AMD takes a big hit & IDT exits x86 clone biz 98
About one billion of you wrote with the news that AMD took a operating loss this past quarter, and the COO and heir apparent to the CEO quit. In related news, IDT has declared that they quitting the x86 clone business. Wow-despite lower then expected earnings, Intel has to be pleased by this turn of events.
Re:winchip (Score:2)
http://www.jc-news.com/pc
"...here's too much news today! IDT posted some really good quarterly numbers but spontaneously decided to give up on x86 and make Centaur (the x86 wing of IDT) total autonomy. It is now the Centaur WinChip 4..."
he later reports that IDT has a buyer for their x86 division.
Re:Bad decisions by AMD (Score:1)
FWIW, the CVS versions of Mesa and the G200/TNT driver both support 3dnow builds. It doesn't look like 3dnow is going to be a lost cause for Linuxers.
Also, they may have felt like they didn't have any choice, after Intel came out w/ MMX.
> on-chip L2 cache (K6-3) which pumped up their integer performance at the time when even casual users had come to learn about the FP issue.
Just possibly there exist blighted souls who would rather have their kernel recompile faster than have Quake update the screen faster.
3dnow flop? Er... (Score:1)
2) most casual users don't know what FP performance is, much less associate AMD with a lack of it. Maybe most
Re:Speaking of celeron performance (Score:1)
Re:Things Of Note: (Score:1)
2) AMD has stated that they plan on releasing 1GH processors in the first half of '00, not the first quarter. This however doesn't mean that Kryotech won't come out with a K7 system that is able to go this fast before then
3) Agreed
4) Don't forget the various issues Merced is having, and that it will be dirt slow on code that the compiler doesn't optimize right. In addition, old x86 code is supposedly dirt slow on it as well.
Few other things of note:
* AMD claims to be making their memory on the copper process, yeilding as well as their aluminum process
* AMD claims to have produced K6's using the copper process, and is getting decent yields
Re:Intel undecutting AMD (Score:1)
Re: Intel able to win the Mhz race -- the K7 is shipping at 600mhz, and reports are that it doesn't run hot at this speed. It is rumoured that AMD will be releasing 700mhz/750mhz versions before the new year. On a
Several sites are already projecting what the clockrate of the PIII would need to be, in order to beat the K7. Most of the figures say that the PIII needs to hit somewhere between 750-800mhz to beat a K7/600.
Food for thought.
Re:You need to relax (Score:1)
You can already do this with the BSD's... 'make world'. Although, this won't be as effective since for say FreeBSD since the current release version still uses GCC 2.7.2.1 for stability reasons - you need to upgrade to current.
Also, Mandrake is pre-compiled for either P5 or P6 march...
Re:AMD is pulling an "Osborne" ? (Score:1)
I wonder though, whether the computer world has changed enough from those days for this not to happen. IIRC, Osborne produced *the* "portable" computer, there really wasn't any serious competition to them (well, Compaq had its models, but they were pretty far behindin terms of sales and future technology weren't they?). The market for sub $1k (hell, sub $.5K) computers looks to be picking up (this is off the top of my head, so corrections with backing joyfully accepted), and AMD could easily sell any backlog of K6-2 and -3's it might have to keep in business until the K7 sales pick up.
I suppose that with Intel being the market leader and producing chips that aren't that much more expensive than AMD's offerings, things could actually be worse for AMD than they were for Osborne, too.
OK, so I'm no market analyst.
Things Of Note: (Score:4)
1) Wall Street expected losses of 250 Million, AMD only lost 162 Million.
2) AMD's copper plant, a facility capable of producing
3) AMD's biggest problem has always been trying to get their average chip price above $100.00. With the new Athlon processor made to compete with the Pentium III, at same (or lower) prices with better performance, they will reach this goal, and also have the fastest processor on the market.
4) All of this doesn't even take into account that the Intel Merced has been delayed AGAIN, and is now not even slated to be a large production processor, its predecessor will be, but its not scheduled to come out until 2001.
Re:A Sony X86 ? (Score:1)
Re:AMD is pulling an "Osborne" ? (Score:3)
1. The K6-2s will be dropped as the K6-3s get cheaper, go
2. The issue with the K6 inventory is that most of the chips are at lower speeds. AMD doesn't want to remark for all the obvious reasons (they are getting too close to problem speeds as it is as a lot of K6s are still failing within the first 90 days of use because they are leaving no margin for later minor failures), but the issue was not the potential of faster chips, but that they were actually out there (and the Celerons).
3. The K7 is very nice. Yes, I have friends with samples. Yes, it beats the PIII, and yes, by more than the unofficial benchmarks suggest and there is room to improve. I would suspect that it will do very well, especially with faster cache at
4. I am buying AMD stock. Everyone I know who works there is too. This is the first time in a long time for all of us, and we are a pretty cynical bunch.
When the problems with the K6 are ironed out (packaging, mostly, and this will be solved soon), when it goes
Anyway, relax about AMD. Yes, they can still pull defeat from the jaws of victory, but it would be hard.
The WinChip deal is a pity, though. I have rechipped a lot of old Pentiums with those and they were always an improvement and ran very cool.
Re:Things Of Note: (Score:1)
Nor the fact that, while the Athlon should hit 1 GHz by early 1Q 00 or even before the end of this year, Intel's roadmap doesn't have the (slower at equiavalent MHz) P3 hitting 800 until 2Q 00.
Nor the fact that the Athlon's point to point SMP, eventually supporting upwards of 16 processors and up to 8 MB L2 cache, should cream the bus-limited SMP performance of the Xeon for servers and high end workstations.
Nor that Intel is stuck with the darn-good-for-its-time but already 3 year old (remember the Pentium Pro?) P6 core until Willamette debuts in (hopefully) Q3 next year.
Nor that Intel will have to deal with the considerable difficulties of moving to copper for Willamette (AMD got around it by liscensing their copper process from Motorola, who has spent a year working out the kinks).
Bottom line: if I were Intel, I wouldn't be too happy about anything to do with AMD.
AMD is its own enemy (Score:1)
AMD can design good chips but it takes solid management to ship a successful product. I would never buy an AMD chip. I don't believe in their ideology(or the lack of it).
"Lower than expected earnings" (Score:2)
--
winchip (Score:1)
More good reasons to buy AMD chips (Score:3)
rivals are dropping out, first Cyrix, now IDT. If AMD can't survive the price war with Intel, then Intel will be under far less pressure to reduce prices (and may raise them), and chip development will no longer be pushed forward by competition. This will be very Bad Thing for all x86 users.
First post? Probably not. Who cares anyway?
Busted link (offtopic) (Score:1)
I love the Celerons but they're killing AMD (Score:3)
Meanwhile, in many niches the Celeron is eating away at the PII/III market share now. If AMD loses their competitiveness, I fear that the days of cheapo, high performance processors will be over.
AMD's only chance is quality of manufacturing and Yield, Yield, Yield!
Re:winchip (Score:1)
The problem is that by the time I had factored in all of the other items I wanted another £20 for an AMD K6-II 300 was nothing... I think for the Winchips to make any kind of impression they needed a few other entry level components to be available.
eg:
cheap motherboard (2PCI,2ISA)
cheap memory (about current price would have done me as my absolute min was 32Mb)
cheap CD-ROM (pref 8 speed for about £10)
Put all of that together and you should have been able to assemble a useful base unit for about £150. This is the sort of market WinChip could have claimed - very cheap useful machines.
Tom
AMD (Score:1)
A small problem that I see with intel vs. amd is that intel doesnt just sell chips. So if they were smart, they could lower chip prices and raise the price on a different product. Until amd couldnt stay with them.
I do not want to see this happen, but you never know these days. Business is war. Anyway, I have said my $00.02, now time to go get coffee.
can we count the competitors? (Score:1)
i can only think of three x86 clones that still exist (and only one of them is in production)
AMD
RISE
Transmeta
am i missing anyone here?
good link for IDT news (Score:1)
--
http://www.beroute.tzo.com
It may have been an operating loss.... (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Re:More good reasons to buy AMD chips (Score:1)
Re:winchip (Score:1)
I had an IDT math coprocessor for the 386 in my first Linux box. That was a good chip too.
I think that IDT faced the same problem that Cyrix did with its MII processor. That was the problem of upping the clock speed above the 250 Mhz neighborhood.
Re:AMD is pulling an "Osborne" ? (Score:2)
>there really wasn't any serious competition to
>them
Try Kaypro. It stacke the drives on one side rather than one on each side of the screen, allowing a 9" (?) monitor that displayed a full 80 columns at a time rather than Osborne's 5" with 52(?) columns that scrolled with the cursor to cover 80 columns. ANd it's been a few years, but it seems to me that they had the same price.
rick
Intel vs. AMD (Score:1)
Speaking of celeron performance (Score:1)
Hmmm... I wonder why, could it be becasue they don't want people building power system with their, 'low-end' processor for pennies.
This is a Y2K sales hit? (Score:1)
Btw, for those that have taken an interest in Microworkz from reading Slashdot, be sure to read the warrenty (anti-warrenty?) [microworkz.com] VERY CAREFULLY. The Microworkz sales staff will explain up and down that their machines are Y2k Compliant but when it comes to providing things in writting they state that they do NOT COVER "damages occurring to hardware and software as a result of the manufacturer's failure to comply with 'Year 2000' requirements." I am sure there are plenty of Comtrade customers [grohol.com] that will testify to the fact that it doesn't matter what a sales person says over the phone, it is what is in writting that matters. Companies like Penguin Computing do have a customer friendly Year 2000 statement [penguincomputing.com]. But there is always the issue of if you have the time to deal with getting RMAs. And if you think that just because a company says they have tested their systems as being Y2K compliant that means it is a non-issue, think again. Gateway 2000 sales has made several promises yet several computers they shipped May of 1999 tested postive for the Crouch-Echlin Effect [intranet.ca] (and it effects Linux). GW2k still has yet to get back to us with the BIOS upgrade they promised over a *MONTH* ago! Over 12 employee hours lost sitting on the phone (mostly on hold) with GW2k just so they could save a couple cents by using an unbuffered real time clock on the motherboard. Unfortantly, several of the AMD resellers aren't making wise choices in what motherboards to use either.
Re:Bad decisions by AMD (Score:1)
If it's FP benchmark performance that everyone relies on, then consult the recent stories on the performance of Linux vs NT. NT may be faster on the quad-Xeon machines, but it would take many, many T3s and millions of hits a second for 24 hours every day for it to be too much for lowly Linux to handle. I don't care how fast a Quake demo runs, just how the game plays. With a 3d card, K6's play Quake, etc just fine. I have issues with the dull game style of all these 3d FPS games, but not with the drawing/calculating of graphics or anything.
Come to think of it, when I got my DX4/120 was about the time the huge 60MB Diablo demo came out. It put up a warning that it required an Intel Pentium to run, but worked just fine without. I just consider these sort of games, pushing for a one-vendor world evil and dislike them even more.
A Sony X86 ? (Score:2)
the past, mass produce and dump it below cost to gain market share, that would definitely benefit
the consumers and at the same time jab at Intel.
A Korean chipmaker buying the WinChip would be good too. I doubt the Taiwanese would step up to the plate again this time, as they already have
Rise and Via/Cyrix. What about to Mainland China?
Thousands of cheap (free) prison laborer.
Re:Intel vs AMD, re: Linux (Score:1)
There are alot of small companies who are in a situation like ours who can't afford not to do this, when Intel will give us so much money to do it.
BTW if I was the one making the business decisions I probably wouldn't go along with it, but I'm just a coder
Re:"PlayStation II technologies"? ROFL (Score:1)
--
Re:Intel undecutting AMD (Score:1)
Now, we all know that benchmarks aren't everything so don't go raving at me about this but the one benchmark that I have seen for a BETA K7 was that the FP calculations weren't as fast as the PIII, nor as fast as a supercooled K6-3. That was over a month ago though and it was a BETA chip on a BETA motherboard.
My guess is that in August when some 3rd party benchmarks and reviews come out that the K7 will show itself to be the top dog. I say guess because I have read some articles discussing how the PIII FP calculations were set up in such a way to be more robust, not faster, but more robust then that of the K7.
Before anyone starts spewing out how the K7 has three FPU pipelines, and how it kicks the living ?hi? out of the PIII, please take these points into consideration.
1) We are all working on speculation. Unless you somehow have your own personal K7 to play with we are all relying on what other people have said, and posted.
2) A lot of the articles I read compairing the K7 to the PIII with actual performance data are now at least a month old, some up to three months old. If anyone has information from a NEUTRAL 3rd party with some actual performance data, please post a url to it.
3) I am planning on buying a K6-2 within a week. I am a supporter of AMD, but I also understand that Intel is starting to head down other roads. We don't hear about AMD starting to design a 64 bit processor, althought considering they are working with the Alpha group... . Intel has split its resources into several projects. With them working on upgrading the PIII, the Merced, etc etc etc, of course they won't be able to fight AMD in the 32 bit market as effectively.
Where are the business machines? (Score:1)
Re:Intel undecutting AMD (Score:1)
http://unreal.epicgames.com/
The interesting quote is (by "Tim"):
The AMD Athlon Rocks!
My new 550 MHz AMD Athlon (K7) just clocked a jaw-dropping 68.5 Unreal timedemo at 1024x768,
running on a Voodoo3 3000 card. Even more telling, at no point did the frame rate ever drop below 38.0 fps. That's astounding, considering the intense lightmap and geometry usage in the timedemo level. Even while playing Unreal Tournament's most texture and polygon intensive level (Shane Caudle's DmGothic), the frame rate hardly ever went below 60 fps.
The Athlon's 128K L1 cache is awesome for memory-intensive games like Unreal. Operations like visibility determination, which thrash on the Pentium III's 32K cache, now run at full speed on the Athlon. This CPU truly shows a generational performance improvement, like going from my old 486 to my first Pentium.
When I saw AMD's K7 spec, I was pretty skeptical. The K6 had been hyped up, but in reality it was
slower for Unreal than a Pentium II of comparable clock rate, due to its poor non-SIMD floating point performance. The K7 claimed to fix all of that, and debut a new architecture with 3 execution pipelines. I decided to wait and see, without getting my hopes up.
Bottom line: I waited, and now I have seen! The Athlon is clearly the fastest x86 CPU at any clock
speed.
Congratulations go to AMD.
Re:Intel undecutting AMD (Score:1)
This is just one of the BO servers.
Those IS managers couldn't give a crap about what runs in their servers. They do care about what company they buy from. Sears buys ALL of their stuff from IBM. Sears doesn't care what's in the machine, just as long as it's from IBM. Hell, most of their machines still run OS/2 (not even OS/2 warp)... (the other biggie I notice is HP; they make some nice server boxes worth drooling over...).
K7 is targetted and the mid to high end of the consumer market. If it were targetted for high end business use, AMD wouldn't have bothered with FP performance (hello, most businesses don't care about FP -- that's why BUSINESS benchess stress the int performance of a processor). On top of that, if AMD were really targetting the high end server market, they would NOT lauch it without an SMP motherboard/chipset.
Celeron for you, is probably better. But you'll have to buy something new next year to play the new games. Don't play games? Then why did you even bother with the Celery? Get a $50 k6. Hell, my k6/233 does everything well except play the new games (and it isn't THAT bad either, if you like average framerates of 15fps (in Q3), which some people around here claim near the max the human eye can see
In addition, last time I checked, intel was making a profit by dumping the Celerons and charging $600/pop for the 450+ PII/PIII's.
...some people... I mean come on! Do you HONESTLY think that the rest of the world's opinion is confined to what YOU see? If that's true, we're all in trouble... then again, I have been noticing an increasing number of complete dolts during my morning commute lately...
Re:More good reasons to buy AMD chips (Score:1)
GET OVER IT
I hate to tell you but intel is not the first manufacturer to put serial numbers on thier chips, the high end workstation chip makers have been doing it for a while, and in a market where people were smart enough to understand the reasons. Granted, saying it was for privacy or crypto or whatever thier line was is BS, but a chip with a retrievable serial number does have some valid uses.
Everyone is talking like it will be the end of the world and how they are going to boycott intel because of this, well shit, if thats why you are going to boycott intel then you have really not been paying attention recently.
I don't buy intel for the simple reason that I can get better performance else where (ie the alpha). They may cost a little more, but probably no where near as much as people think they cost.
Re:AMD (Score:1)
AMD user for 10 years.
Try Here.... (Score:2)
RB
AMD Systems (Score:1)
They are the Pepsi to Intel's Coca-Cola
They are the Compaq to early IBM
They are the Linux to Microsoft's Windows
They are the alternate choice for those unwilling to put up with Intel's deceptions regarding their low end processors.
Computers @ The Manor, our retail store features AMD and Intel products, yet 75-80% of the systems we sell are AMD based.
AMD has forced Intel to speed up development, and drop prices, they are operating on record low profit margins, barely paying for their upgraded fabs before they have to drop prices
Re:Intel undecutting AMD (Score:1)
I could be wrong here, but from what I have heard the k7 blows the pIII away in performance.
Flames sent to
Re:"Lower than expected earnings" (Score:2)
Read the header again, it's Intel whose "lower than expected earnings" were still quite juicy. Damn, I was an idiot to sell my Intel...
Re:More good reasons to buy AMD chips (Score:1)
-Z
Intel vs AMD, re: Linux (Score:1)
Other things in your system are numbered... (Score:1)
I believe there are certain video cards (high end ones albeit, but nontheless...) which do this too.
Get over it. Serial #s on processors are nothing. Nothing at ALL.
Andrew
I'm perfectly relaxed. :) (Score:1)
re: Intel beating AMD to 1Ghz.
Only if Intel is putting them in the fabs by Thanksgiving. The Dresden FAB staff seem to have gotten it into their heads that 1Ghz will be rolling off their lines before 1/1/00, putting them in the market EARLY in 1Q/2000. This is a potentially devestating blow to Intel's server market, particluarly since AMD should also be running 8-way SMP about the same time. It'll be a VERY interest 1H 2k, that's for sure. Oh, and I think the Athlon is going to sell fairly well for one, and only one, reason: it's faster than any other x86 processor currently on the market. If AMD plays it right, in 5 years people will be saying "Intel used to do WHAT??"
Re:You need to relax (Score:1)
Yet another reason to run Linux -- though unfortunately most of my binaries are still compiled for the 386.
I'd like to see a disto that shipped a binary kernel and development kit (autoconf, compiler, etc.) and source for everything, so that your installation kit booted up, prompted you for what you wanted to install, and then compiled everything (including replacements for the kernel and development kit) while you took a day or so away from the terminal (or went on vacation, if you're running a slow processor).
Re:Intel undecutting AMD (Score:2)
Seriously dude. Intel is the one lagging. AMD's Dresden fab is ALREADY producing copper K6-series processors (not on the market YET), and are looking at putting 1Ghz processors through by late 99, VERY early 00. Intel's roadmap has 1Ghz in 2/3Q IIRC. AMD is beating them to the punch, and Intel supporters can't stand it. Oh, and considering that the Athlon w/HALF speed cache is doing these kind of benchmarks against PIII's with full-speed, I consider _ANY_ win on AMD's part "blowing away" the PIIIs. THe full speed benchmarks could very well be embarrassing to Intel (read: 100% or more difference).
AMD is forcing innovation by all parties, they're the first to successfully bring the EV-6 bus to the consumer market, and they're pre-empting the whole RAMBUS/DDRRAM argument by supporting the latter, rather then the former because the latter is simply a BETTER RAM process. Intel needs to seriously reconsider the resources they're spending on Willamette and Merced (Merced especially) if they don't want to spend a year or more as No. 2 in the high performance x86 market.
Oh, and I see AMD at
Granted, but . . . (Score:1)
And for what it's worth, though that's what gave me a bad taste in my mouth for Intel, that's not why I chose an AMD. I chose an AMD because every spec I'd read showed it outperforming equal or higher clock speed pentiums. And I'm happy with mine
Re:Bad decisions by AMD (Score:1)
You got that wrong. Most buyers dont even know they have a choice!
AMD is pulling an "Osborne" ? (Score:1)
What we want is more platform independence (Score:1)
The only thing that doesn't suck about the x86 architecture is that it's mass produced and cheap. Imagine a world where you could choose between using an x86, Alpha, MIPS, PPC, ARM, etc., solely on the basis of price/performance. The demise of clone makers such as Cyrix or IDT would not then carry the risk of Intel re-taking its stranglehold on the market.
That would be cool, in more ways than one: CPUs wouldn't get as hot, because there would be no more need to be backwards compatible with some crappy 20 year old instruction set.