT: I just saw your recent edits - Dude why do i give a f**K if Roy should get fired or not. The hot debate here is that - you just put me on the ignore list because you can't prove anyone that you are not a paid shill. I am surprised that you have been rolling here since 3 years and no one noticed it.
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment
Nov 22nd, 2024 18:00 EST change timezone

Latest GPU Drivers

New Forum Posts

Popular Reviews

Controversial News Posts