Hello, Fool! | Login | Signup | My Fool
Sep 5, 2008 7:40 AM ET | Site Changes | Help
The Company is a global semiconductor company with facilities around the world. It provides processing solutions for the computing, graphics and consumer electronics markets.
View All Commentary (AMD)
Recs
aekarahan (< 20) Submitted: 1/23/07 2:55 AM : Start Price: $20.54 AMD Score: -59.43
Engineers of AMD have a new brilliant and revolutionary idea. Together with ATI they'll bring the CPU and GPU on the same chip. But this is just the beginning of a new era. In near future they will probably mold a physic-engine, and any kind of accelerated units that your imagination allows, within a single chip. (Ref: AMDs analyst day at 14. Dec. 2006, presentation of Phil Hester, AMD's Corporate Vice President and Chief Technology Officer, http://www.amd.com/us-en/Corporate/InvestorRelations/0,,51_306_14668,00.html)This means no more FSB speed limit between CPU and GPU. After this fact was declared (actually much before 14.Dec), NVDA has tried an urgent counter attack, and announced a new NFORCE motherboard with 1033 MHz FSB speed in addition to its new 8800 GeForce serie. This however doesn't compensate the fascinating idea of hardwired CPU-GPU.Similarly Intel's hurriedly planned 45 nm chips cannot counterbalance this revolutionary idea. In fact most of the end-users will not even have interested about the nm scala of these chips.If the system intelligently optimized and perform better, it should sell better. Marriage of AMD and ATI is something more than targeting the game and multimedia market. With this new concept, they will change the rules. They will redefine the art of computing and they will break the new speed limits.Imagine how the motherboards will shrink. And imagine how AMD will invade the laptop market. Hardware that we add on today's motherboards, or some addons like on board vga's will be shifted from the surface of motherboards into the processor. This means however means cheaper laptops, cheaper motherboards, but more apportionment for AMD since it offers more functionality on its chips.In long term this means motherboards will be cheaper, but AMD chips will be sold for higher prices, because on their chips they will bring more than multiple-cpu's. They will cancel the need for graphic cards, or on the board vga's. And in future, they will probably cancel the need for basic audio functions, they can easily bring physic -engines for gamers, etc. etc... Possibilities are limited with your imagination.
Report this Post Replies: 4 | Reply
Oops! There appears to be a problem with your comment. Check to see if there's something you left out.
RandomGuy123 (< 20) Submitted: 1/25/07 5:00 PM
Recs: 0 | Rec This
The name of this advance is "Fusion", and it is what I'm betting on as I hold onto my real life AMD shares that I bought at $18.50. (>.<) If/when it comes to fruition, this guy is right, it has the potential to completely revolutionize processors. Hopefully Intel is behind the wave on this particular issue, but I have the sneaking suspicion they are working on something to compete with this advance. However, if Intel's only answer is to cram more cores onto chips, then AMD will be the easy victor, and my current loss will be my eventual gain.
Report this Post Reply
giorgi (31.12) Submitted: 1/28/07 7:33 AM
This is exactly the difference between Computer Science and Computer Engineering:Computer Scientists always imagine fantastic computers, Computer Engineers actually build them...Don't you think that Intel (that already knows how to make graphic chips) would have already done that integration between CPU and GPU, if there was a sense in doing that?If you look at good graphics card, they dissipate more power than the CPU: Fusion chip would be exactly what its name reminds, something that will just melt down!On the other side, even a single computer on a chip is nice idea (VIA tech. is already doing something in that direction), but once again we are not talking about big performance in such case, nowadays.Final comment: making 45nm chip **IS** revolutionary technology (this is reality NOW thanks to Intel). Thinking about integrating CPU and GPU is just something pretty old and whenever it will make sense, Intel will do it (better than AMD) because their technology is consuming less power!!
RandomGuy123 (< 20) Submitted: 1/29/07 6:32 PM
You're right about one thing; 45nm chip technology is revolutionary, Intel has it now, AMD does not, and that is not going to change for a while. That's bad news for AMD. 45nm technology enables processors to do the same work whilst using less power, and on server farms, low power and high speed is the name of the game. As for the Fusion concept, Intel and AMD have simply decided to go two different routes. Intel has chosen (wisely, at least short term) to rely on the 45nm technology, while AMD has chosen to put it''s resources into developing the Fusion concept. As for your argument that a GPU would "melt down" a CPU if they were paired, what are you smoking? Do you really think that AMD would acquire ATI for 5.4 billion dollars without considering that GPU's "dissipate more power" than a CPU? Actually, I have never heard that a GPU creates more heat than a CPU, and if it does, that is surely due to less R&D being spent on GPU's rather than some inherent trait that they all posess. Obviously, you know something that the scientists at AMD do not - Maybe you should apply for a job, or sell them your secret! Now that I have gotten that out of my system, after researching the upcoming 'war' between AMD and Intel, I think one can only come to one reasonable conclusion: AMD has lost the battle, at least until their Fusion concept rolls out. If Intel has an answer to that, it might be a long time until AMD can steadily gain market share again, which is possible considering the size of Intel's R&D budget. We shall see. I have seen AMD trump Intel for the past ten years on innovation, performance, price, and customer loyalty, but it looks like those days may be over. It seems that AMD has woken the 600lb gorilla, and they have underestimated Intel's ability (and willingness) to innovate. While this is not the end of AMD, by a longshot, it looks like they are going to see declining market share until their Fusion concept rolls out in late 2008. Long term, AMD wins. Short term, put your money on Intel. If AMD's stock keeps dropping for the next few days, cut your losses, because I don't see a bottom on this one.
1poorguy (96.53) Submitted: 2/23/07 9:55 AM
Long term AMD wins???? Not likely. AMD has sucked ever since they stole the x86 architecture from Intel. The one thing that saved them was a lucky confluence of events: Intel screwed up. Big time. Processor problems, mobo problems. It was bad. Intel was not able to deliver enough volume to meet demand (another screw up). AMD introduced Athlon, and it worked well.Those things together gave AMD a chance for some open field running. But they too were at capacity and couldn't meet demand, so they couldn't exploit the opportunity to pound Intel. They did well, no doubt. But they didn't have the ability to kick Intel in the groin and take off. Since then they have had problems with new products, and new processes. Intel, on the other hand, has not. Their new products and processes are killers, and AMD is their target. AMD will continue to lose market share, revenues will shrink, and they will not be able to position themselves to exploit the next time Intel makes a blunder.When you're at the mercy of your competitor screwing up (or not), you don't control your own destiny. That's a terrible position to be in. And if recent history is any indication, AMD has reached the limits of its technical capabilities and will continue to be at the mercy of Intel. In which case they become little more than Intel's insurance against the anti-trust folks in the DOJ.Disclaimer: I have no position in either company. However, AMD is my best scoring CAPS pick. You guess whether I picked thumbs up or down....
Terms & Conditions
RSS Headlines
Fool UK