What happens if Intel wipes out AMD?

HONkUS · Post by **HONkUS** » Thu Mar 29, 2007 4:38 pm

I realized today that if Intel wipes out AMD then we will be stuck with one large company that produces CPU's! Without competition we might be stuck with C2D for a decade! Noto nly that but Intel will be able to charge whatever they want for one too! But at the same time it might also open the doors for another company such as Nvidia or TI to try and put a product out there. Its a scary situation and if Penryn is as good as they claim and smokes Barcelona/Agena then AMD might be toast. What do all of you think?

stopthekilling77 · Post by **stopthekilling77** » Thu Mar 29, 2007 5:18 pm

indeed it is gripping that it COULD happen... but i'm pretty sure that the guys over at AMD are working damned hard, becuase the higher-ups over there have been in a fight with intel for years and years.

i really am looking forward to the barcelonas

and i believe that AMD will make a comeback, if not just to be eye-to eye.

Post by **dicecca112** » Thu Mar 29, 2007 5:31 pm

it won't happen. It happens all the time. they flip flop who has the better processor. If AMD did go down, say hello to really really expensive CPUs

Post by **Apoptosis** » Thu Mar 29, 2007 5:36 pm

AMD isn't going anyplace ;)

AMD has actually hurt intel by taking part in the price war and like it has already been noted future products are already in the works... If Fusion, doesn't work out for AMD in 2008+ then I would be a BIT worried.

Post by **DMB2000uk** » Thu Mar 29, 2007 6:25 pm

Remember how sloppy Intel got back when AMD wasn't very good, maybe that'll repeat again and AMD will have a chance to catchup.

Dan

HONkUS · Post by **HONkUS** » Thu Mar 29, 2007 8:44 pm

lets hope so I just dont think a company can get as big as Intel by making the same mistake twice.

ibleet · Post by **ibleet** » Thu Mar 29, 2007 10:07 pm

Heaven forbid another company gets a monopoly like Microsoft! It still irks me that I cant remove Internet Explorer from windows.

As for AMD, they are here to stay.

SAMSAMHA · Post by **SAMSAMHA** » Thu Mar 29, 2007 11:26 pm

Well, if that's the case, i thin ksomeone will come out and then take AMD's place. There's always someone who will try to take intel. Maybe Via:).

Post by **Apoptosis** » Fri Mar 30, 2007 8:55 am

All I know is AMD stock is hovering just above $13, which is the lowest it's been since 2004... Basically all the good fortune that came from A64 and A64X2 has been washed away thanks to the tough market, price wars, and increased costs due to the production of new fabs.

Kougar · Post by **Kougar** » Mon Apr 02, 2007 2:19 am

I'd like to say that I've never once worried about AMD before, but there's a first for everything. That said, I don't expect AMD to be wiped out, they are to large for that now after having swallowed ATI up. If anyone has some hard facts as to why AMD will be trouncing Intel in the future processor market though, I've love to hear it, as right now I don't see it happening. Here's why:

AMD is on the verge of anouncing K10, which will most likely fall within a 20-40% performance lead over Clovertown. In 2008 they will be working very hard to shrink K10 from a 65nm to a 45nm processor. Here is where it gets confusing... AMD has stated they are only considering using the new high-K dielectric / fab processes for the 45nm node, they have not decided whether to wait until their 32nm node.

Intel is going to release Penryn now, and Nehalem in 2008. I expect AMD to regain the performance, or at least price/performance lead once again until Nehalem ships. Then for all intents and purposes it appears to be end game. What is so special is Nehalem will turn every single last one of AMD's architecture advantages against AMD.

So it will be Nehalem with it's integrated DDR2/DDR3 memory controller and new CSI interconnect facing off against a 45nm K10. Nehalem will be using the new high-K dielectrics, which will greatly help possible clock speed increases and lower power leakage, which also will help clock speeds. 45nm K10 may or may not have this, AMD "is still considering" it. I see this only working out one way, another Core 2 Duo vs K8 all over again and will have to resort to price slashing. I don't need to say AMD will be new to the 45nm node, and Intel will have already matured their 45nm production at this point.

AMD's Fusion is another issue. One varient of Intel's Nehalem will also offer the same integrated CPU/GPU as Fusion, so while I expect ATI's expertise to help give AMD a lead here it won't be a free meal, again Intel can out produce them on a more mature 45nm fab process. Intel already stated they plan to enter the discrete GPU business again by 2009 focused on capturing the high-end market. I forget how much more powerful their design was "guessed" to be, but suffice to say they are aiming high.

AMD will be shrinking K10 to 45nm around the second half of next year. They never introduce a new architecture and a new fab node at the same time. I've seen more performance numbers for Barcelona then I have news/plans of AMD's goals or plans after K10, and while they've always been silent when it comes to revealing future plans there isn't much advantage to any for them to continue to do so. Their stock price hit an all time low last week, right at the point when AMD has announced they need to double their stock portfolio, from ~$750 million to $1.5 Billion in order to sink that into their three FAB facilities to better fight Intel's own.

Nehalem will bring IMCs and CSI, leaving AMD's dusty basket of advantages completely empty with no apparent future of refilling it and no (obvious to me) routes to follow in doing so. I'd love to hear any concrete evidence or reason AMD's processors after Nehalem will likely again retake the performance crown. And if AMD doesn't use the new high-K dielectrics/fab tech for their 45nm node, then that includes the performance per watt, or price/performance aspects as well. The only reason I can envision AMD having any advantage to putting off the new fab architecture might be cost concerns, very likely why they want to double their current market stock portfolio. So if they don't use the new FAB tech, then Intel's Nehalem will be able to post enormous performance leads through higher clocks AMD won't have a chance in matching. If they do use the new FAB tech on the 45nm node, the absolute best case scenario is they might match Intel's Nehalem.

Unless a serious goof up occurs, it is safe to say Nehalem will be a very souped up Core 2 Duo, before the integrated memory controller and more efficient, faster CSI interconnect that replaces the FSB is even considered. Oh, and while K10 is sitting between 2-3ghz, Nehalem will be capable of 3-4ghz and likely higher thanks to the high-K dielectrics, so no clock speed and no arhictecture advantages are possible for AMD. Penryn will hit at least 3.2ghz. Again I don't want AMD to go anywhere, and I'd welcome any hard info on AMD's plans after K10's 45nm shrink. So far though, there's not even been a peep.

skier · Post by **skier** » Mon Apr 02, 2007 2:07 pm

AMD will always be the underdog, no one really cares if they are better than Intel, they only care about the price, AMD will always be cheaper - and will always be more bang for the buck.

kenc51 · Post by **kenc51** » Mon Apr 02, 2007 2:43 pm

People are forgetting how much ATI cost AMD! AMD still owe ALOT of money and are not making much either. They don't have big manufacturing capabilities, they have to outsource their chip making to other companies like Chartered Semi etc.

BUT, They are not going anywhere. AMD are getting funding from alot of inverstors and also alot of IP tech from IBM and others. They are still growing in the enterprise market and this will take time. Enterprise customers demand longevity in their products, why would they use AMD if they didn't believe the company will last?

AMD also part owns a company called Spansion, who are now a big hitter in the flash memory market. Spansion started about 3yrs ago from nowhere and are now worth sh1t loads of $$$. They patented a tech called "morrorbit" tech which allows for faster access and capacity of flash ram.

The semiconductor industry is now only starting.............everyone has learned from Intel (standing on the shoulders of giants as such)

HONkUS · Post by **HONkUS** » Mon Apr 02, 2007 5:14 pm

interesting responses from people, seems like its either "AMD will stick around" or "its the end of AMD" but not one person is saying AMD has a chance of overthrowing Intel. Im an AMD fan all the way. My next proc is going to be an Agena powered AM2+ part but they aren't saying what the plan is after that! ATI cost them alot of money and judging by how r600 is shaping up you gotta wonder if they can compete with nvidia, by the time r600 comes out NV will already have their core refreshes of G80 ready to go and there is no telling how far ahead they are on the next generation.

So here is my prediction for the future:

After r600 and its core refresh AMD leaves the discreet graphics market to focus their money and resources on their one potential future advantage over Intel, "Fusion"

It becomes Nvidia vs Intel in the discreet graphics card battle.

I also see a possibility for a Nvidia CPU, probably starting first in cell phones then PDA's and PC's I read an article about 6 months ago on the inq (I know but hey

) saying Nvidia was considering getting to the CPU arena. You gotta think they would keep their lips pretty tight if they were considering it though. If your strength was GPU's however then its almost an open door into the market if CPU manufacturers start incorporating GPU's into their CPU's

If the cards fall just right then I could see there being a 3 player race between Intel, AMD and Nvidia for CPU supremacy. Think about it, all three already make their own chipsets, and Intel's almost as far from a "Fusion" type processor as Nvidia is. Infact the Inq also even claims to have confirmed that NV is working on getting an x86 65 or 45 nm proc out the door by 2008

so. wow. huh?

Kougar · Post by **Kougar** » Tue Apr 03, 2007 12:12 pm

kenc51 wrote:People are forgetting how much ATI cost AMD! AMD still owe ALOT of money and are not making much either. They don't have big manufacturing capabilities, they have to outsource their chip making to other companies like Chartered Semi etc.

BUT, They are not going anywhere. AMD are getting funding from alot of inverstors and also alot of IP tech from IBM and others. They are still growing in the enterprise market and this will take time. Enterprise customers demand longevity in their products, why would they use AMD if they didn't believe the company will last?

Last I heard AMD was backsliding on their server market share thanks to Woodcrest. K10 may win it back for them, but for how long? This is why my post is such pessimistic in tone, they are losing ground in their primary market.

kenc51 wrote:AMD also part owns a company called Spansion, who are now a big hitter in the flash memory market. Spansion started about 3yrs ago from nowhere and are now worth sh1t loads of $$$. They patented a tech called "morrorbit" tech which allows for faster access and capacity of flash ram.

Spansion was a joint venture between AMD and Fujitsu, key word was. It's now it's own company, both Intel and AMD spun off their flash devisions to cut costs over the last two years. AMD may or may not be the largest shareholder in Spansion, but they are now a independant publicly traded company that must focus on it's own shareholders.

I do not foree AMD exiting the GPU business, ATI sells a great deal of chips to the current plasma/LCD TV market. Infact their eary R700 plans are quite fascinating, and could very well prove to make a huge splash if they continue to develop them as curretly envisioned.

brites · Post by **brites** » Wed Apr 04, 2007 5:46 am

Last time i've checked (2006) AMD had increased the sales... the C2D is a good P to very very high end PC (very $$$$$)... for me AMD is still the best brand and I don't think it goes away...

liqnit · Post by **liqnit** » Wed Apr 04, 2007 5:58 am

I think AMD has rose from a position where it was like Apple vs Microsoft
to a position as a market leader (not in net sales but in technology)
causing Intel to shift direction from Mhz race to other direction.
In terms of the ability to actually eliminates AMD i feel that it would take too much from Intel in terms of $$.

Kougar · Post by **Kougar** » Wed Apr 04, 2007 12:49 pm

brites wrote:Last time i've checked (2006) AMD had increased the sales... the C2D is a good P to very very high end PC (very $$$$$)... for me AMD is still the best brand and I don't think it goes away...

Of course AMD was gaining server market share in 2006. But that is a year ago, the first quarter of 2007 they stopped gaining share, and turned around to lose 1.4% directly to Intel, despite having the largest OEM/distributor presence than any other time in their past.

prozac26 · Post by **prozac26** » Wed Apr 04, 2007 5:09 pm

We'll see very expensive CPUs IMO.

Intel will take advantage this way.

However, I don't think AMD will be wiped out.

TristanM · Post by **TristanM** » Wed Apr 04, 2007 5:53 pm

I probably don't know as much about the specifics of the processor manufacturers, but I'd think (and I could well be dead wrong) that it would be in Intel's best interests to "allow" competitors in their market, and not just tiny fish in their big pond either. If you look at the number of anti-trust, patent, and copyright lawsuits we've seen in the last ten years (yeah, yeah - mostly against microsoft) based on technology corporations pushing their competition out, it would make sense that Intel would not try to keep AMD completely away from their potential customer base. "The devil you know..." and such.

Anyhoo... that's worth a penny and half, if not a full two cents.

stev · Post by **stev** » Thu Apr 05, 2007 6:56 am

HONkUS wrote:interesting responses from people, seems like its either "AMD will stick around" or "its the end of AMD" but not one person is saying AMD has a chance of overthrowing Intel.

From what I understand, AMD only needs a little more market share. As for "overthrowing Intel," that may not be the goal of AMD. Don't get me wrong, AMD does compete very well. AMD is like that of Chrysler in the automotive world. It's not going to take out GM be any means unless GM makes a blunder on the world scene that will loose loyality.

The bigger question should be, will VIA survive in the market place offering CPU alternatives. The laptop/notebook sales for the C7 have picked up for them, but they have a long way to go to capture any significant market share. VIA owns the Cryix technology and seems to be doing well with it now.