How about that AMAT/AMD rumor some rag started.

[memberSince97]

Hi , It is kind of interesting to ponder.

 

[Geeforcer]

It makes no sense to me, at all. In fact, it would be a rather idiotic move. And with AMD bond issue, I think we can safely shelf all the buyout rumors until the next earnings announcement.

 

[memberSince97]

Thanks, for your opinion Geeforcer.

Your sig is on the money....

 

[Arun]

This one is not even a rumour, but I think it's quite interesting; from Mark Lapedus' blog: http://www.eetimes.com/blog/news/ar...E1QC1IYQSNDLRCKH0CJUNN2JVN?loc=semiconductors

4. Perhaps AMD should get acquired by IBM or a member of IBM's ''fab club.'' My assessment: IBM is a bad choice. IBM is a great IP firm, but it never really understood the semi business. Here's a crazy idea: Samsung wants to go toe-to-toe against Intel. How about Samsung buying AMD? However, I'm afraid Intel would kick Samsung's ass in processors. Samsung is a mere one-hit commodity wonder.

Obviously this is very unlikely to happen, but it does make a fair bit of sense, unlike the AMAT thing imo.

I don't really agree with the last part of his opinion though (which is that Samsung would fail terribly). And anyway, the dynamics of the market are changing, and within a few years, some parts of the CPU market will also be much more similar to commodities, anyway, imo.

Unless Windows Vienna increases the minimum requirements CPU-wise much, much more than I'd expect it to, in that timeframe (32nm), a quad-core CPU with a non-absurd level of cache has basically become a commodity. So, once again, the question is where to go from there - Intel's vision seems to be based around Polaris and Larrabee, while AMD's is based around non-server CPU ASPs dropping and an increasing focus on GPGPU. Heh.