3 ms·

I think the issue might more be related to yields and distribution. Even when AMD were outpacing Intel (many years back) they struggled to meet demand and manuf

by leonroy 10y ago

I think the issue might more be related to yields and distribution. Even when AMD were outpacing Intel (many years back) they struggled to meet demand and manufacture enough chips. There was a great article back then too about why Apple and Dell weren't going all in on AMD chips and whilst sweeteners from Intel is part of it, a lot of it had to do with Dell or Apple's typical volume far outpacing what AMD could reliably manufacture.

kogepathic 10y ago
> they struggled to meet demand and manufacture enough chips. I would think, and hope, that the situation is better now. Back then, AMD was manufacturing their chips in house, now they're manufactured by GlobalFoundries and TSMC.
- pkd 10y ago
  GlobalFoundries was spin off from the AMD fabrication units so I don't think they got an immediate advantage with them. Regardless of that AMD is a much smaller company than Intel (~9k employees vs ~100k employees) so it is quite a remarkable feat that they have managed to stay in the competition for so long.
  - matt_wulfeck 10y ago
    I speculate that they could have been extinguished years ago by intel, if it weren't for their fears of anti-competition and monopoly. Either way, I predict both will slowly be eaten by GPU-driven processing and ARM desktops. It's going to be a very tough secular cycle for CISC chip makers in the coming decade.
- mastax 10y ago
  The situation is better except for the protection money AMD has to pay GloFo: "This flexibility comes at a cost though. Not unlike past years where AMD has paid GlobalFoundries a penalty under take-or-pay, AMD will be paying the foundry for this new flexibility. GlobalFoundries will be receiving a $100M payment from AMD, spread out over the next 4 quarters. Meanwhile starting in 2017, AMD will also have to pay GlobalFoundries for wafers they buy from third-party foundries. This in particular is a notable change from past agreements, as AMD has never paid a penalty before in this fashion. Ultimately this means AMD could end up paying GlobalFoundries two different types of penalties: one for making a chip at another fab, and a second penalty if AMD doesn’t make their wafer target for the year with GlobalFoundries." "Along with all of the above, in exchange for the latest agreement AMD is making one more payment in the form of a stock warrant...The warrant will give Mubadala the option to buy up to 75 million AMD shares at a currently below-market price of $5.98/share, so long as they continue to own less than 20% of AMD. AMD is valuing the warrant at $235 million, which will bring the total one-time-costs of the latest agreement to $335M." http://www.anandtech.com/show/10631/amd-amends-globalfoundries-wafer-supply-agreement-through-2020 http://www.anandtech.com/show/10631/amd-amends-globalfoundri... So Globalfoundries was behind Intel, Samsung and TSMC on 14nm, and they have chronic yield problems which made it hard for AMD to compete. I understand that most contracts for large orders have lots of stipulations and minimum purchase agreements but this agreement seems unwise. Why tie your entire business to one fab when their fortunes change year by year and being early can be such a competitive advantage? Moving between fabs is a huge amount of work yes, but now they have to do that work to get on TSMC and also pay Glofo for the privilege.
ianderf 10y ago
> There was a great article back then too about why Apple and Dell weren't going all in on AMD chips Because Intel paid them to not use AMD chips. https://www.extremetech.com/computing/184323-intel-stuck-with-1-45-billion-fine-in-europe-for-unfair-and-damaging-practices-against-amd https://www.extremetech.com/computing/184323-intel-stuck-wit...

by leonroy 10y ago

kogepathic 10y ago

> they struggled to meet demand and manufacture enough chips. I would think, and hope, that the situation is better now. Back then, AMD was manufacturing their chips in house, now they're manufactured by GlobalFoundries and TSMC.

pkd 10y ago
GlobalFoundries was spin off from the AMD fabrication units so I don't think they got an immediate advantage with them. Regardless of that AMD is a much smaller company than Intel (~9k employees vs ~100k employees) so it is quite a remarkable feat that they have managed to stay in the competition for so long.
- matt_wulfeck 10y ago
  I speculate that they could have been extinguished years ago by intel, if it weren't for their fears of anti-competition and monopoly. Either way, I predict both will slowly be eaten by GPU-driven processing and ARM desktops. It's going to be a very tough secular cycle for CISC chip makers in the coming decade.
mastax 10y ago
The situation is better except for the protection money AMD has to pay GloFo: "This flexibility comes at a cost though. Not unlike past years where AMD has paid GlobalFoundries a penalty under take-or-pay, AMD will be paying the foundry for this new flexibility. GlobalFoundries will be receiving a $100M payment from AMD, spread out over the next 4 quarters. Meanwhile starting in 2017, AMD will also have to pay GlobalFoundries for wafers they buy from third-party foundries. This in particular is a notable change from past agreements, as AMD has never paid a penalty before in this fashion. Ultimately this means AMD could end up paying GlobalFoundries two different types of penalties: one for making a chip at another fab, and a second penalty if AMD doesn’t make their wafer target for the year with GlobalFoundries." "Along with all of the above, in exchange for the latest agreement AMD is making one more payment in the form of a stock warrant...The warrant will give Mubadala the option to buy up to 75 million AMD shares at a currently below-market price of $5.98/share, so long as they continue to own less than 20% of AMD. AMD is valuing the warrant at $235 million, which will bring the total one-time-costs of the latest agreement to $335M." http://www.anandtech.com/show/10631/amd-amends-globalfoundries-wafer-supply-agreement-through-2020 http://www.anandtech.com/show/10631/amd-amends-globalfoundri... So Globalfoundries was behind Intel, Samsung and TSMC on 14nm, and they have chronic yield problems which made it hard for AMD to compete. I understand that most contracts for large orders have lots of stipulations and minimum purchase agreements but this agreement seems unwise. Why tie your entire business to one fab when their fortunes change year by year and being early can be such a competitive advantage? Moving between fabs is a huge amount of work yes, but now they have to do that work to get on TSMC and also pay Glofo for the privilege.

ianderf 10y ago

> There was a great article back then too about why Apple and Dell weren't going all in on AMD chips Because Intel paid them to not use AMD chips. https://www.extremetech.com/computing/184323-intel-stuck-with-1-45-billion-fine-in-europe-for-unfair-and-damaging-practices-against-amd https://www.extremetech.com/computing/184323-intel-stuck-wit...