Tuesday, January 19th 2016
AMD Reports 2015 Fourth Quarter and Annual Results
AMD (NASDAQ: AMD) today announced revenue for the fourth quarter of 2015 of $958 million, operating loss of $49 million and net loss of $102 million, or $0.13 per share. Non-GAAP(1) operating loss was $39 million, non-GAAP net loss was $79 million and non-GAAP(1) loss per share was $0.10.
"AMD closed 2015 with solid execution fueled by the second straight quarter of double-digit percentage revenue growth in our Computing and Graphics segment and record annual semi-custom unit shipments," said Dr. Lisa Su, AMD president and CEO. "While 2015 was challenging from a financial perspective, key R&D investments and a sharpened focus on innovation position us well to deliver great products, improved financial results and share gains in 2016."
2015 Annual Results
"AMD closed 2015 with solid execution fueled by the second straight quarter of double-digit percentage revenue growth in our Computing and Graphics segment and record annual semi-custom unit shipments," said Dr. Lisa Su, AMD president and CEO. "While 2015 was challenging from a financial perspective, key R&D investments and a sharpened focus on innovation position us well to deliver great products, improved financial results and share gains in 2016."
- Revenue of $3.99 billion, down 28 percent year-over-year, primarily due to lower client processor sales.
- Gross margin of 27 percent, down 6 percentage points year-over-year and non-GAAP gross margin of 28 percent, down 7 percentage points year-over-year. The year-over-year declines were primarily due to lower unit volumes and product mix.
- Operating loss of $481 million and non-GAAP operating loss of $253 million, compared to a loss of $155 million and non-GAAP(1) operating income of $316 million in 2014 primarily due to lower revenue and gross margin.
- Net loss of $660 million, loss per share of $0.84, and non-GAAP net loss of $419 million, non-GAAP loss per share of $0.54, compared to a net loss of $403 million, loss per share of $0.53, and non-GAAP(1) net income of $132 million, non-GAAP earnings per share of $0.16 in 2014.
- Revenue of $958 million, down 10 percent sequentially primarily driven by seasonally lower sales of semi-custom SoCs and down 23 percent year-over-year, primarily due to lower client processor sales.
- Gross margin of 30 percent, up 7 percentage points sequentially. Q3 2015 gross margin was negatively impacted by an inventory write-down of $65 million, or 6 percentage points. Excluding the Q3 2015 inventory write-down, non-GAAP gross margin improved 1 percentage point sequentially, primarily due to improved product mix in the Computing and Graphics segment.
- Operating loss of $49 million, compared to an operating loss of $158 million for the prior quarter. Non-GAAP(1) operating loss of $39 million, compared to non-GAAP(1) operating loss of $97 million in Q3 2015, primarily due to higher gross margin and lower operating expenses.
- Net loss of $102 million, loss per share of $0.13, and non-GAAP(1) net loss of $79 million, non-GAAP(1) loss per share of $0.10, compared to a net loss of $197 million, loss per share of $0.25 and non-GAAP(1) net loss of $136 million, non-GAAP(1) loss per share of $0.17 in Q3 2015.
- Cash and cash equivalents were $785 million at the end of the quarter, up $30 million from the end of the prior quarter, primarily due to improved operating cash flow.
- Total debt at the end of the quarter was $2.26 billion, flat from the end of the prior quarter.
- Computing and Graphics segment revenue of $470 million, an increase of 11 percent sequentially and a decrease of 29 percent from Q4 2014. The sequential increase was primarily due to higher notebook processor sales, and the year-over-year decrease was primarily driven by lower client processor sales.
o Operating loss was $99 million, compared to an operating loss of $181 million in Q3 2015 and an operating loss of $56 million in Q4 2014. The sequential improvement was driven primarily by higher sales and the absence of a Q3 2015 inventory write-down and the year-over-year decrease was primarily driven by lower sales.
o Client average selling price (ASP) increased sequentially driven by a richer notebook processor product mix and decreased year-over-year due to a lower notebook processor ASP.
o GPU ASP increased sequentially and year-over-year primarily due to a higher AIB channel ASP. - Enterprise, Embedded and Semi-Custom segment revenue of $488 million, a decrease of 23 percent sequentially primarily driven by seasonally lower sales of semi-custom SoCs. Revenue decreased 15 percent from Q4 2014 primarily driven by lower game console royalties, and server and embedded revenue.
- Operating income was $59 million compared with $84 million in Q3 2015 and $109 million in Q4 2014. The sequential decrease was primarily due to seasonally lower sales of semi-custom SoCs. The year-over-year decrease was primarily due to lower game console royalties, and server and embedded sales.
- All Other operating loss was $9 million compared with operating losses of $61 million in Q3 2015 and operating loss of $383 million in Q4 2014. The sequential improvement was primarily due to Q3 2015 restructuring and other special charges and the year-over-year improvement was primarily due to the absence of a goodwill impairment charge, lower restructuring and other special charges, net and a Q4 2014 lower of cost or market inventory adjustment.
- AMD provided a glimpse at its next-generation GPU architecture and delivered innovative new graphics, embedded, and desktop component technologies.
o AMD previewed its revolutionary 14nm FinFET Polaris GPU Architecture, highlighting significant architectural improvements including High Dynamic Range (HDR) monitor support and a 2x performance-per-watt improvement over the prior generation. The GPUs deliver a remarkable generational jump in power efficiency, and are designed for fluid frame rates in graphics, gaming, VR, and multimedia applications on small form-factor thin and light computer designs.
o AMD released its re-architected graphics software suite, Radeon Software Crimson Edition, giving users 12 new or enhanced features, up to 20 percent more graphics performance2, adjustability that can nearly double generational energy efficiency3, and stability across the full spectrum of AMD graphics products.
o AMD introduced the AMD Radeon R9 380X GPU, conceived to play the most detailed and demanding games at 1080p and 1440p. The GPU offers a 256-bit interface and 4GB of high-performance GDDR5 memory and features including compatibility for both AMD FreeSync and AMD LiquidVR technologies plus Virtual Super Resolution.
o AMD announced the new AMD FirePro W4300 graphics card, its highest performing professional graphics card optimized for Computer-Aided Design (CAD) that fits in both small and full-size workstations, offering unprecedented flexibility in its class.
o AMD achieved high-end embedded performance leadership with the introduction of the AMD Embedded R-Series SOC processors designed for digital signage, retail signage, medical imaging, electronic gaming, media storage, and communications and networking.
o AMD announced the AMD FX 6330 CPU for the China market with a new, near-silent stock cooler and offering excellent 6-core performance, control, and reliability for productivity, entertainment, and multi-tasking workloads. - AMD launched its first 64-bit ARM based product -- the AMD Opteron A1100 SoC - designed to accelerate time-to-market deployment of ARM-based systems for the datacenter and improve enterprise-class ecosystem support for 64-bit ARM in key markets. AMD is working with technology partners and customers including Red Hat, Silver Lining Solutions, SoftIron, and SUSE on AMD Opteron A1100 SoC-based hardware and software solutions that provide high-speed network and storage connectivity, energy efficiency, and a balanced total cost of ownership for storage, web, and networking workloads.
- AMD collaborated with industry leaders to bring powerful new embedded, professional graphics, and gaming solutions to market.
o AMD further solidified its No. 1 position in the thin client space with the introduction of the new AMD Embedded R-Series and AMD FirePro-based HP t730, the world's first thin client with native quad UHD/4K support.
o AMD announced several new AMD FirePro professional graphics design wins with Dell, including the new Dell Precision 3510, 7510, and 7710 mobile workstations delivering exceptional graphics performance and GPU compute capability. In particular the Dell Precision 7710 features nearly 3 TFLOPS of single-precision GPU compute power for GPU-accelerated applications and workflows.
o AMD expanded its leadership position in virtual reality (VR), announcing a collaboration with Oculus and Dell to equip Oculus Ready PCs with AMD Radeon GPUs.
o Lenovo introduced the AMD FX CPU and Radeon R9 graphics-based Lenovo Y700, the first notebook validated to support AMD FreeSync technology. - AMD provided developers with new tools designed to simplify software development and more fully harness the capabilities of its GPUs.
o AMD launched the "Boltzmann Initiative", a suite of tools designed to dramatically simplify GPU computing on AMD FirePro Graphics by leveraging Heterogeneous Systems Architecture's (HSA's) ability to harness both CPU and GPU for maximum compute efficiency through software.
o AMD announced the GPUOpen initiative to help address the evolving demands of graphics and unlock game and application development through open source software. The initiative enables game developers to better harness the investments they've made on console development, introduces a new compiler for heterogeneous computing, and demonstrates AMD's renewed commitment to Linux with its Linux Open Source Strategy.
77 Comments on AMD Reports 2015 Fourth Quarter and Annual Results
I never had so much negative opinion towards any tech company, I usually love'm all,
Wait, I think AMD is the only one, they make both powerful CPUs and powerful GPUs, who does it better????
Now I see,
Fck Intel and Nvidia, brain washed me.
The only way they are going to win people back is by getting OEM's on their side.
and soon Nintendo NX
In 1999, VIA acquired most of Cyrix, then a division of National Semiconductor. That same year, VIA acquired Centaur Technology from Integrated Device Technology, marking its entry into the x86 microprocessor market. VIA is the maker of the VIA C3, VIA C7 &VIA Nano processors, and the EPIA platform. The Cyrix MediaGX platform remained with National Semiconductor.
and that
Legal issues[edit]
On the basis of the IDT Centaur acquisition,[10] VIA appears to have come into possession of at least three patents, which cover key aspects of processor technology used by Intel. On the basis of the negotiating leverage these patents offered, in 2003 VIA arrived at an agreement with Intel that allowed for a ten-year patent cross license, enabling VIA to continue to design and manufacture x86 compatible CPUs. VIA was also granted a three-year grace period in which it could continue to use Intel socket infrastructure.
By now, it should not be of news to anyone that Intel bribed the OEMs to take its LGA775 Prescott CPUs even though they were some literal real hot shit. AMD suffered as a result, then Intel followed up with Core from refined Pentium M and began a journey out of the depths of Prescott hell. They were successful.
But what of all the years during which Intel's new darling Core and AMD's AM2+/AM3 remained competitive with each other? "Oh well Intel's devious behaviours in the years prior caused AMD's downfall and AMD was never the same" Oh, I wasn't aware that people bought both early and later Phenoms and Phenom IIs although they sucked donkey nuts and they just wanted to support AMD financially. AM3 was fantastic in price-performance, even though it couldn't keep pace with ridiculously priced crap like LGA1366. It was great even as a stopgap for AMD until they could come up with something better, revolutionary, and a true successor. AMD acknowledged that it was slipping by simply building on K10, so it wanted something new to build on.
What did AMD do?
AMD gave us Bulldozer, in all its CMT glory.
Then we received Piledriver, Bulldozer v2 (in all fairness to AMD, Vishera was a healthy effort in the right direction after the BD catastrophe). Then Steamroller, Bulldozer v3 (giving each core in a Kaveri module more independent logic doesn't solve the BD problem).
Combined with whatever was behind the lack of progress on the GCN side of things pre-Q2 2015, is it any surprise that AMD ends up where it is today? The FX-8150 was king of hype, and yet it came out only to face the SBs from Intel: 2500K/2600K, two of the greatest CPUs that Intel has produced in a very long time.
It's not so much that we cannot wait for Zen as it is that AMD cannot wait for Zen. It (perhaps it even has to be combined with the release of a madly successful Polaris) has the potential to turn AMD around, but the longer it takes, the more amazing it has to be to have a remote chance at success.
Think about what AMD has done in the past 3 years. Yes, BD was a disaster and something new was needed, and to get that new thing to the market you need to devote a good chunk of your resources to it otherwise it may fail.
1. But AMD, after the success of GCN 1.0 and minor/miner success of GCN 1.1, failed to produce responses to Nvidia's offerings and when Fiji finally dropped, when we realized that below the pretty metal shroud and liquid cooling, it was still not enough to match Nvidia's offerings at the ludicrous prices which AMD wanted.
2. Where has Opteron been in all this? Opteron is now, essentially, a relic. When was the last time you heard of the introduction of a new x86 Opteron? AMD was supposedly busy working on the A1100 series "Seattle", which dropped (I think) a few days ago. You're struggling to pick up the ruins of your CPU business and steadily slipping from your success in GPUs, and you want to introduce ARM servers into an area where x86 has brought you all your money in the years prior? Intel's E5s and E7s don't need to be sold in tremendously high volumes because each one costs 100s of firstborns, and that's where Intel makes $$$. That's where AMD used to be competitive and make $$$, until they voluntarily took Bulldozer and Cortex-A57 to the knee.
3. In devoting resources to dig itself out of BD, AMD had BD become a huge steaming pile. Introducing Steamroller to AM3+ CPUs would be extra cost for performance improvements that 1) would suck because the shrink to 28nm killed most of the Piledriver OC and 2) no one would know about except for enthusiasts. FM2+ was too weak. If FX-8350 came to FM2+, boards and CPUs and houses would burn, and it would put AM3+ completely out of business even if it didn't burn.
4. No need to discuss the mobile business. AMD was out. When was the last time you saw a "premium" laptop with AMD handling the CPU side of things? No, stacking a high-end mobile AMD/Nvidia GPU with a Richland/Kaveri quad does not count as "premium", because people don't even understand what the gimmick of Dual Graphics is, much less understand the incredible bottleneck provided by that nice AMD hardware.
5. And no discussion is complete without mentioning how much of a ****up BD really was. AMD couldn't make high-end ITX platforms because the NB + SB design from the Stone Ages takes up too much space, and look what BD did to Opteron. Remember when AMD had no shot at winning over the OEMs because Intel bribed them all 10 years ago? How do you steal them back from greedy Intel? By offering a convincing product, that's how. AMD had absolutely nothing. No OEM wants AM3+ because it can't sell; you can't sell an FX-8350 on its own with respectable graphics because it has no integrated graphics and the whole stupid NB + SB is hard to fit on mATX with that kind of power draw. No OEM wants FM2+ (which has been, in terms of FCH and power improvements, been a step in the right direction for AMD) because stuff like i7 sells; you market it as "four core eight thread" and don't have to worry about graphics either because HD Graphics has you covered, and half of all consumers still think that the CPU is what makes their PC game. No OEM wants AM1 (where is AM1? It's been AWOL for the past little while with no progress, kind of like AM3+ was AWOL for the past 3 years) because it's low-powered, still takes up desktop-level space, and is a small market which Intel requires no extra effort to expand into (because Silvermont was the same damn thing they used in phones and tabs). Like @GhostRyder says, the $$$ doesn't care if enthusiasts love you for the revolutionary new Zen you've dropped. If OEMs can't sell it and make a profit off of it, you can guarantee that it's not going to save you from financial straits or OEM scorn.
We all want to see some real justice for the nasty stuff that Intel did back then, and, for some of us, the shit they still do right now including charging $1000+ for HEDT because no reincarnated version of the X6 1100T is there to provide competition. But is it really necessary to bring back the salt of the Prescott affair every time AMD's current financial woes are brought up? The quagmire they are in right now is not Intel's doing. The demon in the form of BD paid a visit to AMD, and now they're trying to get rid of it; AMD had better do it quick because Zen's chances at success get a little bit dimmer with each passing month.
The AMD PR guy making up that list conveniently forgot that AMD was fined for patent theft. The judgement was three times as much ($58m vs $18m) as that levied against Intel for breach of good faith. It also doesn't mention anything about AMD breaching Intel's copyright (for example the later MMX case), their deliberate false benchmarks with fictitious processors, or their misleading claims about Llano yields currently before the courts.That is a severely blinkered view my friend.
When Intel was paying kick backs to Dell and Toshiba to keep AMD processors out of their products, AMD had Hewlett-Packard (the world's #2 OEM at the time) and couldn't keep them supplied with chips. Rather than outline the whole timeline again, I'll point you towards this post
The facts remains that while AMD have had the shitty end of the stick and Intel became the corporate embodiment of Andy Grove's merciless personality, AMD owes its existence to Intel and acquisition. The company would not have met it's incorporation target of $1.55m had Intel's Robert Noyce not invested in AMD. The company wouldn't have flourished had it not been for the licensing of Intel processors and released of the need to have their own sockets/chipsets/boards, and wouldn't have been able to survive without buying NexGen, DEC's IP, and ATI. This time around, Intel is holding onto its IP and there aren't any ailing companies for AMD to kickstart its project developments. Building from the ground up is a lot more hard work than taking over someone else's nearly completed efforts.Yes until 2018. The original license (which came by way of National Semiconductor when they sold assets including Cyrix - who didn't have an x86 license - to VIA) was extended to 2018 since the accompanying Intel ISA IP licences VIA has also expire at that time.
Despite Intel's shenanigans, AMD's primary reason for being so far in the hole was the vastly overpriced purchase of ATI, on which they still owe money, and the fact that when Intel Core 2 was released, AMD had nothing ready except bluster. Do AMD make good products? Yes, especially on the GPU side. Do they have good management? Not that I've seen, in a very long time.
Despite having decent products, it is however, going to take them a long time to get out of the financial hole that their management, primarily, has put them in. Rest assured, AMD supporters, Intel will not be allowed to be the sole CPU provider, or Nvidia the sole GPU provider. Intel and Nvidia supporters: AMD is not going to go anywhere.
What is tiresome are the armchair executives who shout insults and hatred back and forth as if they could do better whenever it comes to Intel and AMD. If any of them could, or had the answer, they would be working for the respective companies, not here.
Discussion is fine but you know as well as I do that what goes on in these Intel Vs. AMD debates goes beyond discussion.
I am starting to see quite a few entry level SMB products getting the APU PRO lineup. Those also seem extremely popular as of now. Those are undercutting intel in price point very nicely for decent products, typically loaded with more ram/hdd to make up for the weaker processors.
I would expect SMB to move straight to Intel though, because Haswell and Skylake HD Graphics can handle pretty high resolution productivity work with no problems.
AMD is more competitive in the budget desktop market than laptop because Kaveri and Carrizo have so far proven to be a flop when it comes to performance in a tight power envelope. Do they stay nice and cool? Yes. Do they offer the performance that you would expect at 15W? No. Again, competitive until you reach a certain point where discrete GPUs come into play and AMD's APU becomes just another weak CPU that can't pull its weight in IPC and clock. Unfortunately for AMD, the trend over the years is a boundary between iGPU and dGPU laptops that is slowly lowering in price. That's bad news for the APU business, if it stays as weak as it is now.
Do you mean entry level products as in NCIX's SMB builds, Dell's SMB PCs, or custom office builds done by the dozens?
www.google.com/finance?q=AMD
1.80
-0.15 (-7.69%)
Also for what it's worth Intel's stock is practically tied to trends in the Nasdaq where AMD tends to be more volatile.
www.techpowerup.com/forums/threads/nvidia-announces-financial-results-for-third-quarter-fiscal-2015.206963/#post-3190455
Post #7
www.techpowerup.com/forums/threads/nvidia-reports-financial-results-for-fourth-quarter-and-fiscal-year-2010.115553/#post-1770111
Post #7