AMD now worth less then ATI when they bought it.

Things are looking worse for AMD every second. AMD's stock value has recently dropped below the point of which they purchased ATI last year. For reverence, Intel is now worth 162 billion and Nvida is worth 19 bn. Full article can be found here.

I wanted to post some pro AMD piece since the importance of them as a player on the market is way underrated, but the last part of the article already sayed everything I wanted to say:

Let’s hope that AMD’s fortunes in 2008 change for the better because as an industry we need AMD to continue to innovate and deliver great choice to consumers. In recent times, we wouldn’t have had great products like the GeForce 8800 and Core 2, if it wasn' for AMD's forward-thinking innovations like the Athlon 64 and Radeon X1900-series, which were class leading products at their time of introduction (and continued to be class-leading for much of their lives).

Apart from that AMD has some excellent budget solutions which are overlooked too much. Most of that is caused by people who assume that since Intel and Nvidia are the best in the upper market they must be the best in the budget department. Something which isn't true at all.

AMD really are deep in doo-doo at the moment and they need some major funds to be able to compete in the CPU and GPU market segments! Their new CPUs and GPU tech are both at least 12 months behind the competition and you would have to be completely bananas not to buy a Intel Core2 chip, Intel, NForce, VIA or SiS chipset motherboard and Nvidia GPU.

Does anyone here @ GH own a new Radeon HD 3000 based GPU?
Does anyone here @ GH own a ATI motherboard?
Does anyone here intend to own an AMD Phenom CPU?

Whilst AMD make some good mid-range/entry level ATI Radeon hardware they offer nothing which significantly outperforms the equivalent Nvidia chip. They simply no longer have the resources to invest heavily into out-smarting Nvidia at any level.

Lets hope Samsung put a decent offer down for a majority stake in the company and invest heavily into R&D.

Originally posted by Gm2â„¢@Dec 10 2007, 02:41 PM
[...] Does anyone here @ GH own a new Radeon HD 3000 based GPU?
Does anyone here @ GH own a ATI motherboard?
Does anyone here intend to own an AMD Phenom CPU?[...]

I have a ATI IXP 400 mobo in my desktop. But that system is 1.5 years old now, in the times I bought it an Athlon 64 was the best cpu you could get in the middle class segment.
In my laptop it can be a lot of brands, I couldn't find any info about my mobo either in Windows' system info nor in the manual (though Acer gives a detailed table with hardware specs).
Both in my lappy and the desktop I mentioned abvove, I have a Nvidia gpu. But they are not self-build, else my desktop would probably have had an Radeon card, if I had the money for a self-build system that times.
The Phenom is a quad core cpu, isn't it? Well, in the time I will buy a new sys, that processor is probably outdated already.

Originally posted by Gazz@Dec 10 2007, 02:26 PM
[...] Apart from that AMD has some excellent budget solutions which are overlooked too much. Most of that is caused by people who assume that since Intel and Nvidia are the best in the upper market they must be the best in the budget department. Something which isn't true at all.

Don't forget that people buying in the budget segment are usually complete noobs when it comes to hardware knowledge. They often don't know what they buy at all . While AMD really deserves sales that hit the roof, when it comes to the low and middle class processors and video cards. The money they earn with that could then be invested in innovation and, very important, marketing. Lastmentioned is what they forgot to do, so in the latest half P4 age everybody bought an intel instead of an AMD, what was the best stuff then. To be clear, I am talking about the late P4 period, the athlonXP was old-fashioned crap. In that period, they simply where not known sufficiently and thus sold too little, to compensate for the expensive innovations.

How do AMD deserve sales that hit the roof? All they have done in recent history is copy off intel, released mediocre CPUs and uneffective revisions on the x86 architecture, relied on other companies for decent motherboards chipsets and paid way over the going rate for a graphics company who released one graphics card architecture since 2000 that beat the competition (9700 series).

Originally posted by Gm2â„¢@Dec 10 2007, 06:17 PM
How do AMD deserve sales that hit the roof? All they have done in recent history is copy off intel, released mediocre CPUs and uneffective revisions on the x86 architecture, relied on other companies for decent motherboards chipsets and paid way over the going rate for a graphics company who released one graphics card architecture since 2000 that beat the competition (9700 series).

I was not talking about gaming systems, GM. The more recent cpu's are excellent for non-gaming configurations.
If they really copy Intel that much, why are Intel chips creating so much heat compared to AMD chips? An office pc that is noisy (because of the fan(s)), is not comfortable to work with. And when you are using your gaming pc for office tasks (or let it stand idle), then your cpu should clock down. Intel chips don't, while AMD cpu's do. So I think we can not call this "copy and paste".
Ok, a lot of AMD stuff is crap, but it is the same in case of Intel. Something that is depending on models and marketsegments, are you "generalising" to the entire brand.
Several tests in Dutch computer magazines, seem to indicate that Radeon cards are not that bad at all. It is a matter of plusses and minusses, so I think you cannot say 1 card is way above the others. And the issues with DX 10 / Vista these days, make it hard to determine which hardware sucks the most.

Now you are just talking shite. AMD processors are OK for non-gaming applications, not excellent. Also Core2 architectures run a lot less hot than the equivalent AMD Athlon and are considerably faster than an equivlanetly priced AMD processor. Intel chips do clock down and it has been supported for years. AMD Cool 'n' Quiet is not a unique technology. Intel are huge in the mobile space thanks to their centrino and core/core2 architecture.

I have never said the Radeon cards suck, they are just OK. However, in more cases than not, the equivalent Nvidia offers more compatibilty and faster AF and AA in DX9/10 gaming. My point is AMD do not deserve credit for anything they have done recently (which is the common consensus on the sites I frequent) whereas you seem to think they do. If you want a 1.5 year old motherboard and a AGP Radeon 9700 in your case and want to dwell in AMD and ATI's past then please do. My friends and I will continue to play on our Core2 Duos and Quads with Geforce8's!

Originally posted by Gm2â„¢@Dec 10 2007, 05:17 PM
who released one graphics card architecture since 2000 that beat the competition (9700 series).

1950 pro.

Anyway, I might get the phenom for my "normal" pc. Most of that has got to do with the fact that I wont have to change mobo's or waste more money on a mobo that is meant for a intel cpu. Changing mobo and processor would mean that I would spend way more then I intended too. My "normal" pc ( I also have a gaming pc) runs Ubuntu anyway and is way overqualified for it's function. Who knows, I might get a 3870 to go along with it although I probably won´t replace my current gpu for it.

Originally posted by Gazz+Dec 10 2007, 08:42 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Gazz @ Dec 10 2007, 08:42 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin--Gm2â„¢@Dec 10 2007, 05:17 PM
who released one graphics card architecture since 2000 that beat the competition (9700 series).

1950 pro.

Anyway, I might get the phenom for my "normal" pc. Most of that has got to do with the fact that I wont have to change mobo's or waste more money on a mobo that is meant for a intel cpu. Changing mobo and processor would mean that I would spend way more then I intended too. My "normal" pc ( I also have a gaming pc) runs Ubuntu anyway and is way overqualified for it's function. Who knows, I might get a 3870 to go along with it although I probably won´t replace my current gpu for it. [/b][/quote]
The 1950 was late to market to IIRC. By the time it came out the 7800GTX, 7900GT and 7950SLI were already established as the dominant dx9 architectures. By the time the 1950 took hold Nvidia had released the 8800GTX for the enthusiast market.

Originally posted by Gazz@Dec 10 2007, 04:42 PM
Anyway, I might get the phenom for my "normal" pc. Most of that has got to do with the fact that I wont have to change mobo's or waste more money on a mobo that is meant for a intel cpu. Changing mobo and processor would mean that I would spend way more then I intended too. My "normal" pc ( I also have a gaming pc) runs Ubuntu anyway and is way overqualified for it's function. Who knows, I might get a 3870 to go along with it although I probably won´t replace my current gpu for it.

You'll probably be able to get that Phenom even cheaper in a few weeks after
this report.
http://techreport.com/articles.x/13741

The new ATI gpu's are actually pretty good cards. I know a few people that
have bought them. They don't have anything that touches the 8800GTX or
Ultra but they compare favorly to the GT and GTS.
Personally, I may soon build an AMD PC so I can review parts for that
side of the street :-)