7 ms·

I'm trying to put this into perspective. AMD having temporary edge over Intel has happened before. Remember when AMD had Athlon in 1999 and they made huge $1

I'm trying to put this into perspective. AMD having temporary edge over Intel has happened before. Remember when AMD had Athlon in 1999 and they made huge $1 billion in profits. Intel's response has always been the same. They cut their profit margins and start selling chips cheaper. They undercut AMD with volume and price and suddenly AMD is in the doghouse again struggling. AMD's best efforts can cut into Intel's profits, but Intel's response is to remove all profits from AMD until it's left behind. Just compare these two: Revenue/gross profit/gross profit margin (Sebtember 2016) AMD $1.1B/$930 mil/4.5% INEL $60B/$16B /60+% Even if you add $5.5B revenue from GLOBALFOUNDRIES (manufacturer of AMD chips) to make AMD camp comparison more relevant, there is large difference.

tw04 10y ago
>Intel's response has always been the same. They cut their profit margins and start selling chips cheaper. They undercut AMD with volume and price and suddenly AMD is in the doghouse again struggling. AMD's best efforts can cut into Intel's profits, but Intel's response is to remove all profits from AMD until it's left behind. The last time Intel did that it was through illegal tactics - unlikely they'll get away with it a second time. https://www.engadget.com/2014/06/12/intel-loses-eu-antitrust-appeal/?ncid=rss_truncated https://www.engadget.com/2014/06/12/intel-loses-eu-antitrust...
- Nokinside 10y ago
  Doing illegal is just optimization. Intel can undercut AMD lawfully if it wants. Instead of hidden rebates, Intel can openly cut prices.
  - dman 10y ago
    That first line is amazingly brazen. If a movie is made about Intels monopolistic practices that fully belongs as a dialog spoken by the Intel CEO.
    - Nokinside 10y ago
      It was. The whole debacle was probably just decision between few percentage points in Intel's profit margins. For AMD it was much bigger issue.
  - agumonkey 10y ago
    The usual reason mentioned for Intel allowing AMD is to avoid being broken by monopoly laws. If AMD still has energy and get loads of cache, they might be able to finish the APU idea, now that opencl, gpgpu, ml, cv has caught wind, it might give them a fresh market to strive.
  - tw04 10y ago
    You're failing to acknowledge that AMD can just as easily cut prices to compete. If Intel starts selling at a loss they'll be subject to even more punitive damages than they faced for bribing OEMs. Not to mention they'd be hung out to dry by shareholders.
    - Nokinside 10y ago
      > AMD can just as easily cut prices to compete. They can't. They don't have profit margins or cash in hand to do that. > Intel starts selling at a loss they'll be subject to even more punitive damages t I think you failed to see my argument. Intel has 60% profit margins. They can cut their prices a lot without making a loss. AMD cant.

tw04 10y ago

>Intel's response has always been the same. They cut their profit margins and start selling chips cheaper. They undercut AMD with volume and price and suddenly AMD is in the doghouse again struggling. AMD's best efforts can cut into Intel's profits, but Intel's response is to remove all profits from AMD until it's left behind. The last time Intel did that it was through illegal tactics - unlikely they'll get away with it a second time. https://www.engadget.com/2014/06/12/intel-loses-eu-antitrust-appeal/?ncid=rss_truncated https://www.engadget.com/2014/06/12/intel-loses-eu-antitrust...

Nokinside 10y ago
Doing illegal is just optimization. Intel can undercut AMD lawfully if it wants. Instead of hidden rebates, Intel can openly cut prices.
- dman 10y ago
  That first line is amazingly brazen. If a movie is made about Intels monopolistic practices that fully belongs as a dialog spoken by the Intel CEO.
  - Nokinside 10y ago
    It was. The whole debacle was probably just decision between few percentage points in Intel's profit margins. For AMD it was much bigger issue.
- agumonkey 10y ago
  The usual reason mentioned for Intel allowing AMD is to avoid being broken by monopoly laws. If AMD still has energy and get loads of cache, they might be able to finish the APU idea, now that opencl, gpgpu, ml, cv has caught wind, it might give them a fresh market to strive.
- tw04 10y ago
  You're failing to acknowledge that AMD can just as easily cut prices to compete. If Intel starts selling at a loss they'll be subject to even more punitive damages than they faced for bribing OEMs. Not to mention they'd be hung out to dry by shareholders.
  - Nokinside 10y ago
    > AMD can just as easily cut prices to compete. They can't. They don't have profit margins or cash in hand to do that. > Intel starts selling at a loss they'll be subject to even more punitive damages t I think you failed to see my argument. Intel has 60% profit margins. They can cut their prices a lot without making a loss. AMD cant.