digg

Facebook Connect Join Digg About

AMD split rumors accelerating

tgdaily.com — Hector Ruiz’ time at the AMD as we know it today is coming to an end. Ruiz recently stepped down from his role as CEO, but kept his position as chairman of the board with the purpose of launching AMD’s Asset Light and Asset Smart strategies, which are expected to split AMD into two entities.

Who dugg this? Made popular Aug 13, 2008

Digg DudeWhat is Digg?

Digg is a place for people to discover and share content from anywhere on the web. Digg surfaces the best stuff as submitted and voted on by the community. Take the Tour to learn more.

67 Comments

show profanity settings
expand all
  • notepaddotexe, on 08/13/2008, -1/+38Here's to hoping it helps them recover from some bad business decisions, and helps get them back in the competition (If the rumors are true, that is).

    Man, the Athlon 64 line was wicked back before the c2ds hit the market.
  • PeterNorton, on 08/12/2008, -3/+38If it helps AMD, fine. Split it up.
  • Chainheart, on 08/13/2008, -1/+19ATI has been kicking ass lately, though
  • inactive, on 08/13/2008, -2/+17They really need something big to come up soon.. we need more competition in the CPU market.
  • cnot3, on 08/13/2008, -0/+13You're on digg and you don't know what AMD makes? They are pretty much all that is preventing Intel from controlling prices in the entire CPU market. Before the Core 2 I always bought AMD, they still have a few processors that are better deals than comparable Intel CPUs, but they are not innovating like they used to and have been lagging behind Intel for some time. The personal computer market needs AMD to keep prices down, otherwise Intel would have almost no competition.
  • hwy9nightkid, on 08/13/2008, -2/+15they just shipped the fastest GPU in the world
    so, it's not the last thing..
  • jstone, on 08/13/2008, -1/+12Really? Because I just buried him, and I haven't received any money...
  • gradivus, on 08/13/2008, -1/+8Killing the 939 line is what drove AMD to this point. Right when it became popular and people were switching to dual core they dropped the most popular line they had and pissed a HUGE market off. At the same time intel came out with core2 and rocked AMDs world. Then AMD spent all the money they had buying ATI and has been in the hole ever since. Smooth, but Im still not going to the dark side, ***** you intel.
  • species, on 08/13/2008, -2/+9No, read the ***** article before making stupid comments.

    "It is widely expected that Asset Light will part AMD into two companies – one that is led by newly crowned CEO Dirk Meyer and a focus on the development of chip technologies and a manufacturing arm that will take over AMD’s fabs."
  • arjie, on 08/13/2008, -0/+7Wait, that's an 'intelligent observation'? Your bar is a bit low, methinks.
  • askantik, on 08/13/2008, -3/+9AMD is more respectable as a company IMO, and I don't really keep up on how Intel's CPU thermal architecture rocket quantum design is .023 nanometers more efficient than AMD's, so I go with AMD. Same price or cheaper CPU with performance that works just as well for my games, Photoshopping, and anything else I need. Let's get realistic, please.
  • KloroFormd, on 08/13/2008, -0/+6After the Core 2, I still always buy AMD.

    Call me a fanboy, I really don't care about such petty remarks. I like AMD, I like how they stomped Intel's ass in the A64 days, and I like competition.

    Now, Intel makes some damn good chips these days too, but AMD was the one that brought CPU efficiency to the x86 market, instead of attempting to keep the "frequency = speed" mentality Intel fought for with their Netburst architecture.
  • EllimistX, on 08/13/2008, -0/+6This is how you know that Digg is no longer a tech site.

    AMD is a processor company that acquired a graphics processor company, ATI to form DAAMIT.
  • shadowmoose, on 08/13/2008, -0/+5Someone needs to compete against Intel :(
  • mooninite, on 08/13/2008, -0/+5However, with the Intel i7, AMD won't have any sort of superior interface or technology. They [AMD] had better get their act together quickly.
  • dododohead, on 08/13/2008, -0/+5You laugh, but just wait until Intel monopolizes the market and rolls out a family of roughly the same processors for a handful of years and laughs back in your face because you have no other choice.

    AMD had to actually fight its way to the top from nothing...its an underdog story that deserves more.
  • bipolarruledout, on 08/13/2008, -1/+5The Core 2 is a great CPU but it's extremely important to note that Intel is using a smaller die size then AMD right now and AMD also has a superior bus architecture. I believe AM D's biggest problem is shrinking their shrinking their fab process which is really just a financial issue.
  • mshtml, on 08/13/2008, -0/+4You can't compete with a monopoly who pays vendors to delay, abandon and outright refuse to use your products. AMD can win because Intel has done all those things. They've been fined before and they are facing a $4.1 billion fine from the EU.
  • TheMachine1, on 08/13/2008, -0/+4You sound parnoid this artical is no help to AMD.
  • AVigorVermin, on 08/13/2008, -1/+5I wonder if this will help their stock value at all
  • bipolarruledout, on 08/13/2008, -0/+4Intel is at a significant competitive advantage simply due to their market share and manufacturing capacity, forget their products. Nearly everyone in the industry is familiar with their tactics and questionable marketing particularly when AMD had a bonified product lead over Intel. Have you read ANY of the discovery? AMD may not be Intel but they aren't a second tier company either. They have significant intellectual property assets and excellent products. Logic dictates that when you can do it faster, cheaper, and better then you competitors then you should be gaining significant market share bearing anti competitive practices. While this might not apply today it most certainly applies to the athlon days which is a significant point in the law suit.
  • hwy9nightkid, on 08/13/2008, -0/+4the chip wars are back on...
  • KloroFormd, on 08/13/2008, -0/+3@gaqua

    Voting with my dollars in this case can ruin the only competition. It'd be different if AMD made a bad product, but it does what I need it to do and does a good job of it. I've yet to be CPU-limited in any task I've thrown at my humble A64 X2 4000+.
  • arjie, on 08/13/2008, -0/+3Actually, welliwonder, some things are instantly buried on this site, comments like his are part of a formula which goes: "Only x comments and y diggs?!" Another similar one is: "Only x diggs and on the front page?"

    Other comments that are buried are: "I submitted this x hours ago. y stole my story." "[comment comment comment] [signature with link to blog]". It's not so much censorship as people getting annoyed at comments like this which serve no purpose but to detract from the topic, reducing signal-to-noise in the comment threads.
  • bipolarruledout, on 08/13/2008, -0/+2If it's good enough for Microsoft it's good enough for Intel. It may actually be worse with Intel. Vendor lock ins don't exist with x86 and considering that there are several alternatives not even counting Via or AMD it's pretty amazing that the market is not more diverse. I can't wait to see the full discovery from the AMD case.
  • tcpip4lyfe, on 08/13/2008, -0/+2I hope they do something because I bought 20 shares when it was 14 dollars a share. Currently it's at 5. : /
  • Dabellah, on 08/13/2008, -0/+2What happened is that AMD had a good hold on marketshare against Intel until they fell behind in the race. They made bad business decisions as mentioned above, eventually fell short of what Intel can not only promise but continue to bring at a continual and consistent rate, and they bought out ATI. The last mentioned reason, the purchasing of ATI, was a much bigger role to play than many will care to admit. ATI at the time they were acquired was suffering from bad product and software/drive development and has continued to suffer the same problems since. Was a good initial acquisition with good promise but nothing has really changed now has it?

    I'm in no way an Intel biased individual as I own both platforms (my laptop and old desktop were both AMD) but there is no question or doubt among any techy out there who can in their right mind suggest AMD being the better choice for a processor over Intel and their Quad/Core2Duo lineup. The processors are amazing and continue to push the limits as the best bang for the buck. That's important with today's struggling economy. I hope AMD makes a comeback personally and continues to help push the limits but things aren't looking too bright for them at the moment.
  • MarcTheLad, on 08/13/2008, -0/+2not really... they're just separating their fabs from the r&d/engineering unit. running a fabrication plant happens to be really really expensive. i'm sure cpu/gpu stuff will still come out. not having to worry about the manufacturing portion too much will give the engineers more time to come up with great stuff.
  • gaqua, on 08/13/2008, -0/+2@KloroFormd

    If you really liked competition, you'd buy whatever is the best performance for the price. Anything less is not voting with your dollars.

  • bratterscain, on 08/13/2008, -0/+2I bought a Core2 and kind of regret it but it was more bang for the buck compared to AMD's line att. AMD has almost always been the underdog in the desktop market so I'm still more inclined to go AMD. My Core2 serves me well also but if Intel loses competition, the consumer loses.
  • bipolarruledout, on 08/13/2008, -0/+2Why? Because it's something intel might do? Fortunately for AMD the marketing department doesn't design dubious features just to move more processors. What AMD needs to do is shrink their die size and skip the gimmicks.
  • bipolarruledout, on 08/13/2008, -0/+2Digg does tend to suffer from bandwagon mentality but what you are suggesting is a pretty bold statement. Such trends would be at least somewhat detectable on the server side.
  • bipolarruledout, on 08/13/2008, -1/+3I would rather see them dump ATI than their fabs. I'm starting to think that it sounded like a good idea on paper but the suits had no idea what they were getting themselves into. It's just horrible to see because AMD has brought real technical innovation to the industry and have basically been hampered because of financial problems.
  • inactive, on 08/13/2008, -0/+2Weak don't fall apart AMD we need competition with intel. If you ***** up what will we do? Cyrix vs Intel?

  • Nintendesert, on 08/13/2008, -0/+2You can't use your market share and monopolies to drown out competition. And referencing Microsoft as an example of how a company can behave is quite simply laughable.
  • rocko_stazetti, on 08/13/2008, -1/+3Did you just call me a term paper?
  • Arkz, on 08/13/2008, -0/+2why? they could bring out a Phenom with a 32MB L3 but if its not beating an equivalent priced Core2 who cares? im using the AM2 platform right now and wish they would bring something powerful out, i have an X2 4400, id like to upgrade to something like as powerful as an E8500 but unless they pull their fingers out i dont see that happening
  • bipolarruledout, on 08/13/2008, -0/+2With all due respect not enough people care about chip packaging for it to even be on the radar. Intel changes their packaging all the time, perhaps more than AMD. The core architecture is slick but people have short memories. Intel desperately needed a new 8th generation architecture where as AMD had K8 years ago. Netbrust was a disaster and everything before it was basically warmed over P6. Intel's biggest advantage by far is their manufacturing capacity and 45nm process. But AMD does have something Intel does not and that's the hyper transport bus and it becomes more important with each core they both continue to cram on. AMD knows exactly what they are doing, they just lack the funding to do it fast enough. Indeed ATI may have been a mistake.
  • Nintendesert, on 08/13/2008, -0/+2Not winnable? Courts have already ruled against Intel for their unethical practices. So the case AMD brought against them was justified. It doesn't necessarily help AMD now, but it may in the future when the courts fine or sanction Intel for what they've done. It also gets oversight on Intel and helps keep the playing field for AMD level in the future.

    We also don't know how much they spent on legal action, so we can't say how much that hurt their ability to produce better chip architectures. So to claim that AMD ***** themselves for suing Intel is pretty baseless.
  • counterstriker, on 08/13/2008, -0/+1ummmmm no, but AMD's stock price has been up for the last week or two
  • counterstriker, on 08/13/2008, -0/+1Why would AMD do that when they have news like this?

    http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20080812-amd- ...
  • mushoo, on 08/13/2008, -0/+1Will you ever let it go?
    I swear ese, we didn't know you were related to those three chunky chicks. Besides, since when do your mom, wife, and sister count as everything?
  • sanman, on 08/13/2008, -2/+3Usually, when a company like this goes through a rough patch, they come out of it tougher, and with an even stronger product line.

    I really hope AMD keeps on going, because without the competition they provide, you know that Intel is going to back to screwing us all again. Without the Intel-AMD competition, Moore's Law would slow down.
    We'd see Intel slowing down the pace of its product improvements, and they'd go back to their stupid ***** ideas like Itanium, etc.
  • jellygraph, on 08/13/2008, -0/+1Intel needs an anti-trust lawsuit...
  • jasonliman, on 08/13/2008, -1/+2AMD is computer engineer company, they provide affordable CPU processor and powerful video card.
  • Giga, on 08/13/2008, -0/+1Where is the proof? It could be that people digg stories while at work and come back to read in detail later with potential comments. Or maybe people just digg without commenting. Not everyone has to comment.
  • Lionhart, on 08/13/2008, -5/+6You realize there is a button that says "Reply" right?
  • SteveMax, on 08/13/2008, -1/+1I believe/hope you forgot a /sarcasm tag.
  • jellygraph, on 08/13/2008, -1/+1I dugg you down... I obviously must be part of AMD's media censorship team *rolls eyes*
  • tcpip4lyfe, on 08/13/2008, -2/+1Mostly they need a decent chip again.
  • Fetching more discussions...
    Show 51 - 67 of 67 discussions

  • Add a Comment

    Login or register to comment!
    Or, sign-in super fast with your Facebook account ...


© Digg Inc. 2009 — Content created and posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain | Terms of Use Updated | Privacy Policy
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.