Discussion in 'Frontpage news' started by ViperXtreme, Nov 29, 2011.
yeah and they will miss out on that extra 10fps from a expensive intel cpu :wanker:
I think it's more AMD cannot compete with intel rather than merely not competing. It takes a lot of dough to design chips and fabricate them. If you can't secure fabrication then you can't sell a chip in the server market. Businesses need to be assured of the availability of parts, AMD is likely losing its ability to do that.
As some people mentioned, Intel won't do whatever they want. The nature of the monopoly is not that. Look at Coca Cola for example. The big deal with the monopoly is that you can adjust the ratio between price/costs and the quantities you sell. So that it is the most benefial to you. In short, the prices are not going to be sky rocketing I think.
Am I missing something??
Exactly where does it state they'll stop producing desktop and server CPU's??
The server side brings in a fair bit of revenue, as does the desktop side on low end workstations.
People really do like to add in their own bits to a story, and get 2+2=3.
AMD have not competed with Intel in the high end desktop CPU market in years, and it's been obvious for some time now that they do not wish to create overly expensive, non-profit making CPU's for a tiny market.
AMD will continue to make desktop / server CPU's, they just don't care about competing with Intel. They will also be focusing more on the mobile / ultra-portable market and no doubt will advance fusion designs for desktops.
If AMD dies, CPU prices would be regulated by goverment, noway intel can control it.
Also to the guy who said that AMD was faster than Intel sometimes, yeah, because Intel made big mistakes @ design, but economically and at everything (factories...), Intel its godlike here.
That's another thing, would it not also be quite possible that if Intel were the only PC CPU manufacturer, that prices of their CPU's would actually drop considerably, considering they'd be selling a lot more?
VIA has x86 licence,right?
so what you say?
but IF they merge with ,let´s say ,ARM ?or another player in the CPU field?
this is a wild wild assumption,so please don´t take seriously.
x86 compatible low power CPU's is what would happen.
Neither are in any position to develop high end desktop or server CPU's, nor have either every ventured into that field.
The only other manufacturer that may have the capability would be Nvidia. (unless of course IBM or Motorola decided to move into x86 desktop territory).
Yes but... Does Nvidia have a future???
i knew i should keep my mouth shut.
<<<<<<Jensen would drool in a heartbeat at the opportunity to payback Intel some turns
wait,isn´t Nvidia playing with ARM integrations in a GPU ?
adding to that mix the bloody x86 license and ...
another wild ,wild dream
Nearly half of Nvidia's revenue these past couple years has come from it's mobile CPU Division. Nvidia estimates that value will double by 2014. But will they go x86? Doubt it. They've already invested tons into ARM development even going as far as partnering with them, attempting to compete with desktop/servers with the ARM architecture (Project Denver). I don't see why they'd throw that out to potentially gain a fraction of what AMD has now.
VIA is doing just fine with it's industrial costumers, no need to compete with Intel or AMD.
yeah ,i know.
man,i can dream ,right?