ASUS ROG Rapture GT-AXE11000 WIFI6E router review
Backforce One Plus Gaming Chair review
ASUS GeForce RTX 3080 Noctua OC review
AMD Ryzen 5 5600 review
PowerColor RX 6650 XT Hellhound White review
FSP Hydro PTM Pro (1200W PSU) review
ASUS ROG Radeon RX 6750 XT STRIX review
AMD FidelityFX Super Resolution 2.0 - preview
Sapphire Radeon RX 6650 XT Nitro+ review
Sapphire Radeon RX 6950 XT Sapphire Nitro+ Pure review
AMD Hires Bank to Arrange Sale or Pursue other Alternatives
A report from Reuters states that Advanced Micro Devices has hired JPMorgan Chase & Co to explore options, which could include a sale, as the chipmaker struggles to find a role in an industry increasingly focused on mobile and away from traditional PCs, according to three sources familiar with the situation. Sources told Reuters on Tuesday that an outright sale of the company is not a priority, and other options for AMD could include a sale of its portfolio of patents.
AMD said in an email to Reuters, "AMD's board and management believe that the strategy the company is currently pursuing to drive long-term growth by leveraging AMD's highly-differentiated technology assets is the right approach to enhance shareholder value. AMD is not actively pursuing a sale of the company or significant assets at this time."
One of Silicon Valley's oldest chipmakers, AMD is laying off engineers and some analysts are concerned it may not find new markets for its chips in time to reverse a declining cash reserve.
AMD's shares have fallen more than 60 percent this year, giving it a market value of about $1.4 billion. It also has long-term debt and capital lease obligations of about $2 billion.
Microsoft Corp, Google Inc, Samsung Electronics, Intel Corp and even Facebook Inc have been suggested by Wall Street analysts as potential suitors that could benefit from some of AMD's chip business, including its graphics division, PC processors and server chips.
Others say AMD's most valuable asset may be its deep bench of engineers or its patents.
k1net1cs
Senior Member
Posts: 3783
Joined: 2010-11-14
Senior Member
Posts: 3783
Joined: 2010-11-14
#4454290 Posted on: 11/14/2012 01:41 PM
Ever since Core 2 Duo came up, Intel could already price their processors as they wished; AMD didn't really give meaningful competition aside from playing catch-up (much later).
If it weren't for ATi (a.k.a. their graphics division) and their Arab backers, I have no idea how AMD would have survived this long.
Intel will never price theirs to be too expensive because they do need to move the processors they manufactured.
Making it too expensive means less buyers thus less products going off the shelves, and (non-gamer) people will soon realize that even a low-end Sandy Bridge i5 is actually overkill for their needs.
Aside from gaming, folding, and rendering, which aren't exactly the majority of users will do, a measly i3 is enough.
Heck, even those Pentium Gs are enough.
What I'm afraid of isn't pricing, but rather a lack of innovation due to less competition.
But that'd probably be of no concern right now, because AMD has been off Intel's radar for awhile.
What Intel's been battling for some time is actually ARM.
ARM is what has been keeping Intel busy to push TDP down while maintaining/improving performance.
This can be both bad news and good news. If AMD desides to sell and the company that buys them doesn`t want a role in the pc market, that leaves us with only Intel, and than Intel could price their processor as they whish.
Ever since Core 2 Duo came up, Intel could already price their processors as they wished; AMD didn't really give meaningful competition aside from playing catch-up (much later).
If it weren't for ATi (a.k.a. their graphics division) and their Arab backers, I have no idea how AMD would have survived this long.
Intel will never price theirs to be too expensive because they do need to move the processors they manufactured.
Making it too expensive means less buyers thus less products going off the shelves, and (non-gamer) people will soon realize that even a low-end Sandy Bridge i5 is actually overkill for their needs.
Aside from gaming, folding, and rendering, which aren't exactly the majority of users will do, a measly i3 is enough.
Heck, even those Pentium Gs are enough.
What I'm afraid of isn't pricing, but rather a lack of innovation due to less competition.
But that'd probably be of no concern right now, because AMD has been off Intel's radar for awhile.
What Intel's been battling for some time is actually ARM.
ARM is what has been keeping Intel busy to push TDP down while maintaining/improving performance.
Mikedogg
Senior Member
Posts: 2844
Joined: 2011-11-01
Senior Member
Posts: 2844
Joined: 2011-11-01
#4454302 Posted on: 11/14/2012 02:08 PM
AMD could just drop the CPU market, and instead start working on Havoc/physics a bit more. Nvidia is doing great in those areas - because they are exploring every possible rendering method.
And just to think, I was going to upgrade to an all AMD based system.
AMD could just drop the CPU market, and instead start working on Havoc/physics a bit more. Nvidia is doing great in those areas - because they are exploring every possible rendering method.
And just to think, I was going to upgrade to an all AMD based system.
PhazeDelta1
Senior Member
Posts: 15616
Joined: 2010-09-12
Senior Member
Posts: 15616
Joined: 2010-09-12
#4454310 Posted on: 11/14/2012 02:25 PM
I can pretty much guarantee Intel wont raise their prices anymore than they already are.
This can be both bad news and good news. If AMD desides to sell and the company that buys them doesn`t want a role in the pc market, that leaves us with only Intel, and than Intel could price their processor as they whish. I don`t wanna even mention the graphics industry. Good news if the company that buys them desides to invest in the processor developement section, cuz I think the main reason for AMDs low performing processor is their budget in developement. They have lost a lot of ground after Intel introduced the Core 2 lineup, since then it seems that AMD can`t get back on it`s feet. Maybe just a miracle can save them.
I can pretty much guarantee Intel wont raise their prices anymore than they already are.
allesclar
Senior Member
Posts: 5727
Joined: 2004-09-04
Senior Member
Posts: 5727
Joined: 2004-09-04
#4454333 Posted on: 11/14/2012 02:56 PM
IMO no, when one company controls the market, goverments create controls and such, thus limiting their price to a reasonable quantity.
While i don't want AMD to disappear, but IMO a weak AMD for the enthusiast market, its even worse. Just see what intel did with 2500K's, they are like 20€ more expensive than on release.
The Government may create controls and stuff, but they are useless at everything in general, let alone setting price levels.
They will set pricing levels based on what advice? At least direct competition is directing at attracting customers rather than having a legal obligation not to rip the customers off too much.
This is bad news regardless.
IMO no, when one company controls the market, goverments create controls and such, thus limiting their price to a reasonable quantity.
While i don't want AMD to disappear, but IMO a weak AMD for the enthusiast market, its even worse. Just see what intel did with 2500K's, they are like 20€ more expensive than on release.
The Government may create controls and stuff, but they are useless at everything in general, let alone setting price levels.
They will set pricing levels based on what advice? At least direct competition is directing at attracting customers rather than having a legal obligation not to rip the customers off too much.
This is bad news regardless.
Click here to post a comment for this news story on the message forum.
Senior Member
Posts: 6228
Joined: 2010-10-17
Eep, not good.