Sounds like Intel finally found a scanning electron microscope powerful enough to actually see AMD's itty bitty balls, and used a microfilament wire with a tiny noose on the end to garrote them off.
AMD will come in at the low end of guidance and lose about 4 cents a share. Q2 guidance will be for losses. That will be enough to send the stock to the 2s. Next support, $2.30.
Sure it does mr. short bus rider.
Cash is falling.
Margins are falling.
Revenues are falling.
EPS are falling.
Market share is falling.
Orders are falling.
Inventories are swelling.
Looking good, Einstein. Outstanding!
He's lying. If you go to Best Buy's webpage and check you'll see that out of hundreds of models they only have a couple with AMD chips. Same-same if you go into any brick and mortar store. In factm check and major OEM you like - HP, Lenovo, Acer, etc. - and you'll see that there are fewer than one tenth the number of models using AMD chips as there used to be.
AMD honestly can't give away APUs. No one wants them. Not even Kaveri. Loads of them in AMD inventory. Another write-down can't b too far away. Same story with GPUs. Intel and NVDA are kicking butt and taking no prisoners.
It beat on revs and EPS and beat on guidance.
nVidia discrete GPUs outsold AMD's more than 9:1 in the quarter; a recent term record.
AMD is losing money on GPUs, server CPUs, laptop CPUs, tablet CPUs and PC CPUs, and only making pennies on console chips.
nVidia's results prove it - AMD is OVER.
Would make sense.
They could get rid of creditors and shareholders and put more money into fixing the broken x86 core architecture.
Tim: "Hi Rory, what do you want. I'm too busy to spend time talking to small-fry vendors."
Tim: "Nope, it's a done deal. AMD is out of both the Macbook Pro and iMac lines. Why? You really have the gall to ask that? I'll tell you why. It's because your chips and drivers are GARBAGE! We asked you to fix the drivers and improve your technical support, and you clowns ignored us. Ignored the biggest computer maker in the world."
Tim: "Mac Pro? Yeah, we are leaning NVDA there too when we refresh in the fourth quarter. What would it take for us to let AMD hang on to one out of three of its former GPU placements? I doubt you could deliver if I told you."
Tim: "Okay, if you insist. While it's true that the Mac Pro is a very, very slow seller - one of our lowest volume products - so the risk posed by your shoddy graphics products isn't as high as it was in our money-maker volume Mac lines, and NVDA absolutely refuses to discount their professional GPUs to gain what they call 'low volume press release only business', for us to stick with AMD in the new Mac Pro, you'd have to deliver the professional graphics chips to us at your cost. For you it would only be a marketing opportunity. There's no way in good conscience I could reward #$%$ vendors like AMD with profits."
Tim: "In fact, it will allow us to increase our spend on the world-leading Intel Xeon CPUs we plan on using, making up for your poor graphics a bit with increased processing muscle. So if you give us the chips at your cost we'll let you do a press release and that's it."
Cook hangs up and says to himself:
"That guy is the biggest imbecile ever, in a long line of imbeciles, to head up the Clown."
Every time that roach, sharikou, scuttles out from his dark crack to post on the message board, it signals bad news just around the corner.
Watch and see.
Samsung, just another in a long line of OEMs which include Apple (booted AMD from 2 out of 3 lines the last refresh), Origin (dumped AMD completely), Lenovo and HP (both who went from many AMD-powered models to just a couple each over the last 12 months), etc., has figured out that AMD loses on (a) efficiency, (b) performance, and (c) value.
Of course they're dumping it, fool. They wouldn't continue to produce two different systems under the same name. Idiot. The AMD powered unit was a pile of #$%$.
CNET gave it a weak 3/5 and said: "A plastic design, underwhelming display and battery life, and underpowered AMD processing. It cut corners aren't worth the money saved."
With Core i3 Haswell besting Kaveri in INTEGRAYED GRAPHICS in many games, you shouldn't be surprised to watch it decimate AMD's little remaining market share.
As the legacy of pre-Obama Republican rule winds its way to conclusion we see the end result of divesting from education. The poor get dumber and poorer. Sure that makes them more susceptible to being duped by low-brow right wing politicians, but it also makes gullible and useless members of the workforce.
As the poor get dumber, they also get poorer, which in turn means they are no longer able to afford the second class garbage they once bought. This includes products at Walmart and computers powered by AMD chips. They've never been able to afford "Intel Inside" but now the crucial "moron" demographic on which AMD has relied for decades no longer has the pocketbook to buy even junk AMD systems.
Better watch out or I'll send another typhoon and wash away a few more of your grass-hut-living relatives.
Sure it does. That's why Intel is selling out of Core i5s and i7s while AMD can't give away its APUs at any price.
90% of AMD's revenues come from implementation of Intel's patented x86 instruction set. The license for x86 granted by Intel to AMD includes a clause that says if AMD is acquired (undergoes a change in control) the x86 license terminates and the buyer has no right to make use or sell x86 chips.
Now given that AMD's revenue remains almost totally dependent on that Intel license, and Intel isn't likely to consent to a company like QCOM becoming an Intel x86 licensee in its own right, what would a company like QCOM actually be getting if it were to buy AMD? Also, what are AMD's non-x86 assets and businesses really worth?
It's Radeon graphics cost it $4.5 billion and now struggle against NVDA to have even 20% market share in a fairly small market, generating scarcely $600 million annually. Moreover, what would QCOM possibly want with such a shoddy and tangential revenue stream?
QCOM is master of ARM. AMD is just starting. QCOM could at will eliminate AMD from the ARM server market with minimal R&D investment. Why buy what you can more cheaply and easily kill through competition?
AMD is not a buyout candidate. Not at all. It is however a bankruptcy candidate in 2014.
Ah, but Xeon isn't the competing part. Today it's Avoton. Tomorrow when AMD's ARM chip finally arrives (if it ever actually gets made commercially, that is) the competing part will be 14nm Atom for servers using the all new Goldmont core microarchitecture. Goldmont promises 5x the CPU performance and 15x the PU performance of Avoton.
Pricing? Intel's chips will outperform AMD's ancient 28nm ARM chips by many multiples in CPU performance, will consume only a tiny fraction of the electricity, will cost Intel much, much less to make (these are tiny chips) than AMD's dinner-platter sized ARM antiques. Intel can beat AMD on price at will, and still maintain incredibly rich margins.
AMD's ARM attempt is over before it ever really gets off the ground. But that was obvious in the middle of 2013 when Avoton was sampling. Why is it that AMD deliberately wastes resources dogmatically pursuing business strategies despite the fact that changes circumstances make those strategies clearly bad ones? They must be stuck with a bunch of dummies.