• 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
What's happening at BTR 4 .. and report issues here
#61
Focused on making money is a huge incentive in today's business climate. Never count that out. Intel **needs** to keep selling CPUs and giving their customers a reason to upgrade.

I don't think that Zen will matter even if it is very successful. And if it is, it will only motivate Intel to compete on price. They know their customers and they know they have a solid CPU architecture and a good future roadmap. Competition only does so much. When AMD was ahead in performance with Athlon, it didn't suddenly force Intel to "try harder". The competition made Intel cut pricing and rethink their strategy with their Pentiums and their IPC. It was AMD that rested on their laurels and let the lead slip away.
#62
I don't think AMD rested on their laurels. They made a mistake. They made Bulldozer too parallel and they let their marketing people dictate one of the worst engineering decisions I have ever seen made on a piece of modern hardware. Intel came roaring back with the Core architecture so AMD didn't have much time at all to sit around making money. And they surely knew that Intel was going to come up with something. It's always been like David and Goliath with those two. AMD/ATi vs nVidia has always been more of a fair fight but now nVidia is starting to pull away. We will see what happens. I don't expect much from Zen personally. Most of AMD's talented engineers have left the company and they don't have the R&D budget to do much. I will say they have had a lot of time to work on it but we will see. That could also mean that it's badly delayed and that it was intended to come out several years ago. Bulldozer was badly delayed and we all know what happened there.
#63
I am talking long before BD, AMD rested on their laurels with Athlon. They even held back a process change to milk their customers of money. Phenom was a mess. Phenom II was not competitive except at the very beginning, and then it was eclipsed.

AMD's management stinks and has stunk for about ten years. They have made one stupid decision after another crippled by a brain-dead marketing system. They have worked very hard to get where they are today; it was not luck nor engineering talent that sunk them. Stupid top managers and a greedy BoD with no vision.
Cry
#64
The way it looks to me is that AMD gave their CPU marketing decision the authority to essentially make engineering decisions about the CPU. If you look at the way they advertise Bulldozer as an 8 core CPU it's very misleading. There are only 4 floating point units. So while there are 8 integer units they are held back by the lack of FPUs. So it's not a true octa core CPU. Clearly they wanted to be able to market the fact that their CPUs had 8 cores for less money than Intel's quad cores. We all know the result of that decision. I don't blame their engineers at all. Management should never have given the marketing people such power and the marketing people shouldn't have been so stupid. Who can expect a marketing person to design a CPU though. That would be like hiring your hairdresser to be your dentist. Yet AMD's management clearly did this. It's really mind blowing, isn't it? And that is just the tip of the iceberg with AMD's marketing department.
#65
I think it would have been very different with Jensen as AMD's CEO - with real decision making powers - if they had merged with Nvidia instead of AMD
:(
#66
Probably. There's nothing that can be done about that now though. Hindsight is always perfect. As it stands right now, buying ATi was the best thing AMD ever did. Without the graphics division AMD would have gone completely broke a long time ago.
#67
(01-31-2016, 01:07 AM)SickBeast Wrote: Probably.  There's nothing that can be done about that now though.  Hindsight is always perfect.  As it stands right now, buying ATi was the best thing AMD ever did.  Without the graphics division AMD would have gone completely broke a long time ago.
I don't know about that. If AMD didn't acquire ATi they could have perhaps made a much better CPU, and they could have licensed graphics tech from Nvidia or ATi.

What sunk AMD was their ridiculous agreement with GloFo. They should have just dumped their foundry - shut them down and fired everyone. This part isn't hindsight. That agreement was seen as stupid back then by many of us at the time.
#68
Doesn't Intel require AMD to keep the foundry as part of the x86 licensing agreement?
#69
No. First time that I heard of that excuse. And AMD certainly didn't keep their foundry - they spun it off but committed themselves to it financially in a stupid blunder that probably benefited some of their top officers in the short term but destroyed them in the long term.
#70
I was under the impression that if AMD does not fabricate their own CPUs that the x86 license becomes invalid.

So as it turns out they are allowed to go fabless because of a settlement in 2009:

http://www.anandtech.com/show/2873

I knew there was something about this. That solves it then. AMD bought ATi in 2006 so they couldn't get rid of their foundries quite yet. There must be a reason why they are keeping it today. Perhaps you are right and they should get rid of it.


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 5 Guest(s)