And a little breakdown.


x.com/EconomyApp/status/1785412626979373104

I'm a masochist. I read financials of corporations that I am interested in. So this is nice to see a visual breakdown for people to see.

Icon CharlieI'm a masochist. I read financials of corporations that I am interested in. So this is nice to see a visual breakdown for people to see.

I try to post those when available. That company does in general do a good job with the breakdowns.

AMD market cap 255B, yet annual revenue is only 22B odd and net income not even 1B...

Batshit crazy stock price.

So, Radeon sales down 48% year on year? Am I reading that right?

Consoles and Radeon sales have gone down the drain

The $2.3B in data center is close to the $3B made by Intel. While its nice that AMD is making almost as much money as Intel on server tech, neither company is anywhere near the over $20B made by Nvidia in this category.

Unfortunately Su while being the CEO who saved AMD, seems to be not the right CEO to make AMD bigger than what it is the last 5 years. And that's probably because she can't understand the retail market. She is the perfect CEO probably for servers, expanding EPYC success, seeing the value of spending 30+ billions for Xilinx, but until now it seems that she is unable to understand GPUs, laptops and desktops. AMD could be making 10 billions per quarter by now, but no matter how match favorable conditions can enjoy at a certain period, it's a 5-6 billions top company. I think even if they had CUDA and H200 hardware in their product portfolio they would still not be able to pass over 6-7 billions. It's like in sports where a coach who saves a team from dissaster, ends up being the wrong person to make that team champions.

john_Unfortunately Su while being the CEO who saved AMD, seems to be not the right CEO to make AMD bigger than what it is the last 5 years. And that's probably because she can't understand the retail market. She is the perfect CEO probably for servers, expanding EPYC success, seeing the value of spending 30+ billions for Xilinx, but until now it seems that she is unable to understand GPUs, laptops and desktops. AMD could be making 10 billions per quarter by now, but no matter how match favorable conditions can enjoy at a certain period, it's a 5-6 billions top company. I think even if they had CUDA and H200 hardware in their product portfolio they would still not be able to pass over 6-7 billions. It's like in sports where a coach who saves a team from dissaster, ends up being the wrong person to make that team champions.

I think its more to do with customer mindset towards the Nvidia and Intel brands. That’s hard to overcome no matter the CEO. Also its way into the console cycle, new GPUs are coming so buyers are holding off and its the slowest quarter of the year.

The silver lining is upcoming APUs. AMD is finally combining real GPU, CPU and memory bandwidth together in a single package. Many have been waiting for this.

DavenI think its more to do with customer mindset towards the Nvidia and Intel brands. That’s hard to overcome no matter the CEO. Also its way into the console cycle, new GPUs are coming so buyers are holding off and its the slowest quarter of the year.

Customer mindset was towards Ryzen after Zen 3 introduction. Intel grabbing the market with Hybrid processors was also AMD's fault. They failed to secure cheap AM5 boards from manufacturers, they failed to see that DDR5 pricing will remain too high for too long, they where wrong to not introduce X3D chips for AM5 sooner, they let Intel push it's CPUs and power consumption to ridiculous levels and never really tried to do a campaign to explain to consumers that a CPU needing 250W and top of the line hardware and cooling to reach benchmarks numbers, is not what the average consumer gets. And their marketing is not doing anything this period to take advantage of the situation with 13900K and 14900K. Look how Nvidia managed to make AMD look bad with their campaign(it was their campaign in my opinion) about AMD blocking DLSS in Starfield. That's how marketing works.
In GPUs they failed to see the importance of RT performance, they thought that raster was enough and RX 7000 series was a disaster. As for APUs, they are too slow improving their iGPUs. They stayed too long with VEGA, they should move forward with RDNA 3.5 and leave behind RDNA2. They should also introduce Infinitive Cache fast for ALL APUs, before Intel has Battlemage ready, because they will lose the APU market also. And if they lose the APU market, the console market will be lost next. In laptops they failed to promote anything over 5000 series. 6000 series APUs where no where to be found for months and even now their market share is flat.

The silver lining is upcoming APUs. AMD is finally combining real GPU, CPU and memory bandwidth together in a single package. Many have been waiting for this.

AMD is doing wonders in hardware these last 5 years and keeps failing in everything else. Look at 8700G for example. The perfect APU at a ridiculous high price. So, if the upcoming APUs are monsters at such prices where someone can simply buy a discrete GPU and a CPU, they will end up as nice products to read about, look at, but never buy.

john_Customer mindset was towards Ryzen after Zen 3 introduction. Intel grabbing the market with Hybrid processors was also AMD's fault. They failed to secure cheap AM5 boards from manufacturers, they failed to see that DDR5 pricing will remain too high for too long, they where wrong to not introduce X3D chips for AM5 sooner, they let Intel push it's CPUs and power consumption to ridiculous levels and never really tried to do a campaign to explain to consumers that a CPU needing 250W and top of the line hardware and cooling to reach benchmarks numbers, is not what the average consumer gets. And their marketing is not doing anything this period to take advantage of the situation with 13900K and 14900K. Look how Nvidia managed to make AMD look bad with their campaign(it was their campaign in my opinion) about AMD blocking DLSS in Starfield. That's how marketing works.
In GPUs they failed to see the importance of RT performance, they thought that raster was enough and RX 7000 series was a disaster. As for APUs, they are too slow improving their iGPUs. They stayed too long with VEGA, they should move forward with RDNA 3.5 and leave behind RDNA2. They should also introduce Infinitive Cache fast for ALL APUs, before Intel has Battlemage ready, because they will lose the APU market also. And if they lose the APU market, the console market will be lost next. In laptops they failed to promote anything over 5000 series. 6000 series APUs where no where to be found for months and even now their market share is flat.

AMD is doing wonders in hardware these last 5 years and keeps failing in everything else. Look at 8700G for example. The perfect APU at a ridiculous high price. So, if the upcoming APUs are monsters at such prices where someone can simply buy a discrete GPU and a CPU, they will end up as nice products to read about, look at, but never buy.

For arguments sake, even if AMD made none of the above moves, the average tech consumer, prosumer and corporate IT buyer would still buy Intel and Nvidia inside. Its very frustrating for all of us but AMD is up against some powerful market forces.

That’s why AMD is metaphorically skirting the edges to find weak spots against these powerful forces. The Xilinx acquisition, APUs and Zen #c chips are a big part of this strategy. Time will tell if it works.

DavenI think its more to do with customer mindset towards the Nvidia and Intel brands. That’s hard to overcome no matter the CEO. Also its way into the console cycle, new GPUs are coming so buyers are holding off and its the slowest quarter of the year.

The silver lining is upcoming APUs. AMD is finally combining real GPU, CPU and memory bandwidth together in a single package. Many have been waiting for this.

This is a complex problem. Because I'm 100% sure that if AMD launches a product with more performance and a lower price, Nvidia will simply match the price and people out of "mindshare" will buy Nvidia, and it will continue to sell multiple times more. While AMD will burn capital giving discounts, profitability will go down.

This game is getting more expensive with each generation, I'd say impossible to maintain, excluding consoles, AMD effectively relies on pulling out a Multi-GCD solution to gain a competitive advantage and have a single chip to scale to all price segments and dominate them.

The company should also seek efficiency by reviewing operating costs, improving marketing strategies, among other things.

Can anyone say what "incident" caused this 60 million loss?

DenverCan anyone say what "incident" caused this 60 million loss?

Maybe the earthquake in Taiwan?

There could have also been a large shipment of chips on the boat that hit the bridge in Baltimore.

john_Customer mindset was towards Ryzen after Zen 3 introduction. Intel grabbing the market with Hybrid processors was also AMD's fault. They failed to secure cheap AM5 boards from manufacturers, they failed to see that DDR5 pricing will remain too high for too long, they where wrong to not introduce X3D chips for AM5 sooner, they let Intel push it's CPUs and power consumption to ridiculous levels and never really tried to do a campaign to explain to consumers that a CPU needing 250W and top of the line hardware and cooling to reach benchmarks numbers, is not what the average consumer gets. And their marketing is not doing anything this period to take advantage of the situation with 13900K and 14900K. Look how Nvidia managed to make AMD look bad with their campaign(it was their campaign in my opinion) about AMD blocking DLSS in Starfield. That's how marketing works.
In GPUs they failed to see the importance of RT performance, they thought that raster was enough and RX 7000 series was a disaster. As for APUs, they are too slow improving their iGPUs. They stayed too long with VEGA, they should move forward with RDNA 3.5 and leave behind RDNA2. They should also introduce Infinitive Cache fast for ALL APUs, before Intel has Battlemage ready, because they will lose the APU market also. And if they lose the APU market, the console market will be lost next. In laptops they failed to promote anything over 5000 series. 6000 series APUs where no where to be found for months and even now their market share is flat.

AMD is doing wonders in hardware these last 5 years and keeps failing in everything else. Look at 8700G for example. The perfect APU at a ridiculous high price. So, if the upcoming APUs are monsters at such prices where someone can simply buy a discrete GPU and a CPU, they will end up as nice products to read about, look at, but never buy.

Exactly. One can't beat the market, with great products alone, without the production capabilities and not investing in the securing the entire platform and ecosystem with solid QA control, and with dumb marketing. What I loathe in AMD's later strategy, is that they tease with some very cool stuff, but it cannot be obtained, due to being out of stock, and has MSRP price tag bigger than intel's/Nvidia premium products. I don't mention, the atrocious motherboard situation, that hasn't been adressed since Zen4 launch.
As for the APUs, it seems the laptop counterparts are yet much cheaper. If the entire barebone mini-PC box, with embedded CPU, motherboard, cooling goes for $519.00, I don't see, how the same CPU selling for $330 is a good value.

And the miserable income feels like AMD went all in with Enterprise, while abandoning everything else, and it yet to bring any profit. In my laymans opinion, they've cut the ropes, that could hold them afloat quite abruptly. Of course they invest only in the branch that is bringing them most profits. That's good for finacial company. But for the company that used to supply the consumer market, this looks like the abandoning. And personally brings uncertainty in the future of all AMD's consumer products.
I know, there will be Ze5 soon-ish. It may end up great, and maybe they will fix the horrible artificial MB chipset and class segmentation. But seeing such slides, after rumours of abandoning dGPU (hi-end or not) market for entire generation, doesn't bring confidence.

DenverThis is a complex problem. Because I'm 100% sure that if AMD launches a product with more performance and a lower price, Nvidia will simply match the price and people out of "mindshare" will buy Nvidia, and it will continue to sell multiple times more. While AMD will burn capital giving discounts, profitability will go down.

That's complete truth and an obvious axiom. People will go, and buy whatever they've been told to buy, by pouring the BS into their ears. That's why the GPP existed/ing for in the first place.
However, AMD should have learned their number of their loyal base, and supply them with better products with the according amount. Instead, they sell their products, where the Nvidia is dominant, and the areas, which would prefer AMD, and would definitely buy, their products are non existent.

DenverThe company should also seek efficiency by reviewing operating costs, improving marketing strategies, among other things.

Their Marketing is absolutely impotend and useless. I guess, AMD should just fire the entire marketing department for good, and nothing bad will happen. I think it's a good start for increasing "efficiency by reviewing operating costs".

AMD also better to keep their partners in check, because they seems completely got out of touch.

I wonder how much of the Radeon sales have decreased with all the stuff flying around about the PS5 Pro etc. So sony not ordering any more of current SKUs while winding down existing stocks etc.
On the GPU side, I am not surprised. There hasnt been a shift in the value propositions of either sides offerings which will hurt AMD more than nVidia purely due to mindshare.

Nice to see Server doing really well!!! Hopefully they can keep that up now going forward reliably while slowly growing consumer and embedded segments in the next few quarters.

Surprised that they are saying the 8000 cpus have been such a success. That must mean there are a lot of design wins for AMD coming through the pipelines from SIs like Dell and HP for their prebuilts.

DenverBecause I'm 100% sure that if AMD launches a product with more performance and a lower price, Nvidia will simply match the price and people out of "mindshare" will buy Nvidia, and it will continue to sell multiple times more. While AMD will burn capital giving discounts, profitability will go down.

That's why AMD can't price it's GPUs much lower than Nvidia. People complaining about AMD pricing it's offerings too close to Nvidia's will rush to buy Nvidia anyway. They only complain because AMD following Nvidia's pricing, means Nvidia products will not become cheaper. That's why they complain.

That being said, they really dropped the ball with RX 7000. When RX 7000 came out, I was screaming seeing no real performance gains in RT performance. People where even calling me Nvidia shill. A few years passed and I think everyone can see today that RT performance is crucial. Nvidia is using titles like CP2077 and Alan Wake as technology demos that not only show it's hardware RT performance, but they are also used to paint a very bad picture for AMD's hardware, making it look like old tech. I would expect from AMD, that probably has many employees from ATI, who are in business for over 20 years to know that even things that look non important, can kill the reputation of a company over night. 3DFX started losing the game when graphics switch from 16bit color to 32bit color. That unimportant detail was enough for me and others 20+ years ago to only look at Nvidia and even ATi graphics cards. In all our naiveness and inexperience, losing too much performance when switching to 32bit color, was way too important. And looking at those graphs from Anandtech 24 years ago, the situation today looks extremely similar where AMD is behind Nvidia in raster, but worst, it's getting butchered when RT is enabled.

john_That's why AMD can't price it's GPUs much lower than Nvidia. People complaining about AMD pricing it's offerings too close to Nvidia's will rush to buy Nvidia anyway. They only complain because AMD following Nvidia's pricing, means Nvidia products will not become cheaper. That's why they complain.

That being said, they really dropped the ball with RX 7000. When RX 7000 came out, I was screaming seeing no real performance gains in RT performance. People where even calling me Nvidia shill. A few years passed and I think everyone can see today that RT performance is crucial. Nvidia is using titles like CP2077 and Alan Wake as technology demos that not only show it's hardware RT performance, but they are also used to paint a very bad picture for AMD's hardware, making it look like old tech. I would expect from AMD, that probably has many employees from ATI, who are in business for over 20 years to know that even things that look non important, can kill the reputation of a company over night. 3DFX started losing the game when graphics switch from 16bit color to 32bit color. That unimportant detail was enough for me and others 20+ years ago to only look at Nvidia and even ATi graphics cards. In all our naiveness and inexperience, losing too much performance when switching to 32bit color, was way too important. And looking at those graphs from Anandtech 24 years ago, the situation today looks extremely similar where AMD is behind Nvidia in raster, but worst, it's getting butchered when RT is enabled.

It's funny, because I see it as the complete opposite, time has passed and there are only two games that stand out with RT activated, and in both of them even the 4090 suffers to get 4k @ 60fps with RT on. Of course, the extra gimmicks of fake frames and upscaling help to make up the situation.

But it's always been clear to me that RT in games isn't viable, simply because the evolution curve we're on in terms of manufacturing processes doesn't offer anything close to what's needed to make it viable for the masses. What the hell is a iGPU or low-end GPU doing wasting die space to run RT? It's insane if you think about it.

The company that is going to win the biggest slice of the hardware pie will be the company that is first to get the patent on a new material or combination of materials to replace silicon. Every once in a while something pops up in mainstream tech news on this front. I recall an article years ago on ArsTechnica about possibly carbon nanotubes as a solution that held the promise of making transistors up to 5 times faster and possibly using much less power at the same time. I believe there has to be very smart scientists and engineers working quietly on discovering a replacement for silicon year after year.

imo something is going to have to come after silicon to bring an incredible leap in performance without a corresponding leap in production cost for fully implemented RTRT to go mainstream and by that I mean midrange GPUs at prices that will be affordable to the vast majority of gamers.

DenverNvidia will simply match the price and people out of "mindshare" will buy Nvidia

They wont, AMD's product history is already full of faster and cheaper GPUs and Nvidia still didn't match their pricing.

DenverIt's funny, because I see it as the complete opposite, time has passed and there are only two games that stand out with RT activated, and in both of them even the 4090 suffers to get 4k @ 60fps with RT on. Of course, the extra gimmicks of fake frames and upscaling help to make up the situation.

But it's always been clear to me that RT in games isn't viable, simply because the evolution curve we're on in terms of manufacturing processes doesn't offer anything close to what's needed to make it viable for the masses. What the hell is a low-end iGPU or GPU doing wasting die space to run RT? It's insane if you think about it.

Marketing drives consumers and those two games are enough to direct consumers to Nvidia options. 2 games today, 20 games tomorrow. That's how someone thinks. People don't buy GPUs to play current and older games. They buy GPUs to play current, older and future games. Nvidia drives the narrative with the help of the tech press and tech press will try to paint a picture where RT performance is as important as raster. As for upscaling and fake frames? I am expecting Tim from Hardware Unboxed to be hired by Nvidia in the next 5 years. He is trying so much to make DLSS look like a god send technology and FSR as utterly crap, it will be pity if Nvidia doesn't hire him. Another example where the press drives consumers to Nvidia products.
The average consumer wouldn't philosophize enough on whether RT is viable or not. They will go and buy Nvidia because "it is better in RT performance and comes with DLSS". People buy RTX 3050 to enjoy RT and DLSS.

Vya DomusThey wont, AMD's product history is already full of faster and cheaper GPUs and Nvidia still didn't match their pricing.

They will drop the price where it will look "not much more expensive" than AMD's product, or come up with new products at the same old prices, but somewhat better performance. We seen this with the Super versions.

I really like the donut chart with proceeding visuals for their revenue... Wonder what program they're using to make that... I'm sure I could do something similar in Tableau with a slightly less gradient of colors....

john_They will drop the price where it will look "not much more expensive" than AMD's product

This simply cannot work for them, it's not their business model. We know from what AIBs been have saying over the years that Nvidia forces them to operate on very low margins despite the high MSRPs, if it ever gets to the point where Nvidia will price their products to a similar level that will mean AIBs will make literally no money, not sustainable.

Vya DomusThis simply cannot work for them, it's not their business model. We know from what AIBs been have saying over the years that Nvidia forces them to operate on very low margins despite the high MSRPs, if it ever gets to the point where Nvidia will price their products to a similar level that will mean AIBs will make literally no money, not sustainable.

Nvidia works with very high margins themselves. Even if they are forcing their AIBs to work at very low profit, they probably do discounts when needed to help their AIBs. Their business model is overcharging their customers, not killing their AIBs.

john_they probably do discounts when needed to help their AIBs. Their business model is overcharging their customers, not killing their AIBs.

I sincerely doubt it, everything points to Nvidia being an absolute nightmare to work with. From the more recent events like the EVGA situation and the GPP thing to stuff that goes back years and years, like the PS3/2006-2008 era of their chips dying in droves, they never took responsibility for that, blamed everyone but themselves. People may have forgotten these things but Nvidia has a long standing history of screwing companies over that they work with.

mamaSo, Radeon sales down 48% year on year? Am I reading that right?

Yep. Partly to do with mindshare, and partly has to do with Nvidia upscaling & RT being superior. AMD needs to improve both to be near-parity to Nvidia for many people to consider AMD GPU products. Right now AMD products have pathetic raytracing performance, around 2 tiers below their Nvidia counterparts, and more importantly, FSR is the worst upscaling of all the current upscaling techniques. That means that even if AMD GPU's have more value in pure rasterization, lower-tier Nvidia users can fall back on DLSS to achieve the performance that AMD cards have, while also performing the same or better in the occasional raytracing title.

Even for someone like myself that prefers AMD because of their support for open standards(FSR, Freesync/Adaptive sync), next year I may be looking at a Nvidia card to upgrade my 6800XT unless AMD improves FSR and significantly improves their Raytracing performance.