When it comes to laptops, Samsung has created more than their fair share of devices. In fact products like the Samsung Series 9 Ultrabooks have proven to be pretty popular, but according to a report from DigiTimes, it seems that Samsung could be looking to put an end to the launch of conventional notebook models come 2015. The company is expected to continue pushing out Chromebooks but as far as R&D is concerned for future laptop models, Samsung will be putting an end to that.
According to DigiTimes, the reason is that while Samsung did enjoy growth for its Windows-based notebooks several years ago, that growth has since been stunted due to a decreasing demand in laptops as well as stiff competition from other laptop manufacturers such as Lenovo, who many years ago acquired IBM’s ThinkPad and who has since started to create ThinkPad laptops of their own. Based on the report, Samsung is said to have set their goal of 7 million laptops to be shipped in 2014, which is decrease of 41.67% from 2013 where they managed 12 million units, which was also actually a miss for Samsung who estimated 17 million units shipped last year.
At AMD's web site, the GS guy is very positive about AMD's strategy, Gaming, ARM servers, custom APUs etc, only a couple of minutes were spent on PC market.
On the street, earnings are not that important (look at FB, Amazon, Tesla etc), the key is an unconstrained bright future. By disengaging from Intel, AMD has found a world for itself. Chip convergence with highly parallel compute.
Lowly educated guy wants to get paid. Fraud is the way.
Samsung uses Intel in ATIV Book 9 Lite does NOT necessarily mean AMD is out. This is simple logic Ashraf should understand. Go to Samsung's web site, and AMD quadcore chip is still listed as an option.
From the same News: The games division saw a 64.6 percent boost in sales over last year, thanks to the PlayStation 4's strong launch and a weakened yen.
Facts of that case, Boeing's new plane failed wing test, but its execs kept saying it would soon fly. The plane got delayed two years, and stock dropped. Court: no case, though the info was false, Plaintiff cannot show that Boeing intended to defraud.
These hungry lawyers may get sanctioned.
Let me quote from CITY OF LIVONIA EMPLOYEES'RET. v. Boeing Co., 711 F. 3d 754 7th Circuit 2013, where the lawyers are on the way to the guillotine for failing to check its source.
[The Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995, Pub.L. No. 104-67, 109 Stat. 737, altered the landscape of federal securities fraud litigation in four respects that bear on our case. First, it requires a plaintiff who is complaining about "forward-looking" statements — predictions or speculations about the future — to prove "actual knowledge" of falsity on the part of defendants, not merely reckless indifference to the danger that a statement is false. 15 U.S.C. § 78u-5(c)(1)(B); see Slayton v. American Express Co., 604 F.3d 758, 773 (2d Cir.2010); Lormand v. U.S. Unwired Inc., 565 F.3d 228, 243-44 (5th Cir.2009); Helwig v. Vencor, Inc., 251 F.3d 540, 554-55 (6th Cir.2001) (en banc).
Second, the complaint must "state with particularity facts giving rise to a strong inference that the defendant acted with the required state of mind," 15 U.S.C. § 78u-4(b)(2)(A) (emphasis added), rather than a mere inference. But except with regard to "forward-looking" statements, the Act does not specify "the required state of mind," so it remains scienter.
"There is no securities fraud by hindsight." Fulton County Employees Retirement System v. MGIC Investment Corp., 675 F.3d 1047, 1050-51 (7th Cir. 2012); In re Ceridian Corp. Securities Litigation, 542 F.3d 240, 248 (8th Cir.2008); Denny v. Barber, 576 F.2d 465, 470 (2d Cir.1978) (Friendly, J.). The law does not require public disclosure of mere risks of failure. No prediction — even a prediction that the sun will rise tomorrow — has a 100 percent probability of being correct. The future is shrouded in uncertainty. If a mistaken prediction is deemed a fraud, there will be few predictions, including ones that are well grounded, as no one wants to be held hostage to an unknown future.]
Check DICE's numbers:
Core i7-3970X Extreme (6-core 4GHz) and it featured two R9 290X cards.The frame rate with Mantle shot up to 116 from 78fps, a 58 percent increase.
Joel , you ought to take a lesson in logical reasoning. Mantle mostly helps in "CPU bound" situation does lead to a conclusion that "it’s actually for boosting low-end CPUs." CPU-bound vs. GPU-bound is a relative comparison of GPU and CPU. While low-end CPU is the result of a comparison between CPUs. One measure (CPU/GPU) simply cannot lead to another (CPU/CPU). You could have a PC with the highest end CPU currently available, but still being CPU-bound due to the GPU being even more powerful. In such a case, Mantle will offer big gains. Similarly, you could have a low-end Celeron paired with a even lower GPU, and Mantle will help a bit but not much.
Once AMD is no longer hated by vicious and jealous Intel stakeholders who have vast resources to protect their investments through legal or illegal manipulation, it will be judged more on its own merit. Its stock worths $40 per share.
Why don't you watch the 42 minute presentation of Mantle by Oxide Games? The game developers know much more than you and me.
You are wrong. In terms of AMD64+GCN microprocessors (APUs), AMD grew a massive amount, last Q. AMD's last Q saw a 10% drop in PC chips revenue. This was projected by AMD, no surprise there. AMD categorizes 500 million APU revenue as Visual Computing for a strategic reason, which I attempted to explain. As to the margin of Visual Compute, you need to distinguish Operating Margin from Gross Margin. 15% operating margin is good business.
AMD64+GCN+OpenCL/Mantle will allow AMD to dominate visual compute , and AMD64/ARM64 + Fabric will allow AMD to penetrate deeper into the Cloud. So far, the gaming industry has been standardized around AMD64+GCN. Mantle will push AMD's performance to a much higher level.
AMD has almost disengaged itself from Intel. With AMD64, GCN and Fabric, AMD will be all by itself in a chip-convergence world as the only chip design company owning all necessary IP blocks. Once it is fully disengaged, it will be valued on its own merits, instead of being hated by the jealous and fanatic Intel stake holders who have a lot to lose and vast resources to manipulate the markets.
Ashraf's main thesis is that AMD is losing microprocessor market share because AMD's IPC is lower than Intel. The fallacy of this is it completely ignores the fact that XB1 and PS4 APUs are 8-core AMD64 microprocessors coupled with GCN. AMD thus is growing its microprocessor business at a massive rate.
AMD put the XB1 and PS4 APU into the Visual Computing for a strong strategic reason.
Ashraf Eassa, with a lowly education from a 7th-tier school, is more concerned about proving to the world that he is more intelligent than he really is. But his illogical analysis betrayed his feeble mind.
Some of his stuff is also plainly dishonest, as he often ignores the well known facts.
A lowly education from a 7-tier school adds no credibility to his logically deficient mind, but only serves to confirm his inadequacies which he so eagerly tries to disapprove on the internet. At least, he has Shorts@AMD applauding to his feeble-minded reasoning.
AMD's APU shipment grew by at least 5 million units over 4Q02. You ask why? Count the 8-core Jaguar AMD64 APUs used in XB1 and PS4. Can any one deny that these APUs are full blown microprocessors with 8 x86-64 cores? No.
Now the question is: why shouldn't one count them as microprocessors? You say because AMD put them into Visual Computing. But AMD did for a very good strategic reason.
Your U of Vermont lowly education certainly does not help in improving your logical deficiencies to comprehend the importance of this strategy.