Not Bad AMD not bad at all. The only gripes that I have heard about the AMD Threadripper CPUs is the CPU retention mechanism especially the ones made my Foxconn on some motherboards its impossible for the screws to catch and make a proper connection for instillation. Jayztwocents made a video on it.

BReal85:

That's why (or at least was one reason) AMD (ATI) cards sold better then nowadays: they had better value for the money in most GPU categories (nowadays it's only competitive in mid range).

Except, Vega didn't have a better value, at all. AMD GPUs sold well because of the mining craze.

And X1X is just coming, which should sell much better than PS4 Pro. Ryzen update may come in early 2018. Promising times for AMD.

AMD didn't see much profit from the consoles. It basically helped prevent more layoffs but that's about it. I don't think X1X or PS4P are going to be any different.

kruno:

Honestly disappointing. I was expecting much bigger sales of Ryzen and way bigger revenue to the tune of min. 3B US $. Well this shows that only thing that keeps AMD afloat is enthusiasts and not general public.For general public AMD may not even exist otherwise they would have much bigger revenue thanks to the great performance of ZEN architecture.

$3 billion? Even if Ryzen could OC to 5GHz and if Vega64 could outperform a 1080Ti, AMD still wouldn't have seen $3 billion in revenue. As for the general public, I'd say you're mostly right. None of the existing Zen products are appealing to the general public, and most GPUs just haven't been available for even enthusiasts. But none of that changes the fact that AMD actually did very well in selling their products. And despite this, they still didn't breach $2 billion. Intel can make so many billions of dollars for several reasons, such as (but not limited to): 1. They own their own factories, so they don't have to pay any 3rd parties. AMD has to outsource to companies like Global Foundries. 2. They've barely put any effort into changing their CPU design for almost 3 years, and have been using the same fundamental architecture for almost a decade. AMD, meanwhile, has created a brand new architecture twice in that amount of time, and, they've also spent a lot more money into GPU architectures. 3. They currently have products that appeal to the general public. AMD doesn't yet have APUs or wide-spread mobile chips. 4. They have a lot more deals with other companies and organizations (particularly schools) that guarantee them a huge chunk of sales. 5. Their products are arbitrarily priced higher.

heffeque:

Here's an example of someone who thinks that going from deep-red (almost bankruptcy in late 2015 - early 2016) to black numbers is a disappointment. What are you, 5? The world doesn't work that way. Companies don't suddenly become ultra-profitable from one quarter to another just because a few products turn out to be fairly good. IMHO, if Raven Ridge ends up being a nice APU, AMD will be able to start to really take off and fight Intel with more resources backing them up.

Yes disappoint because all of the numbers in retail and seeing some OEM s are already selling boxes was suggesting bigger gain. Don't confuse the fact they are now in black with the fact that is still overall small market share that AMD command.They had almost 1B US$ sales with the Bulldozer and derivatives (both APU and desktop)

schmidtbag:

Except, Vega didn't have a better value, at all. AMD GPUs sold well because of the mining craze. AMD didn't see much profit from the consoles. It basically helped prevent more layoffs but that's about it. I don't think X1X or PS4P are going to be any different. $3 billion? Even if Ryzen could OC to 5GHz and if Vega64 could outperform a 1080Ti, AMD still wouldn't have seen $3 billion in revenue. As for the general public, I'd say you're mostly right. None of the existed Zen products are appealing to the general public, and most GPUs just haven't been available for even enthusiasts. But none of that changes the fact that AMD actually did very well in selling their products. Intel can make so many billions of dollars for several reasons, such as (but not limited to): 1. They own their own factories, so they don't have to pay any 3rd parties. AMD has to outsource to companies like Global Foundries. 2. They've barely put any effort into changing their CPU design for almost 3 years, and have been using the same fundamental architecture for almost a decade. AMD, meanwhile, has created a brand new architecture twice in that amount of time, and, they've also spent a lot more money into GPU architectures. 3. They currently have products that appeal to the general public. AMD doesn't yet have APUs or wide-spread mobile chips. 4. They have a lot more deals with other companies and organizations (particularly schools) that guarantee them a huge chunk of sales.

Qute: " 1. They own their own factories, so they don't have to pay any 3rd parties. AMD has to outsource to companies like Global Foundries. 2. They've barely put any effort into changing their CPU design for almost 3 years, and have been using the same fundamental architecture for almost a decade. AMD, meanwhile, has created a brand new architecture twice in that amount of time, and, they've also spent a lot more money into GPU architectures." That all stands but i am talking about sales not profit or profit margins.

If they can keep the momentum going like this for the next 4-5 years I can see them catching-up or maybe even passing Intel in sales at certin products.Go Amd!!!

nz3777:

If they can keep the momentum going like this for the next 4-5 years I can see them catching-up or maybe even passing Intel in sales at certin products.Go Amd!!!

Depending how you look at it, they already have. In terms of quantity, they're doing pretty great, and from what I recall hearing, the 1600 is the best-selling CPU on Amazon. But, the chances of them exceeding Intel in revenue will probably never happen.

schmidtbag:

Depending how you look at it, they already have. In terms of quantity, they're doing pretty great, and from what I recall hearing, the 1600 is the best-selling CPU on Amazon. But, the chances of them exceeding Intel in revenue will probably never happen.

The Mindfactory.de figures for August showed them exceeding Intel in both units AND revenue. Although they'll probably never exceed Intel in total revenue, I would say that they could very well match or exceed Intel in certain markets, such as retail and desktops - servers and data centers are a different story (that'll be a much bigger hill to climb).

JamesSneed:

3) AMD will be at a process disadvantage to Intel(yes both are 14nm but Intel is more dense and can get to higher frequencies) until they get on GloFlo's 7nm process. This should help them be more competitive all around due to lower power and higher frequencies which the current GloFlo process is inhibiting greatly.

Actually you have it wrong. AMD was sorely disappointed by GloFlo's production difficulty @14nm. They have contracted TSMC for 7nm lead production (the biggest independent fab with the highest QC). they are doing GloFlo's 10nm in the interim (Q2 2018)

D3M1G0D:

The best-selling Ryzen CPU is the 1600, and I seriously doubt that enthusiasts are the ones buying them. There is no way that AMD could survive by only appealing to enthusiasts.

Ofc not. They are appealing to miners. 🙂

gx-x:

Ofc not. They are appealing to miners. 🙂

People don't buy CPUs for mining... This is why dual cores sell so great - you only need a little bit of processing power to send a small chunk of data to the GPUs to keep them busy. All that matters is having enough PCIe slots to fit all your GPUs.

gx-x:

Ofc not. They are appealing to miners. 🙂

LOL. Seriously though, I think Nvidia cards are just as attractive for mining. Also, the mining craze seems to be cooling off, as Su mentioned on the earnings call (part of the reason why the stock sold off).

Yep, AMD is approaching the $6.5B-a-year threshold again--really nice profit this quarter considering the enormous bill they must have footed for marketing. Hopefully it won't be long before they hit $10B a year again--and this is exclusive earnings from technology sales only, as AMD isn't highly diversified like Intel. AMD is running on all cylinders again thanks to Su and the rest of the team--who actually have a great idea of what they are doing--which hasn't been true for AMD, sadly enough, since Jerry Sanders, really. Glad to see the company back in competent hands once again!

Awesome news!!! Great work and great products! Now they must keep the mining and gaming folks happy by bringing a strong product at reasonable prices too the table and that profit will go up even more.

I'm curious to know how much of this is to do with ryzen/ TR and how much of it is due to the mining craze thats being going on for the past year now. because the gpus are selling out soon as they appear its mental haha, that and price inflation of them. Either way it's nice not to see AMD still in the red... uhh 😀 well the other red (PUNS!)

schmidtbag:

Depending how you look at it, they already have. In terms of quantity, they're doing pretty great, and from what I recall hearing, the 1600 is the best-selling CPU on Amazon. But, the chances of them exceeding Intel in revenue will probably never happen.

Cherry picked data from retailers isn't a good way to judge how successful a product is. Reminds me of that german retailer numbers which made everyone proclaim AMD gained 10 points in market share the previous quarter. While Jon Peddie research tends to focus on GPUs, if you compare their numbers to that of the Steam hardware survey, they're pretty close. So if we were to look at the Steam Survey's CPU section, the past few months AMD has actually lost market share. Yeah, i know not everyone has steam but if GPU numbers are so close with total market numbers, i dont see why CPU numbers would not be. Don't get me wrong, i'm glad AMD is in the black. It seems they're finally beginning to learn from their mistakes, and they'll make even more money if they manage to keep their mouths shut about upcoming products until after sales of current products drop off. As for their stock price dropping, i have a feeling it might be a good time to buy some AMD stock. Last time I had this feeling I dropped $10k on their stock back in 1999 as a young and stupid college student who refused to listen to those saying that i need a diversified portfolio. It was $17/share then... and the following year i sold it at $89/share.* *nothing in the stock market is guaranteed, and no investment can guarantee gains without the risk of losing ones principal. I got lucky. It could have easily gone the other way.

kruno:

Honestly disappointing. I was expecting much bigger sales of Ryzen and way bigger revenue to the tune of min. 3B US $. Well this shows that only thing that keeps AMD afloat is enthusiasts and not general public.For general public AMD may not even exist otherwise they would have much bigger revenue thanks to the great performance of ZEN architecture.

"General public" processors haven't even been released yet, so cool story brah. Also, it's nice to know you're the all-knowing sales guru who gets disappointed about sales numbers because you expected them to be bigger, even though you have no clue what these numbers should be, or what is good, etc. Cool story brah.

Aura89:

"General public" processors haven't even been released yet, so cool story brah. Also, it's nice to know you're the all-knowing sales guru who gets disappointed about sales numbers because you expected them to be bigger, even though you have no clue what these numbers should be, or what is good, etc. Cool story brah.

Oh,please enlighten me what are this so called mythical "General public" processors?? And i am not all-knowing sales guru just pointing to the little teed-bit of a fact that everybody's mouth is full of "competition,competition" but at the same time they all just suck marketing "tricks" and buying Intel. Let me in position of "all-knowing sales guru" point to little fact that market has changed and there is no more that "general public processor",That is now domain of mobiles and tablets,that thing of the past that you need whole "box" just to surf internet and do some light gaming and Word is just that past.Consumer aka "general public" is overwhelming on mobiles and business mostly "cloud" and thin client,education is on chromebooks .So APU's are not going to change picture that much.

Andrew LB:

Cherry picked data from retailers isn't a good way to judge how successful a product is. Reminds me of that german retailer numbers which made everyone proclaim AMD gained 10 points in market share the previous quarter. While Jon Peddie research tends to focus on GPUs, if you compare their numbers to that of the Steam hardware survey, they're pretty close. So if we were to look at the Steam Survey's CPU section, the past few months AMD has actually lost market share. Yeah, i know not everyone has steam but if GPU numbers are so close with total market numbers, i dont see why CPU numbers would not be.

I explicitly said "depending how you look at it", meaning, what I said isn't the only way to interpret it, but just one of many. Regardless, in any situation where AMD outsells Intel, that's a big deal. Intel's net income is higher than all of AMD's assets combined. So for AMD to outsell with something like the 1600 in the world's largest retailer is not cherry-picking results, that's conclusively a significant accomplishment. Meanwhile, you resort to the Steam hardware survey, which doesn't have much correlation at all to current CPU sales. Intel still wins by a wide margin in terms of total PCs still in use, and they likely will remain that way for many years to come. Even if Intel made no sales at all this year, they would still be #1 most used brand. As for GPUs, those have even less of a correlation to sales. Many models (including Nvidia's) have been selling out due to mining. These GPUs will likely never be recognized for gaming purposes.