btarunrMake me its medical officer instead :D

Done. Our BOD meetings would be great.

If it [AMD's]was excellent, we wouldn't have seen a decline in its market share.

Not necessarily true. There are other forces at play here, especially advertising. When is the last time you saw a "AMD Inside" sticker on a system. AMD needs to start doing better on that front.

Well all this while both Intel and AMD have stayed on merely being product-specific and not solution-specific (by solution I mean stuff like the hypothetical Samsung PC you were talking about)

I respectfully disagree. AMD has been trying to push more of a solution specific initiative than Intel. AMD has been touting their Spider platform as a more complete solution. I am not commenting on the Spider platform's quality or performance, I am just saying they are trying to show their commitment to a complete solution.

AMD's job is to make good, top quality product and leave it for the people to derive solutions out of it.

This is only partially true. Companies are only interested in one thing. Increasing the bottom line. This may be through innovated use of their existing system, or implimenting new ones, but the end goal is always the same. It is the job of the producers of the hardware to show that their product can be adapted in many manners by showing off new innovation, even if basic, to their core partners. Companies have thier hands full with trying to be competitive, but with a little nudge they will consider change. It is the nudge that AMD needs to focus on. AMD must have something to bring to the table to interest the people who are speding the money.

As an IT manager, if AMD/Samsung could plop a complete destop replacement in the form of a touch screen monitor in front of me that was low cost, I would be all ears. The potential for lower TCO would be dramatic.

If people wanted such a solution, Apple Mac would be way over the PC irrespective of price.

No, price is a huge factor, especially in bugetted IT departments.

Even if Samsung comes up with such a product, will it be priced lower than a Mac?

Just about everything is cheaper that a Mac, isn't it? :D Just kidding.

Talking about touch-screens, VRS, etc., you're basically hinting at innovation, IBM has plenty besides what's the point in a magical Samsung PC with a slow AMD processor? Samsung would much rather use Intel and make its product look better to the consumer "Hey we've got Intel inside too!"

That is were functiionlity trumps speed. I don't care if Intel is faster (because I am using it for business and it is not so critical) if AMD gives me more options for greater productive innovation.

Remeber, we are all looking at AMD from a performace standpoint (and we should because we are speed freaks), but from a business standpoint if AMD could give me a system that reduced my TCO, reduced the overall administration of my networks, and had great reliability, I would jump on it. The heavy adoption of businesses would fatten the pocketbook of AMD so that they could also cater to the high-end market through increased R&D thus bringing everything full circle.

KreijDone. Our BOD meetings would be great.

Doctors don't form part of BOD's, I'm a lesser mortal. You'll have to come to my clinic instead:D

KreijNot necessarily true. There are other forces at play here, especially advertising. When is the last time you saw a "AMD Inside" sticker on a system. AMD needs to start doing better on that front.

They don't because when Intel markets their processors as the 'best', they mean it and everyone would want to see an Intel sticker, be it Celeron or Core 2 Extreme, it does have a psychological impact on the buyer because with lack of leadership AMD puts the first-time buyer into a cloud of doubt on whether he should choose AMD in the first place. Performance leadership, technology leadership instils confidence in the buyer: "Hey I'm buying a Sempron and it comes from the people who make industry-leading products".

KreijI respectfully disagree. AMD has been trying to push more of a solution specific initiative than Intel. AMD has been touting their Spider platform as a more complete solution. I am not commenting on the Spider platform's quality or performance, I am just saying they are trying to show their commitment to a complete solution.

Spider is more of a marketing gimmick than solution. If AMD had the integrity and self-confidence to push this forward we would have already had them in the market, and AMD wouldn't have authorised the use of Crossfire X by Intel (and giving away a valuable USP that would draw people to buying the Spider (CPU + Board + video-cards ).



wish i could talk more, but its 12:46 AM here. thanks for the discussion.

btarunrDoctors don't form part of BOD's, I'm a lesser mortal. You'll have to come to my clinic instead:D

Many doctors are on BODs here in the US. That being said, if I am ever in Inda and need a doctor I will be looking you up. ;)

They don't because when Intel markets their processors as the 'best', they mean it and everyone would want to see an Intel sticker, be it Celeron or Core 2 Extreme, it does have a psychological impact on the buyer because with lack of leadership AMD puts the first-time buyer into a cloud of doubt on whether he should choose AMD in the first place. Performance leadership, technology leadership instils confidence in the buyer: "Hey I'm buying a Sempron and it comes from the people who make industry-leading products".

This is exactly what I mean when I say that AMD needs to advertise better. There are real differences in the the designs and AMD needs to promote the advantages. When people see an Intel advertisement do they really know what makes Intel better? No. It's no different than commercial advertising that goes on between the automobile manufacturers,. AMD has got to get more serious about advertising their products.

Spider is more of a marketing gimmick than solution. If AMD had the integrity and self-confidence to push this forward we would have already had them in the market, and AMD wouldn't have authorised the use of Crossfire X by Intel (and giving away a valuable USP that would draw people to buying the Spider (CPU + Board + video-cards ).

This is a very tentative tactic that AMD is trying to do. They have their own solution, but they also know that it is in their best interest to work with Intel. They want their GPU division to grow on any platform and at the same time promote thier own as the prefered.
I am sure there is much hand-wringing at the AMD meetings.

wish i could talk more, but its 12:46 AM here. thanks for the discussion.

Sweet dreams, back to discussing things tommorrow.

erockerI would love to see AMD/IBM make a chip that brings Core 2 to it's knees, and then Intel counter with something else

and intel releases its nuke on amd with there Nehalem processors on 45nm/22nm
and then Sandybridge on 22nm and smaler :)

Nehalem can't be a nuke. Think Radeon HD 3000 series. They weren't performance champs but they certainly 'nuked' NVIDIA's sales.

The problem with AMD is they are trying to merge with everything they possibly can. The C2D shook them bad enough to make them loose creativity. All they have is "We have a true quad core and we can disable how many ever cores we want" factor.
and even if AMD does make a faster processor than intel people here are more intrested in "brand" and would go for Intel just cause its the fastest.

The moment AMD came up with the Athlon 64 FX, and that it performed way better than the Pentium 4, people started flocking to the AMD camp, more so after NVidia came up with SLI for its NForce 4 which stayed "AMD only" before NVIDIA came up with an Intel edition of the same.

but I read sli wasn't such a big hit on Intel motherboards as it was on AMD i.e it was more compatible with AMD socket.
One thing though as far as IGP is concerned AMD motherboards have the upper hand(not only due to hybrid crossfire but due to many more features at lower prices)