[Tricks]

saturn_656 wrote:

AMD needs to gut its management team. It's quite unbelievable how they have screwed things up with their desktop CPU line. Bulldozer (the CPU and its launch) were so bloody amateur I still can't believe, months afterward, that an established company like AMD fucked up so badly.

Exactly. Bulldozer ruined them for the desktop market, right on the tails of Intel's amazing Sandy Bridge. The only things I'm seeing with bulldozer are low end 3-400 dollar laptops. And they're shit.

[sandorski]

OY vey, even Intel screws up. To think AMD won't screw up once in awhile given they have a fraction the R&D budget as Intel is silly. AMDs' Bobcat and Llano cpu lines are really quite excellent in the Laptop Market and Llanos' Integrated GPU really makes it a great OEM Desktop PC.

Bulldozer certainly is a problem for AMD. A large part of that problem comes down to Manufacturing though and not necessarily the design itself. Global Foundries and TSMC are struggling with 32 and 28 nm Manufacturing and that translates for AMD into low Yields(something that plagues all AMD Products as well as Nvidia's Products) and lower than desired Clock Speeds. Once GF/TSMC get their acts together, AMD will be much more competitive. Until then though, they need to focus on the areas they are currently most competitive in.

[saturn_656]

sandorski wrote:

OY vey, even Intel screws up. To think AMD won't screw up once in awhile given they have a fraction the R&D budget as Intel is silly. AMDs' Bobcat and Llano cpu lines are really quite excellent in the Laptop Market and Llanos' Integrated GPU really makes it a great OEM Desktop PC.

People who really care about the chips in their PC, typically don't buy from OEM's. The bulk who do buy OEM likely don't even know who Intel and AMD are, much less what they produce.

Quote:

Bulldozer certainly is a problem for AMD. A large part of that problem comes down to Manufacturing though and not necessarily the design itself. Global Foundries and TSMC are struggling with 32 and 28 nm Manufacturing and that translates for AMD into low Yields(something that plagues all AMD Products as well as Nvidia's Products) and lower than desired Clock Speeds. Once GF/TSMC get their acts together, AMD will be much more competitive. Until then though, they need to focus on the areas they are currently most competitive in.

Bulldozer is AMD's "Pentium 4".

Poor yields are a problem, but the design itself fails to perform. The top end bulldozer only trades blows with AMD's last flagship X6 1100T (countless benchmarks show this to be true), never mind compete with Sandy Bridge. AMD would have been better off shrinking/refining the Thuban die (add two cores?). Likely would have cost less R&D dollars and they would have had a better performing chip.

Ivy Bridge is due to be released soon, and AMD can't even hack out a competitor to Sandy Bridge.

Epic Fail.

[sandorski]

saturn_656 wrote:

sandorski wrote:

OY vey, even Intel screws up. To think AMD won't screw up once in awhile given they have a fraction the R&D budget as Intel is silly. AMDs' Bobcat and Llano cpu lines are really quite excellent in the Laptop Market and Llanos' Integrated GPU really makes it a great OEM Desktop PC.

People who really care about the chips in their PC, typically don't buy from OEM's. The bulk who do buy OEM likely don't even know who Intel and AMD are, much less what they produce.

Quote:

Bulldozer certainly is a problem for AMD. A large part of that problem comes down to Manufacturing though and not necessarily the design itself. Global Foundries and TSMC are struggling with 32 and 28 nm Manufacturing and that translates for AMD into low Yields(something that plagues all AMD Products as well as Nvidia's Products) and lower than desired Clock Speeds. Once GF/TSMC get their acts together, AMD will be much more competitive. Until then though, they need to focus on the areas they are currently most competitive in.

Bulldozer is AMD's "Pentium 4".

Poor yields are a problem, but the design itself fails to perform. The top end bulldozer only trades blows with AMD's last flagship X6 1100T (countless benchmarks show this to be true), never mind compete with Sandy Bridge. AMD would have been better off shrinking/refining the Thuban die (add two cores?). Likely would have cost less R&D dollars and they would have had a better performing chip.

Ivy Bridge is due to be released soon, and AMD can't even hack out a competitor to Sandy Bridge.

Epic Fail.

You're correct, the typical OEM Customer doesn't care. However, Llano is going to do very well in the OEM Desktop market. That's all that matters from a Business perspective.

BD is similar to P4 in the sense that higher Clock speeds are very important. That's one way that the Manufacturing problems are holding it back right now. Newer revisions will improve BD both Performance wise, but as important, power consumption wise.

AMD is not leaving the Desktop market, they'll simply not be the Enthusiast part for awhile.