AMD Is Restructuring Again, Losing 7% Of Employees

[geearf]

Well, how'bout this? Install a .apk on a GNU/Linux distro. Holy shit! I can run my favorite version of Candy Swipe Saga, (a game that was blatantly stolen from the original Candy Swipe) on my GNU/Linux desktop such as Debian, Fedora, Ubuntu, Slackware! Oh.. wait.. no..

There you go: http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2014/...nux-computers/

[profoundWHALE]

Seems like you've put a couple of hours in this idea of yours.

Less than 10 minutes actually.

[torsionbar28]

Xeon marketshare blows Opteron out of the water. I think we see who the clear winner is there. I'm not sure what point you're even trying to make. You want AMD to get out of the "peecee" space and focus on an area where they're getting crushed even more?

Not sure who told you that. Might want to check your sources. With all this Cloud and Virtualization stuff these days, core count and TDP are far more important than clock speed. AMD has a 99w TDP 16 core chip that costs less than 1/2 the comparable intel model. The savings when buying a 4 socket server are nearly $5000. And that's just one server. Twenty 2U servers in a rack, that's $100,000 in savings, per rack, as compared with intel. That's huge.

Not that you care, but I work for one of the largest Cloud providers in the country. Right now roughly 1/2 our servers are Opteron, and we're replacing Xeon's with Opterons all the time, due to the massive cost savings vs. intel.

[johnc]

Not sure who told you that. Might want to check your sources. With all this Cloud and Virtualization stuff these days, core count and TDP are far more important than clock speed. AMD has a 99w TDP 16 core chip that costs less than 1/2 the comparable intel model. The savings when buying a 4 socket server are nearly $5000. And that's just one server. Twenty 2U servers in a rack, that's $100,000 in savings, per rack, as compared with intel. That's huge.

Not that you care, but I work for one of the largest Cloud providers in the country. Right now roughly 1/2 our servers are Opteron, and we're replacing Xeon's with Opterons all the time, due to the massive cost savings vs. intel.

From the various sources out there it looks like Intel has about 90% of the server / workstation market.

So even more than the desktop.

Your idea of how things are may be skewed by your individual experience at your company.

If single-threaded performance wasn't important servers would still be on UltraSPARCs.

[mark45]

To do WHAT ?

Good/experienced programmers are very scarse, those who exist are almost always already employed by someone else, so AMD releasing its programmers is a good opportunity for Intel. The fact that they worked on non-Intel GPUs isn't a showstopper by any means.

Though what I'm saying is obvious for those at Intel responsible for hiring, it's like telling 2+2=4 to a mathematician.

[vitalif]

AMD has a 99w TDP 16 core chip that costs less than 1/2 the comparable intel model.

O_o... What exact CPU models are you speaking about?

[Marc Driftmeyer]

O_o... What exact CPU models are you speaking about?

Opteron 6370P.

http://www.amd.com/en-us/products/server/opteron/6000/6300#

Not hard to find.

[niner]

From the various sources out there it looks like Intel has about 90% of the server / workstation market.

Which is no wonder. It's ridiculously difficult to buy AMD based servers.

HP: 3 out of 23 servers are using AMD processors.
Lenovo: not a single AMD offering.
Dell is 100 % Intel. Even the low performance servers use Intel Celeron (!!) and Pentium instead of much more powerful AMD processors for the same price.

This does not make any sense at all! But Intel is known not to play fair. They have been convicted many times of abusing monopoly power and there is no reason to believe that they've stopped this.

In conclusion: market share does not say anything at all about the viability of server processors.

[AJSB]

Good/experienced programmers are very scarse, those who exist are almost always already employed by someone else, so AMD releasing its programmers is a good opportunity for Intel. The fact that they worked on non-Intel GPUs isn't a showstopper by any means.

Though what I'm saying is obvious for those at Intel responsible for hiring, it's like telling 2+2=4 to a mathematician.

You forgot to quote the rest of my post

It really doesn't matter how much good devs Intel hire, their HDxxxx graphics *HARDWARE* SUCKS BIG TIME compared to AMD APU, NO DEV can fix that.

IrisPro *HARDWARE* is already good (ergo, no real need for more devs but i agree that for a company with filled pockets like Intel they are never too much) but IrisPro FAILS because the chip is TOO EXPENSIVE for the masses.

[AJSB]

Well speaking about CPUs, it is 0.32 vs 0.22 nm actually Yeah archictecture matters of course i do think Intel has slightly better, but applied on lower manufacture process it just gives illusion that is so big difference... so yup it does matters, but i don't think architecture takes all the precedence there

You are talking about FX line of course because Kabini and Kaveri (and Carrizo-L/Carrizo) are/will_be made in 28nm.