Overclock.net › Member Blogs › Game Over Amd Evil Empire Wins Rebels Lose

Game Over Amd Evil Empire Wins Rebels Lose

While I am neither an AMD fan nor Intel fan, I've traditionally opted for the best price/performance value processor. I currently have 7 desktops, 6 are Intel and 1 AMD. In the following sequence of quotes, I've taken them mostly from the NY vs. Intel anti-trust suit. You can see where Intel want's AMD to go and where they currently are now.

Obviously, Intel used underhanded tactics to get there, the fact of the matter is that we are there now and AMD is not in a good position.

(Page 12)
From an internal HP email: “In this market, Intel dictates the rules of the game

This pretty much explains how OEM feels about Intel. You go with them or risk loosing money.

(Page 17)
Intel therefore argued to OEMs that Intel would “continue to pigeon hole AMD to the bottom 10% of segment.…” Intel’s Paul Ottellini believed that AMD units which were sold on “the backstreets of beijing [sic] are wonderful.… [T]here is really no question that in the long run, I would like to see amd [sic] output spread round the world as a low cost/low value, unbranded brand…” Accordingly, in the following years, Intel focused on barring AMD’s access to this vital high ground – the corporate market and its gatekeepers, the major OEMs.

Intel DOES NOT want to eliminate AMD, but instead keep them as a second tier brand. This is of course so they can maintain a near monopoly. If AMD does not exist, you can bet Intel will be broken up or their x86 license open up to other manufacturers.

(Page 20)
During the relevant period, OEMs understood that they would benefit from increased competition in the microprocessor market. If a competitor such as AMD could establish itself as a genuine alternative to Intel, they (and consumers) would enjoy more choices, lower prices, and better products. Nevertheless, they frequently decided, when faced with the array of incentives and threats which Intel brought to bear, to collaborate with Intel in restricting their purchases from AMD.

People much smarter than myself, KNOWS that with competition, comes better products and better pricing. Yet everyday, I hear Intel fanboys screaming for AMD to "throw in the towel". When I read these type of comments my eyes are rolling. People really do not know how bad things can get if AMD does not exist.

In early December, several sources sites AMD changing their tune with a new CEO and restructuring from November.
In an e-mail to Computerworld, Silverman wrote that the company is rethinking its course.

"Any time a company is more focused on its competitor than what the market wants and needs, it is probably not in a good place for long-term growth" wrote Silverman. "Our CEO Rory Read is driving a shift internally to think beyond the typical and outdated AMD/Intel mindset.

"At the end of the day, we aren't focused on keeping pace with Intel, we are focused on keeping pace with consumers and the market," he said. "That is how we are going to win."
source from PC World

GG AMD. While it seems AMD played right into Intel's hand, given the current AMD desktop/server products, this approach is the ONLY logical path for AMD.

Comments (13)

Nice article man. I wish AMD went ARM for... three months?
Imagine the market. Intel would have a monopoly, the courts would force Intel to liberalize x86, AMD could pick it again and modify it at will... And break havoc amongst the foes XD
Isn't AMD more competitive in the GPU sector nowadays anyway? Seems like AMD and Nvidia are neck and neck there, and AMD does well in the laptop market as well with the APUs. I don't think AMD's success lies in desktop processors so much anymore, and even with Bulldozer being non-competitive performance wise vs Intel, Bulldozer is still selling out units as soon as they come in on Newegg and other sites.
But we all knew this. It's like linux vs windows. We all know linux is better but we use windows anyway because it has the backing,support and the monopoly to make interconnect easy.

Nice write up though.
by this logic, wouldn't it be better if amd did throw in the towel? if this happened, intel would be forced to break up. and we would no longer have to pretend intel is not a monopoly, which it functionally is anyway
If AMD stopped producing X86 products all that would be left is VIA, and I'm certainly sure it wouldn't count as competition, as they only have presence in the embedded market.
Intel would probably be forced to liberalize the X86 standard (which IMO should've been forced to do so AGES ago, after all it's a standard), and it would probably become the best era X86 has EVER seen.
Good grief, I have a feeling this is going to happen if piledriver fails and amd quits the desktop processor marketing section, that way anyone who purchased the Ivy Bridge will be the happiest person on earth.
I have a feeling that Piledriver is just going to be another Phenom II. If AMD doesnt pull some serious **** out of its ass any time soon, all they'll have left is the GPU and APU market. That still impressive. I'm seeing more and more netbooks and ultrabooks running AMD APU's and as far as i can see, most desknotes run AMD GPU's. IF and IF ONLY AMD keeps its lead in the mobile computing and GPU sector will AMD have the money to start competing with Intel in the desktop sector. And once they have the funds, hopefully they'll release another processor that deserves the FX badge.

That said, i personally believe AMD should just die shrink Phenom II and release it for the mainstream market. Leave the new stuff for the enthusiast market.
You can't say that Intel is evil for wanting to destroy AMD. You got to realize where this all started. Intel came before AMD, they designed the early chips and AMD just made clones of them. Then, Intel changed the design of their chips radically and patented it so AMD couldn't clone them anymore. From there, AMD had a high point around the days of the Athlon Processor, which caught Intel off guard so bad. Intel had enough money to burn through to get through those days, they came back stronger than ever and have pushed so much faster than AMD. Intel is afraid AMD might do it again, that is why they try to get so far ahead.

Now, yes, Intel did provide incentives to help sell their chips. Intel just had so much money, they knew in a starvation contest, AMD would cripple and die first. But, they don't want to kill AMD. They just want to make it so AMD can't make some huge push and overtake Intel. AMD might not have been in such a tough spot if they wouldn't have screwed up Phenom, Phenom 2, and Bulldozer.
If for 'did provide incentives' you mean 'blocked completely AMD sales in the asiatic market, bribed Microsoft to certify their ultra-subpar IGPs with Vista, and bribed the immense majority of OEMs in the States for them to sell exclusively Intel based computers', then I agree with you.
I will still support AMD, I don't have the need for the 'best' CPU money can buy. As long as they continue to make CPUs that run my games at decent frame rates and allow me to do my encoding at fast rates... Intel will never get my money.
As soon as intel puts better APUs on the market (the HD series pisses me off, as have almost all intel integrated graphics) AMD will be dead to me for CPUs.
Overclock.net › Member Blogs › Game Over Amd Evil Empire Wins Rebels Lose