There is more discouraging news out of AMD as another 5% of their workforce, around 10,000 employees, will be let go by the end of 2016. That move will hurt their bottom line before the end of this year, $42 million in severance, benefit payouts and other costs associated with restructuring but should save around $60-70 million in costs by the end of next year. This is on top of the 8% cut to their workforce which occurred earlier this year and shows just how deep AMD needs to cut to stay alive, unfortunately reducing costs is not as effective as raising revenue. Before you laugh, point fingers or otherwise disparage AMD; consider for a moment a world in which Intel has absolutely no competition selling high powered desktop and laptop parts. Do you really think the already slow product refreshes will speed up or prices remain the same?
Consider the case of AT&T, who have claimed numerous times that they provide the best broadband service to their customers that they are capable of and at the lowest price they can sustain. It seems that if you live in a city which has been blessed with Google Fibre somehow AT&T is able to afford to charge $40/month less than in a city which only has the supposed competition of Comcast or Time Warner Cable. Interesting how the presence of Google in a market has an effect that the other two supposed competitors do not.
There is of course another way to deal with the competition and both Amazon and Apple have that one down pat. Apple removed the iFixit app that showed you the insides of your phone and had the temerity to actually show you possible ways to fix hardware issues. Today Amazon have started to kick both Apple TV and Chromecast devices off of their online store. As of today no new items can be added to the virtual inventory and as of the 29th of this month anything not sold will disappear. Apparently not enough people are choosing Amazon's Prime Video streaming and so instead of making the service compatible with Apple or Google's products, Amazon has opted to attempt to prevent, or at least hinder, the sale of those products.
The topics of competition, liquidity and other market forces are far too complex to be dealt with in a short post such as this but it is worth asking yourself; do you as a customer feel like competition is still working in your favour?
"AMD has unveiled a belt-tightening plan that the struggling chipmaker hopes will get its finances back on track to profitability."
Here is some more Tech News from around the web:
- Microsoft brings LinkedIn to Cortana, and Likes and mentions to Outlook @ The Inquirer
- Microsoft previews less buggy OneDrive for Business client @ The Register
- Toshiba CEO: Yeah, we MAY need to chop some heads @ The Register
- UK scientists create quantum cryptology world record with 'unhackable' data @ The Inquirer
Couldn’t agree more. There
Couldn’t agree more. There are some people that are laughing in the face of AMD’s woes, probably because they are unhappy they aren’t doing more to compete with Intel. The fact is though cpu’s were at there very best when AMD was providing serious competition to Intel.
Look at the last few years and what Intel has been coming out with for desktop cpu’s. Boring and minimal updates to their cpu line have become the norm, while prices remain higher for longer on older chips.
At the very least, up until the last year or so, AMD was providing much needed competition for Nvidia. In that time, we saw great things happen at both companies, and consumers benefited. Now though AMD has stumbled in the gpu business as well and we’ll see Nvidia rest on it’s laurels because of it.
Ever read Atlas Shrugged?
Ever read Atlas Shrugged?
We also have some data that
We also have some data that AMD was ready to sell 25% of the company about 300 millions.
But AMD loses about 100 to 300 millions a quarter. So selling 25% of the company would only cover about 6 month of losses.
Its sad that AMD pays their VPs extravagant salaries and insane bonuses (in the multi millions) because AMD is afraid to lose them,
yet they slash worker position and reduce AMD products to make this happen.
Last time I checked, AMD VP’s / CEO are paid well over all Intel or nvidia equivalent.
And on top, AMD lavish bonus for VPs happen even if the company performance and strategy are total failures.
For example L. Sue got 11 millions just in 2014 compensation, one of AMD worse year in performance and the stock dropped to a 30 year low.. yes AMD stock never been this low since the company creation.
It was supposed to be way more but share holder had a law suit as the amount of money awarded was actually beyond what was legally authorized.
I’m not sure, but I think the bonus/salary alone of the top 5 officer at AMD way surpass the money that will be saved in this latest round of layoff.
The sad thing is Microsoft probably was ready to acquire AMD to start an fully owned xbox HW team VS outsource the design. (and dump the x86 division)… but that would mean an acquisition, and all the worthless senior managers/vp would be fired.
And since the senior/vp hold relatively very little stock, its in AMD management interest to squeeze all the last millions in bonus and salary out of AMD VS accepting ANY buyout offers.
Another round of debt or dilution is in AMD management best interest as it would allow surviving another yer to collect lavish salaries and bonuses.
And them follow by more layoff, more debt, and maybe do another year before opening the parachute and collect a 10 to 30 million golden parachute. I think L. Sue is above 20 million.
Intel own the fabs, so they are almost invincible.
If they sell chips at about 35% margin (what TSM / samsung fabs gets) ZERO competitor can touch them.
Because that competitor like qualcomm , nvidia, etc.. would need to lose money to sell a chip.
nvidia pay TSM $40 for the chip.. well Intel is selling the ‘same’ chip for $40 at MSRP.
AMD to this date was here just to pick up Intel leftover low margin x86 market. The part of the market that Intel would need to create a new fab to full fill low margin chips demand… AMD was an Intel pion, doing the hard work in more then one way (many agency will not accept single vendor HW).
That ended when the PC market got squeezed and Intel had so much excess capacity.
AMD was not needed anymore and was actually a problem.
And this Intel problem was solved within 6 month.
AMD can never come back to the PC/server x86 market, even with zen. Not until Intel allow them to. (when intel fab capacity is to low for the world demand… guess when this will happen)
Best hope for AMD is to join the small Microsoft HW division.
Apple is zooming past Microsoft in custom HW. 10 years from now Apple will be a juggernaut, and if Microsoft doesn’t lock in some security they will locked in a very dependent relationship with Intel. MS will need to use what Intel give them.
Intel is paying OEMs to use
Intel is paying OEMs to use some of their CPUs/SOCs, and AMD’s Carrizo SKUs have better graphics than any of Intel’s core i3 series SKUs. In fact Intel rarely offers its best graphics on anything but it’s highest cost SKUs, so AMD’s better graphics can be had at a much lower price point. Competition is difficult with Intel using monopolistic sales tactics. That R7 latest GCN graphics on AMD’s Carrizo FX8800p can also be used for asynchronous compute acceleration with the ACE units on the GPU able to task switch acceleration workloads and keep the GPU more efficiently loaded with graphics and GPGPU workloads. With current and future application ecosystem able to take advantage of AMD’s GPU asynchronous compute there is more that can be done on AMD’s GPU cores than just graphics, and even Intel does not have its graphics at the level of compute usability compared to AMD.
Intel’s paid apologists are quick to point out Intel’s top end graphics that is only used for its most costly parts, while neglecting to mention AMD’s much lower cost SKUs that have much better graphics for the dollar. In Intel’s case, fair competition sometimes has to be enforced by court judgment, as Intel has a past history of violations with its monopolistic tactics. Intel has a lot of money to sponsor one sided reviews from some of the technology sites out there, and can pay the OEMs to use its products, while hiding behind the lack of proper enforcement of the current and past government watchdogs.
AMD will still be around in spite of all the paid FUD that some technology sites are offering up. So expect Zen to be released but the big story here, for those not so CPU core obsessed as much Intel would like people to remain fixated on the CPU cores, is that fact that the ACE units on AMD’s GPUs have many more FP/other execution resources to work with for any type of compute workloads so the HSA methods of doing compute on the GPU is here to stay, and Intel is far behind with getting fully unified memory addressing, and other HSA foundation standards. The mobile market GPU providers are all members of the HSA foundation and doing the necessary R&D to make the mobile SOC market continue doing well with Intel on the outside. If you want to see a healthy market look to the market that Intel does not dominate, the mobile market and see the amount of technological innovation going on which true fair and healthy competition provides!
If AMD is betting all on HSA,
If AMD is betting all on HSA, its going to end very badly.
Much worse then bulldozer…
Intel is moving toward true ‘fusion’ and you can see this with AVX512.
So on AMD CPU its going to be a mess to crosstalk a x86 core and some hidden GNC architecture, via some high level abstraction API like openCL.
But yes, today if you run openCL code AMD APU are better. but this ends when AVX512 start appearing in consumer chips.
and like vertex shader and pixel shader got unified. You are going to see yet another unification between the SIMD unit and the GPU unit. (and Intel already have it implemented)
I seriously see little hope for AMD to grab any relevant market in the x86 world. Because anything they might get, Intel would scoop up.
Intel GPU are actually very powerfull, the reason they are weaker is because of the transistor count. GPU are easy to scale up.
Sorry for being pesimist, but zen is a non viable product for AMD, even if its all that AMD claim its going to be.
AMD senior architect (keller) left because of this, AMD is about to end its x86 r&d business.
AMD and the entire mobile
AMD and the entire mobile market are doing right now HSA compute on the GPUs to get more work done on APUs, and mobile SOCs. Just count the numbers of FP/INT/other units on even mobile SKUs and compare that to the paltry numbers of FP/Int units on CPUs, and expect Arctic Islands to have even more Asynchronous compute resources. Intel’s GPUs have nowhere near the FP/INT/other unit counts compared to Nvidia’s or AMD’s GPUs, and Intel’s GPUs are clocked higher, and can only run gaming workloads with most games using low polygon count meshes to allow the Games to run above 30, or 60 FPS, while AMD’s and Nvidia’s GPUs have more FP/INT/other execution units and are able to execute more in parallel than Intel’s GPU’s.
Zen does not have to beat Intel in CPU IPC’s because after DX12, and Vulkan more of the non graphics gaming engine code will run on AMD’s ACE units in addition to graphics. More of the non graphics gaming code can be accelerated on AMD ACE units in addition to the usual graphics workloads, why do you think the VR gaming folks are all in with HSA aware hardware and HSA aware graphics APIs like DX12, and Vulkan!
P.S. AVX512 is for the Xeon
P.S. AVX512 is for the Xeon line of products That Cost $$$$$$, while AMD offers more parallel FP/Int resources at a fraction of the cost of even Intel’s non server related SKUs. Even Nvidia’s X1, has better graphics than Intel at a better price, and Nvidia’s graphics cost less than Intel’s dollar for dollar on Nvidia’s Tegra line of ARM based SOC!
Keller left because his
Keller left because his design contract was finished, both Zen, and K12 were finished and done design wise by Keller and his teams! Keller for hire is Jim Keller’s MO, and that MO has Keller moving around to the next job/contract with whatever company when the previous work is done.
100% correct, AMD as no more
100% correct, AMD as no more x86 work in its pipeline, hence he left .(AMD had no work for him to do)
I don’t like the idea of only
I don’t like the idea of only one company providing x86 processors, and only one company providing GPUs.
You can sit on either team you want, red, green, blue, whatever. The fact is that there can’t really be another company that will do what AMD does, outside of Intel. We need diversity and competition in the computing space. Go to you favorite computer store and look for RAM, or SSDs, or cases. There are a dozen big-time companies you can pick from. Head over to CPU, and there’re two. Two companies. ARM and ARMv8 doesn’t offer anywhere near the performance of x86_64, and besides that, applications aren’t coded for it.
Imagine having to pick between Ford or Chevy. No other cars on the market, just Fords and Chevies. That’s downright depressing.
“ARM and ARMv8 doesn’t offer
“ARM and ARMv8 doesn’t offer anywhere near the performance of x86_64”
Totally not true! ISAs are not what makes the performance it’s the execution resources like the number of execution pipelines, and instruction decoders. The power8 processors are based on a RISC ISA design like the ARMv8a ISA’s RISC design but in the power8 they are backed up by 8 instruction decoders feeding the powers8’s 14 execution units and the power8’s can run 8 simultaneous processor threads per core with 10 instructions in operation at any one time. simultaneous multithreading (SMT) and other functionality could be added to any ARMv8a based device and allow for better execution resource utilization. Apple’s custom A7 Cyclone is twice as wide on the instruction decoder end than ARM holdings’ reference design A53/A57/A72 cores and the A7’s reorder buffer is that same width as Broadwell’s at 192 entries.
The Apple’s Cyclone has execution resources that are closer to Intel’s core i series of processors than most of the reference Arm Holdings’ designs. So it’s not the ISA that makes the performance it’s the underlying hardware and execution resource that run the instruction set architecture that provide the processing power. Intel is just now reaching the same levels of CPU core reorder buffer size in its Skylake compared to power8, but the Power8 has way more execution resources than even Skylake and the Power8+ designs are incoming with the power9 expected in 2017. ISAs are just templates that the underlying micro-architecture is engineered to execute, and the Power8s are much more powerful than Xeon’s in the server room.
CPU Codename Cyclone,
ARM ISA ARMv8-A(32/64),
Issue Width 6 micro-ops,
Reorder Buffer Size 192 micro-ops,
Branch Mispredict Penalty 16 cycles (14 – 19),
Integer ALUs 4,
Load/Store Units 2,
Load Latency 4 Cycles,
Branch Units 2,
Indirect Branch Units 1,
FP/NEON ALUs 3,
L1 Cache 64KB I$ + 64KB D$,
L2 Cache 1MB,
L3 Cache 4MB,
I couldn’t agree more on your
I couldn’t agree more on your overall point.
I’m not sure the cpu business was the best example though. When was the last time that AMD was really any competition to Intel? Maybe 2005 with intel’s p4 chips. I thought the gpu business would have been a better example. Nvidia has been in control of the market for quite some time now and the past few generations have shown a lot of improvements in power efficiency because that technology is going to improve things for them on Tegra/Quadro/Cuda side of things. Graphics performance improvements have been kind of lack luster though. When was the last time we saw something like the 8800GTX release, something that really made us go WOW! At this point NVIDIA has no reason to really push the envelope when it comes to performance. They can continue to offer the far superior driver support and performance that is about equal or slighter better than AMD and continue to increase their market share.
AMD just isn’t performing,
AMD just isn’t performing, its been struggling for a long timeand not putting up suitable competition.
Letting it die and then splitting Intel and Nvidia up to generate competition would produce a much better competitive landscape in the short and long term.
How exactly would you split
How exactly would you split them up? Nvidia doesn’t have a competitive CPU architecture and Intel doesn’t have a competitive gpu, at least nothing compared to dedicated chips. You can always go Apple instead; they will probably be producing their own chips across their entire product line eventually.
Perhaps AMD should create a
Perhaps AMD should create a gofundme account and ask for donations from people that want to help them out. Instead of having to settle on a 720p 2 hour battery life laptop, they can send $20, which actually might be close to what AMD actually gets out of a laptop sale anyways.
You can purchase AMD stock if
You can purchase AMD stock if you want AMD to get financial help to get them over the hump until Zen can get to market, and the APUs that AMD will have online in the future are available for sale. Purchasing stocks is the old school Go Fund Me way for companies to get capitol.
Yay! Another Jeremy Hellstrom
Yay! Another Jeremy Hellstrom opinion piece! I’m glad I come to PC Perspective for unbiased and objective coverage of the latest happenings in the tech world.
relax man they are just
relax man they are just writing up facts, hey its sucks for amd but what can you do.they couldn’t really innovate in the cpu market intel rules their and since they been ahead of the manufacturing process it would of been stupid for amd to spend a shit ton of money on new designs of cpus.just now other companies like GF are catching up to intel and just barely.nvidia rules the gpu market because of the huge amount of money they spend on devs making game lean a little their way but amd does that too nvidia just does it more
Not one for defending tech
Not one for defending tech site writers, but Jeremy has always come off to me to be a sweet, very decent guy. His only agenda is to keep us informed, and he does it extraordinarily well, parsing news in a most entertaining and insightful way.
Yes, because the occasional
Yes, because the occasional “opinion” piece (discussing entirely facts) completely invalidates the credibility of every other article ever written or ever to be written on the entire site, and in fact renders every other factual, unbiased, objective article on the website completely unreadable. It’s too bad, too. All that unbiased and objective coverage being blocked out by a single sort-of-opinion-but-entirely-factual article.
Oh wait. They’re all still there. Every last article.
So skip over this one and go read the rest if you don’t like it.
Or, better yet, go start your own website and run it the way YOU think is best – and see if you do as well as PC Perspective does. I mean, you obviously know how to run a tech site better than they do.
No no, sir. Thank YOU. 🙂
No no, sir. Thank YOU. 🙂
First, Causation doesn’t mean
First, Causation doesn’t mean correlation. While I think most of us agree that competition is a healthy influence on markets in general, we cannot target specific events and claim that no other scenario was possible given the initial conditions of the system. Second, This piece and similar pieces that contain significant amounts of the author’s opinions interspersed with the facts about current tech news should be marked as open editorials, or something similar. Failing to mark such articles is on poor form and taste for an otherwise great site with a good reputation.
You mean as in the way I
You mean as in the way I tagged it "rant" and put it in the Editorial section? That is why Subject and Tagged are placed at the top of all posts.
I am also curious what opinions you spotted me inserting into the piece in between facts? By the general tone and the title it should be obvious I am upset by the general way that personal security is being treated by providers and users. Obviously you are intelligent enough to infer my general attitude towards this topic but upon re-reading my post I do not see any specific opinions I attempted to force on readers. I went out of my way to provide evidence with links and then to ask questions of the reader; the idea was to make people think, not to think for them.
P.S. Your stats quote makes no sense in this context, it refers to data and is too often being misused as some sort of bastardized strawman argument. Please don't help strip it of its actual meaning.
I stand corrected on the
I stand corrected on the tagging. I failed to notice it since I jumped straight into reading the body of your article after reading the title. I am satisfied now that I know it is marked appropriately. I never really paid attention to tagging and section on your site prior to now, but I will do so in the future.
I guess I got too used to other sites that prefix their article title with something like “Op-Ed:” or other similar denotation. I understand the purpose of tagging, but it is so ubiquitous that many of us have gone numb to it. There is also a separate argument to be made that tagging is most beneficial for searching articles and queries, while marking open editorials in the title is most beneficial for folks who browse the front page daily for new content. Regardless, I won’t fall into that trap again now that I know it is the sole means that PC Perspective uses to document and transmit this information (other than reading a snarky title or the article and figuring out later that it was meant to be opinions or an exercise in critical thinking). I think most readers would appreciate a more formal journalistic approach like having op-ed prefixed in the title in addition to tagging and section. I’m sure PC Perspective has thoroughly reviewed and justified their current practices and have little room for improvement.
I’m not the same anon who posted (random?) stats. I’m the same anon who posted the original sarcastic comment about opinion pieces and the comment about marking your articles appropriately.
I won’t delve into specific opinions on this article because that is not being debated here. You already marked this as rant and editorial so we are on the same page; there is nothing left to debate. Forgive my mistake.
No worries, I never have a
No worries, I never have a problem with criticism about things I have done, it is the criticism about things I did not do that can be annoying.
to all the intel guys that
to all the intel guys that enjoy pissing on AMD.
You won’t be laughing when you can’t afford processors anymore.
I will make the joke I read
I will make the joke I read somewhere else: “Cutting 5% of the workforce? So that means one engineer has reduced from 100% employment to 50% employment?”
Besides the AMD news, the
Besides the AMD news, the Amazon news is a bit more disturbing to me. We have way to many companies that are vertically integrated and can use this to lock out competitors. Apple has way too much control with proprietary hardware and massive media distribution platforms. We have a similar problem with cable companies that are internet service providers and content providers. Net neutrality is an attempt to keep them from degrading content from other sources. I don’t think this is that good of a solution, but I doubt the U.S. Government would actually break these companies up. In my opinion, the Internet has become infrastructure similar to roads. You must have equal access to do buisness. I don’t think Amazon stopping the sale of competing devices is that unexpected. We wouldn’t expect Apple to sell competing devices on their store. Forbidding others to sell it on the marketplace is going a step further though. It may be warranted to some extent though. Amazon is still selling some other devices where they support Amazon prime. I don’t know what the cost structure is for Amazon to support Amazon prime on the Apple TV and chrome cast though.
This is the fault of our(US)government. All the Antitrust lawsuts filed against Intel were pretty much being ignored by way of pushing back court dates by years.
Once AMD is out of the way intel will go after ARM.
The mobile market OEMs have
The mobile market OEMs have pretty much kept Intel’s x86 outside of the Mobile market(tablets/phones), and they have adopted the ARM ISA for their devices, and the software ecosystem on the mobile market’s CPUs/SOCs based on the various ARM ISAs over the years is already established over decades, and the software ecosystem is mostly based around the Linux Kernel for what the mobile market utilizes for the majority of the non Apple mobile market. Apple’s OSs are based on BSD which like Linux are Unix derived OSs.
And Intel can not just go after ARM Holdings, as ARM Holdings does not manufacture the chips that they design, they only license the reference designs and the ARMv8a/other ARM ISAs to other companies that make the working SOCs. Apple is a Top tier architectural licensee of only the ARMv8A ISA, and Apple makes their own custom Micro-architecture that runs the ARMv8a ISA, Qualcomm is another licensee like Samsung. The entire ARM based industries total market cap and chip R&D spending dwarfs Intel’s market cap and Chip R&D spending. You are talking Intel’s 145 billion market cap against the combined market Caps of companies that are worth trillions. Apple alone has a 629.07 billion market cap, Samsung electronics, just the electronics part, that is small compared to the rest of Samsung, has a market cap of 114.53 billion, Qualcomm has a market cap of 86.49 billion, add the rest of the ARM companies and its in the trillions. Intel is small compared to an entire industry that uses the ARMv8A ISA, some only license the ARMv8a ISA and make their own custom micro-architectures that can run the ARMv8a ISA, and some license ARM holding’s reference design cores and use those.
It’s not Intel verses little Arm Holdings, it’s Intel versus Apple, Samsung, Qualcomm, and many others! Why go with Intel’s ring through your nose when you can license an ISA from Arm Holdings, or Imagination technologies(MIPS based CPUs and powerVR GPUs that can be added to ARM based SOCs or MIPS based SOCs). Even ARM has its Mali GPUs up for license. AMD’s got its K12 custom cores, and maybe Jim Keller baked some SMT into K12’s ARMv8a ISA based custom cores, while he baked SMT into AMD’s new Zen micro-architecture. So add AMD to the list of the ARM based industry, as well as the few remaining x86 based companies. AMD’s K12 is going to come with AMD graphics, so Intel is even going to be further outside of the mobile market, and Intel’s graphics on the mobile side does not compare to AMD’s, Nvidia’s, or Imagination technologies(PowerVR)etc.
P.S. AMD will still be around in the x86 market, and the ARM market with APUs based on both ISA. Intel can’t even buy its way into the mobile market and has already spent billions in contra revenue trying!
The ARM business model is
The ARM business model is much better than x86. For device makers, even if they are not going to make the chip themselves, they can source ARM based processors from any of a large number of suppliers. If the go AMD64, they are limited to Intel, AMD, or maybe VIA. They also can not get the same design from multiple companies. If they go with a standard ARM design, they can source the actual chips from multiple companies much more easily. There is almost no way to source a comparable AMD64 device from more than one company. This doesn’t necessarily have much to do with the software ecosystem, although binary comparability has some importance. It is actually not as important as in other markets since mobile devices tend to be a more strictly controlled and proprietary. Apple could switch ISA easily, if they’d wanted to; they already forced the switch from 32-bit to 64-bit.
Intel has done some work getting a beachhead in the mobile market by partnering with Chinese companies to try to capture some of the Chinese market, but I don’t think this will work well. Also, I suspect Apple will eventually drop Intel, AMD, and Nvidia in favor of making most of the chips themselves. A quad-core A9 with a higher power budget is probably close to being able to power most of Apple’s product line-up, at least most of the mobile devices up to laptops. Since they have such tight control over the platform, they can abandon x86 relatively easily. The fact that they are developing their own graphics API (Metal) may mean they are going to be making more powerful custom GPUs of their own also. If they have their own custom GPUs, they would have pretty much complete control over the platform.
With AMD’s ARM projects, they seem to have been shooting more for the server market rather than mobile, although there is some overlap. Performance per Watt is probably the most important metric in both. Hopefully the ARM plans will not be completely sacrificed because of budget issues. With the way modern processors work, the back-end execution core and many other elements such as caches are actually relatively independent of the ISA. Zen and their ARM project probably could share a significant amount of technology. A high performance ARM core with SMT and the ability to scale up to power servers would be quite interesting.
? Intel in 2014 paid the EU
? Intel in 2014 paid the EU 1.45 BILLION $ when they lost the the suit against “unfair and damaging practices against AMD”
None a penny went to repay AMD for damages….
For intel 1.45 billion is pocket money. AMD is actually worth less the 1.45 billion on the open market.
AMD only existed because they help Intel make more money (cover the costly low margin x86 market share). When the x86 market eroded, Intel had plenty of supply and AMD was no longer needed.
AMD cant make high end part, but Intel can flood the market with low end part (with better energy efficiency to boot).
Hence AMD is dead in the CPU business.. And frankly even if the 1.4 billion in fine where given to AMD, AMD VP would have burned that in a few quarters on lavish bonus and making stupid decisions.
As someone said yesterday in
As someone said yesterday in a Greek forum
“AMD should recover. It’s stupid seeing people arguing about which Intel chip is better. Totally pointless compared with the good old Intel vs AMD”.
AMD has not been competitive
AMD has not been competitive in the CPU market for years so they already are absent there. It is only with GPUs that AMD is competitive with NVIDIA and with Maxwell’s release, they fell behind pretty badly there too despite Fury X’s release. So as it stands right now, AMD is not really winning any of the markets they have a presence in aside from console wins.
Fortunately, despite AMD not being competitive, it hasn’t slowed NVIDIA down and they continue to pump out faster and faster GPUs.
Competition works well so AMD
Competition works well so AMD cuts their workaround, doesn’t it?
You covered a lot of things
You covered a lot of things in your article but you’re not exactly comparing apples to apples:
Intel has less competition because they’re better. Same goes for Nvidia. They’re just better. When companies do something better they take market share. Whether people want to believe it or not, this process has always made things better. Yes we have less selection compared to something like SSD’s but a GTX980Ti is today a $650 card that outperforms a $1100 GTX Titan from last generation. That’s improvement whether you like Nvidia or not. When AMD or ATI goes out of business, it’s highly likely that someone will buy out their patent portfolio in a bankruptcy and a newer better capitalized competitor will be born into the market place.
Cable is completely different. They are given local monopolies by corrupt government politicians. That’s it. They didn’t compete and win their monopoly like Intel or Nvidia. They basically stole it out from under the voting population because the voters are ignorant mouth breathers that vote for corrupt politicians.