4 ms·

I definitely agree with you. Though AMD's comeback with Ryzen really surprised me and I don't think other companies can't replicate comebacks like that. After

I definitely agree with you. Though AMD's comeback with Ryzen really surprised me and I don't think other companies can't replicate comebacks like that. After the Bulldozer fiasco who would think AMD would be where they are today?

nordsieck 4y ago
> After the Bulldozer fiasco who would think AMD would be where they are today? I mean... for people who remember AMD's original breakthrough with the Athlon, it's not super surprising. Although it feels a bit like a problem with Intel as well. I think, too much time wearing the crown can be bad for a company. Although some companies don't seem to suffer from that problem - Nvidia and TSMC being 2 pretty good examples.
- snovv_crash 4y ago
  TSMC hasn't been on top nearly as long as Intel was. NVidia indeed seems an outlier, although arguably the GPU division of AMD hasn't had the same overhaul that the CPU side had.
  - mepian 4y ago
    Yeah, the last significant stumble of Nvidia I can remember is the GeForce FX (aka GeForce 5) series being notably inferior to the ATI R300 series.
- nerpderp82 4y ago
  I do, Bulldozer was a great lesson on how to run a great team to make a mediocre product because you don't have the right feedback in place. When you have silicon is not the time to find out you perform poorly.
- Dalewyn 4y ago
  >I think, too much time wearing the crown can be bad for a company. Being #1 is bad for everyone and everything period. History has shown us time and time again that the #1 spot inevitably falls from grace, the only question being how disasterously. There is no exception. #2 and below are where you want to place if your primary interest is continued, ideally permanent, long-term prosperity.
Vt71fcAqt7 4y ago
>I don't think other companies can't replicate comebacks like that. AMD didn't really do so much. It was TSMC that saved them.
- ChuckNorris89 4y ago
  Couldn't be a more false statement. AMD's success was also due to their new Zen architecture and move to chiplets. TSMC alone wouln't have been enough to save them if their architecture would have sucked.
  - Vt71fcAqt7 4y ago
    Right. It was just a coincidence that they became competitive only after selling glofo and moving to TSMC.
    - ChuckNorris89 4y ago
      Please get your facts straight. Zen architecture and their move to chaplets were also big factors of their success. AMD still used Glo-Fo for the first gen Ryzens and still do for the I/O die in some chiplets because it's cost competitive. It they would have just ported their failed Bulldozer architecture to TSMC, that wouldn't have helped them at all. Your original claim that "AMD didn't do much" and it was "TSMC that saved them" is a blatantly false. You are grossly misinformed if you believe that.
      - deleted 4y ago
        [deleted]
- nl 4y ago
  This isn't really true. Zen was built for years at Global Foundries on 14nm and out performed Intel at the time. Moving to TSMC definitely helped later, but it was the original Zen architecture that put them back in the game. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zen_(first_generation) https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zen_(first_generation)
silisili 4y ago
A bit apples and oranges, isn't it? Intel has been having trouble fabbing. AMD was having trouble designing. Keller et al designed a hell of a chip with Ryzen, then threw it to TSMC to produce. Intel probably could have done the same, but for the sake of having a competitive home grown fab, I'm glad they didn't.
- ac29 4y ago
  AMD also had trouble fabbing. They didnt spin out their fabs until 2009 and continued to use manufacturing from the spun out entity (Global Foundries) for many years after that despite their capabilities being behind Intel and TSMC. Ryzen manufacturing didnt move to TSMC until 2019 with Zen 2.
  - silisili 4y ago
    IIRC, AMD going with TSMC happened around the time GloFo said they're not going to do cutting edge anymore. Makes me wonder exactly what happened there. Did GloFo hit trouble and give up? Did AMD tell them they weren't going to use them anymore, leading to them giving up? Basically, who dumped who?
    - beebeepka 4y ago
      I think AMD dumped GF. The first two Zen line ups (1000/2000) clearly used an interior process.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]

nordsieck 4y ago

> After the Bulldozer fiasco who would think AMD would be where they are today? I mean... for people who remember AMD's original breakthrough with the Athlon, it's not super surprising. Although it feels a bit like a problem with Intel as well. I think, too much time wearing the crown can be bad for a company. Although some companies don't seem to suffer from that problem - Nvidia and TSMC being 2 pretty good examples.

snovv_crash 4y ago
TSMC hasn't been on top nearly as long as Intel was. NVidia indeed seems an outlier, although arguably the GPU division of AMD hasn't had the same overhaul that the CPU side had.
- mepian 4y ago
  Yeah, the last significant stumble of Nvidia I can remember is the GeForce FX (aka GeForce 5) series being notably inferior to the ATI R300 series.
nerpderp82 4y ago
I do, Bulldozer was a great lesson on how to run a great team to make a mediocre product because you don't have the right feedback in place. When you have silicon is not the time to find out you perform poorly.
Dalewyn 4y ago
>I think, too much time wearing the crown can be bad for a company. Being #1 is bad for everyone and everything period. History has shown us time and time again that the #1 spot inevitably falls from grace, the only question being how disasterously. There is no exception. #2 and below are where you want to place if your primary interest is continued, ideally permanent, long-term prosperity.

Vt71fcAqt7 4y ago

>I don't think other companies can't replicate comebacks like that. AMD didn't really do so much. It was TSMC that saved them.

ChuckNorris89 4y ago
Couldn't be a more false statement. AMD's success was also due to their new Zen architecture and move to chiplets. TSMC alone wouln't have been enough to save them if their architecture would have sucked.
- Vt71fcAqt7 4y ago
  Right. It was just a coincidence that they became competitive only after selling glofo and moving to TSMC.
  - ChuckNorris89 4y ago
    Please get your facts straight. Zen architecture and their move to chaplets were also big factors of their success. AMD still used Glo-Fo for the first gen Ryzens and still do for the I/O die in some chiplets because it's cost competitive. It they would have just ported their failed Bulldozer architecture to TSMC, that wouldn't have helped them at all. Your original claim that "AMD didn't do much" and it was "TSMC that saved them" is a blatantly false. You are grossly misinformed if you believe that.
    - deleted 4y ago
      [deleted]
nl 4y ago
This isn't really true. Zen was built for years at Global Foundries on 14nm and out performed Intel at the time. Moving to TSMC definitely helped later, but it was the original Zen architecture that put them back in the game. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zen_(first_generation) https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zen_(first_generation)

silisili 4y ago

A bit apples and oranges, isn't it? Intel has been having trouble fabbing. AMD was having trouble designing. Keller et al designed a hell of a chip with Ryzen, then threw it to TSMC to produce. Intel probably could have done the same, but for the sake of having a competitive home grown fab, I'm glad they didn't.

ac29 4y ago
AMD also had trouble fabbing. They didnt spin out their fabs until 2009 and continued to use manufacturing from the spun out entity (Global Foundries) for many years after that despite their capabilities being behind Intel and TSMC. Ryzen manufacturing didnt move to TSMC until 2019 with Zen 2.
- silisili 4y ago
  IIRC, AMD going with TSMC happened around the time GloFo said they're not going to do cutting edge anymore. Makes me wonder exactly what happened there. Did GloFo hit trouble and give up? Did AMD tell them they weren't going to use them anymore, leading to them giving up? Basically, who dumped who?
  - beebeepka 4y ago
    I think AMD dumped GF. The first two Zen line ups (1000/2000) clearly used an interior process.

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]