Is AMD going to die?

This reminds me of what happens to freescale/motorola. They simply had better products than IBM. Around 15 years ago, x86 was going to be replaced by PowerPC. Intel and AMD were behind, and still are, they were going to be replaced by IBM and motorola, and I hope it will happen some day. In 2000 the motorola 74xx series v.s the IBM 750xx series was no comparison, a low end 74xx was 50% faster than a top end 750xx. In 2003, Motorola spun off freescale so motorola could build flip phones, leaving freescale leaderless. The Freescale's 85xx series failed to come to life, they ran the company to the ground with that project, they were so close to shutting down that they sold off their fabs at auction. They couldn't build 90nm chips with the fabs gone, while IBM was cranking out 90nm 970MPs, and was to be going to 65nm in mere months. Freescale had been defeated, they desperately tried to catch up, but they couldn't, they just slipped further and further behind. Unfortunately no PCs used PowerPC and IBM stopped the 970 project before 65nm mobile chips were to be ready. IBM left the PC market, and now builds 96 core monsters at 14nm. Freescale builds phone and cable modem CPUs. If PowerPC would have beat x86, the world would never have been the same.

I fear that that what happened to motorola will happen to AMD. Intel is building 22nm, but AMD is still using 32nm. If AMD can't get to 22nm before intel reaches 14nm, it will be over. I don't want x86 to become one CPU brand too.

die shrinks cause problems, AMD is just fine at 32 nm.... so no, AMD is not gonna die. they still have their amazing graphics line as well

lol, amd has HUGE market share where freescale had practically none so im not sure about your comparison.

why would they die? thay supply the wii u the ps4 and the xbone with chips and thay still have solid gpu's.

I dont think thay stand to lose money in the foreseeable future....

unless any of the other fabs or chip designers come out with something amazing, like super cheap and low power while still having great performance over everyone else i doubt it's going to happen. freescale like you said i still around they just provide chips for a different market segment.

AMD has rescaled their company, They are a much smaller company like they were before, you're right.

But you're getting it wrong. They are more flexible this way. They dont need to pay upkeep costs of 654654 fabs and what-not anymore.

Basicly, they dont need to make the same revenue as big companies like Intel. Not anymore.

They have become smaller, yes. They will die? Nope.

Freescale isn't doing that bad, being the lead supplier of automotive chips for instance. Almost every modern car is running on a Freescale processor running linux.

Just like AMD, Freescale sold off their fabs, which was probably a wise decision. Reason: they can compete more on price, regardless of the technology of the products. The fabs themselves benefitted also from this: they are not owned by US companies any more, but by Arabian, Asian and European companies, that have a more long-term strategy instead of being terrorized by stock dividend races "pour la beauté du tableau", and that really boosted their potential, and see what happens now: even the most modern fab in the US in New York is built by GlobalFoundries, which is owned by ATI (the irony right? ATI here stands for Advanced Technology Investment), which is owned by the government and mostly citizens of Abu Dhabi and European investors.

This has given AMD time to breathe, and they have used their time very wisely. They have bought ATI (the former Canadian graphics card manufacturer) and SeaMicro, and they have a really good talent portfolio. The key to their strategy is the concept of the AMD APP, aka AMD "Fusion", aka "AMD Hybrid Architecture", which is the first next-gen PC platform of its kind. It focuses on next-gen operating systems (mostly linux), and is open sourced under AL2.0 license. I posted the link where you can download the AMD APP toolkit in another thread earlier today. It's a hugely successful concept that is embraced by the markets, because it brings HPC within reach of small businesses and consumers. AMD has been designing their graphics cards as GP-GPUs for a while, and came up with the CGN architecture, which in terms of gaming graphics performance on legacy platforms can still keep up with nVidia, and often even surpasses it, but at the same time delivers all the benefits of the better integration of the GP-GPUs in modern systems, and, AMD can even recycle some of the tools of the AMD APP toolkit on legacy systems, like Mantle, which is like a small part of the AMD APP linux toolkit that is used to accelerate legacy Windows/PS4/XBone consoles.

The selling of the fabs to non-US owners that are capable of long-term thinking, has enabled AMD to trade with non-US companies better (Nintendo, Sony, with a focus on straight deals), and still to trade with US companies like before (Microsoft, US companies focus more on "ersatz-compensation" deals than straight money deals), and the end result is that they shift a lot of chips to the market, one way or the other, and have Intel and nVidia peeing their pants in more way than one.

The AMD APP technology being there and being implemented in real-life existing systems that anyone can buy for a fraction of the cost of any other comparable performance solution, is a thorn in the side of Intel, that has been working on iGPU and Xeon Phi integration for a very long time, but can't seem to get it right. i-GP-GPU is the most simple thing ever with AMD APU's, but Intel can't even seen to get OpenCL working on its iGPUs, so that's a big problem for them, because the future is not making smaller litho chips that use less power, if at the same time, that does nothing for the total system performance. AMD isn't focusing on the CPU in delivering that performance, but on the CPU+GP-GPU or CPU+i-GP-GPU, aka APU. Those little SeaMicro boxes cost less than many gaming PC's, but they are true HPC wonders, and everyone can have one, use them, benefit from them.

AMD has been merging a lot of code into the linux kernel, and everybody knows that's the platform that matters for the future, even Apple is talking about open sourcing OSX to benefit from Linux and BSD evolution for their future products. AMD doesn't have to make a lot of noise about it, their APP is hugely popular with open source projects, indie game devs and open source game engines are being worked on to use the power of APP.

As a refernce line: with APP, the overall performance of a standard system with AMD CPU and AMD GP-GPU, whether as discrete components or as APU, rises on average 40%, that's without overclocking, and not a buck is spent on extra hardware. That means that this is a much more efficient route than making smaller and more process-specific optimized CPUs and GPUs, which is what Intel and nVidia have been doing. The Phenom II X4 for instance performs just the same as an Intel Core i5-750K, and outperforms when both are overclocked, due to better overclocking capacity due to the larger die and litho. Intel now has CPUs in the Core range that perform 15% better, maybe with cherry picked Haswell chips, even 20% better. AMD can improve the overall performance with 40% just like that, without users having to buy new hardware, without overclocking, and up to 500 % performance increase in compute applications. They have been silently following the route that IBM has been following for a long time, the route of "Many Core Processing", which is the next-gen computer technology. Another example: Intel and nVidia die-shrinks have made their chips more power efficient, but it has come at a price of less burst-performance improvement and less overclockability, and a more difficult binning process. AMD has been working on DPM and zero-core abilities, and although core-per-core their chips use more power, they can also shut cores off completely, and in the end, overall, there will not be more power consumption on a system level than with smaller lithos and dies, but there will be more performance when it counts.

So I don't think that AMD is going to die any time soon. They may be bought up in the long run by a non-US company as a strategic move, but they definitely have the edge of next-gen computing now in comparison to the others, and they are doing well, just like IBM.


I think it's amazing that they can keep up with 2 companies in terms of technology, with a budget serveral times less than those opponents. AMD always had more innovation in them than the others IMO. (examples: dualcore, 64 bit, HSA, etc)

I guess its true what they say, bigger companies become more lazy. Underdogs always are more competetive.

AMD have posted their first profitable quarter for a while. I should think this would indicate a reversal of fortunes, they are on an upturn. This is probably due to the selling of assets, and dealing with the leadership/exec crisis they had. They still have their core competencies, things that they do better than anyone else.

Nuff said... Crytek has been hiring linux developers for a long time... probably the next CryEngine will use AMD APP GP-GPU integration. Gears are turning in Frankfurt, Kiev and Budapest... EA DICE has also taken the AMD route, with Mantle first and full APP integration later, gears are also turning in Stockholm...


No. They have so many fingers in so many pies. They have a lovely APU range, as said above  solid GPU's, they supply chips for Peasantbox, Peasantstation and Nintendo stuff i believe. Also they will always be friend to man who can't afford i-7's or top end i-5's. Anyway the stuff they do is good why should they die.

They probably wont die. But they seem to be very quiet in the CPU market. I wanna see them roll out steamroller. (see what I did  there?)


fresh pressed like a million bucks

at 30ish % market share and going up that'd be a no.

They destroy Nvidia at the low and mid range gpu market and their cpus are ahead of Intel in price/performance.

They are also the chip provider for what will nearly be all of the console market.

Doubt they are going away anytime soon.

I think it is possible giving their current state if they aren't allowed to catch a break. I don't think it will happen though. From my perspective (I am not a financial expert fyi) they seem to have a solid plan to return to fiscal stability and its just a matter of weathering the next couple years well and executing their plans moving forward.

Is there a good place to get a high-bandwidth overview of what APP is?

I looked up Seamicro and it is 64 chips, AMD or Intel, in a box.  With RAM.

I looked up AMD APP and it seems like it is OpenCL plus some device drivers plus a lot of content-free words.

Would like to learn more.


Intel stayed in the past with single core improvements (which is great and moving forward).

AMD tried something new and offers unprecedented core/thread count for a reasonable price.

The new method is new and requires some adoption. With all these game developers (SOE, DICE, Crytek, and more who port from xb1 and ps4 [I know it isn't copy paste, but it's more one to one that to a higher api]) hopping on with core optimization, I see AMD moving a little closer to Intel.

We all know ATI is now apart of AMD, ATI made great cards and still do under AMD. Their marketing has been up and down (cool hits towards NVidia, but foolish reference only launch), but their cards still perform very well in just about any situation.

No they will not "die"

AMD is not going to die. First of all, while Intel is pretty much a CPU company and that's it, AMD is a CPU and GPU company. Intel doesn't want much to do with graphics, and they suck horribly at it!

AMD could just become a dedicated graphics company, if they so chose to. nVidia can't really get into the ARM/Mobile area that much, and they've pretty much given up. Tegra 4 is a fail for product launches, even after nVidia marketing hype.

AMD doesn't need 22nm or even 14nm. Not yet. And why? Because shrinking the die size doesn't give you much more added performance.

Intel didn't get much on LGA 1155 or LGA 2011 going from 32nm (Sandy Bridge) to 22nm (Ivy Bridge). Even overclocking didn't help much. It doesn't matter how much power you put on the chip, or if it's unlocked or not. It runs about as fast, but doesn't perform that much better. Same with Haswell; more energy efficient, more sophistacted, not much better at performance.

Intel could put more cores in the same space, or they could decrease the size reserved for their integrated graphics, but they wouldn't do that. Intel wants us stuck at 4 cores forever.

Simply put, motherboard features (sound codecs, software, memory support, etc), USB 3.0 ports, SATA 3.0 (6Gbps) connectors and PCIe 3.0 lanes are all that are getting only the most subtle improvements. Nothing else is really getting much better. The only reason to upgrade from i7 2600K to i7 4770K are the motherboard features, if that. Intel has yet to give consumers more processing power that gives us a reason to be excited or hopeful. It's just selling the same thing in a shiny new box that looks better; it's like buying the car of the year so you can get +2 mpg (miles per gallon). It's a really bad idea. No wonder the PC market has cooled down.

Not only that, software developers (and even game develops to an extent) haven't made their software much more demanding than before. They don't want to keep people from using their software, and because consumers don't have to upgrade their software, PC sales have decreased. If PC sales are going to keep improving along with software sales, SoftwareDevs need to make use of more powerful hardware to drive hardware sales of PCs, and software that works better on more powerful PCs will sell more. If a hardcore gamer will buy an ASUS RoG motherboard just for software features and looks (that's pretty much what ASUS RoG motherboards have added in the Z87 line - the overclocking performance is the same from what I hear, with a few exceptions of certain SKUs and components inside), than imagine what they'd spend on games or other software that might run better on their PCs.

High-end gaming desktops are the only area of desktop and PC sales that hasn't shrunk over the years. And that's in a bad economic market. That proves how valuable gaming is, and how compelling it is. There's money to be made, but software devs and hardware companies need to keep pushing the market forwards or they'll both be locked in a death spiral. And we need OS companies like Canonical and Microsoft *shudders* to increase the hardware requirements (just like Windows 8.1 did a short while ago).