The AMD Execution Thread [2007 - 2017]

Status
Not open for further replies.
That's what logically happens, when one company ships a full range of DX11 chips and the other only their highest end version.
 
Goes to show where the volume is (budget/low end mainstream). Not only more per wafer (which were/still is in short supply), but also more customers.

Regards,
SB
 
I wonder how much of this perhaps was volume locked up in presales waiting on OEMs to finally get their machines on the market? Perhaps the volume was sold a while back but it took all this time for it to move into shipped status with the OEMs actually starting to take the orders.
 
Not bad. I wonder however, when they mention sales up 87% are they referring to the revenue generated or the units moved?

If it's just revenue generated it's not as impressive as 4xxx cards had hugely depressed prices due to the price war with Nvidia.

If it's units sold, that's a hugely impressive number as revenue per card is quite significantly higher than the same quarter last year. But in this case it begs the question of just how the CPU division is doing.

Regards,
SB
 
Not bad. I wonder however, when they mention sales up 87% are they referring to the revenue generated or the units moved?

If it's just revenue generated it's not as impressive as 4xxx cards had hugely depressed prices due to the price war with Nvidia.

If it's units sold, that's a hugely impressive number as revenue per card is quite significantly higher than the same quarter last year. But in this case it begs the question of just how the CPU division is doing.

Regards,
SB

Here you go:



Source: http://phx.corporate-ir.net/External.File?item=UGFyZW50SUQ9NTM4ODV8Q2hpbGRJRD0tMXxUeXBlPTM=&t=1

Page 18.
 
Ah so it does appear to be 87% increase in revenue versus 87% increase in units shipped. Although that's not surprising considering how AMD is currently supply constrained for 40 nm wafers.

If not for that, it's quite likely they would have posted a profit for Q2.

And hopefully, with ATI continuing to be the better performing division (in terms of revenue growth), we've heard the last of the "ATI's purchase was a huge mistake" meme.

Regards,
SB
 
Maybe lower R&D signifies better integration between the two divisions - graphics and processors ?
 
Is that lower R&D compared to Q1'10, or Q2'09? If it's the latter, it may just reflect the separation from GloFo. And if it's the former, it might be related to the fact that Bulldozer is almost finished.
 
Is that lower R&D compared to Q1'10, or Q2'09? If it's the latter, it may just reflect the separation from GloFo. And if it's the former, it might be related to the fact that Bulldozer is almost finished.
According to the linked above document, that is H1-2010 vs H1-2009, with Q1 and Q2 with similar %
 
Is that lower R&D compared to Q1'10, or Q2'09? If it's the latter, it may just reflect the separation from GloFo. And if it's the former, it might be related to the fact that Bulldozer is almost finished.

AMD should already have stripped that out of the H12009 figures otherwise the comparison is worthless.

It probably reflects better synergy between the CPU and GPU divisions. It wouldn't surprise me if they found a lot of repetition in their research over the past year as the CPU and GPU begin to merge in earnest.
 
http://www.investorvillage.com/smbd.asp?mb=476&mn=181558&pt=msg&mid=9324547

Q2 Numbers from Mercury, nV dropped 10% YoY and that was AMD's gain in discrete (desktop and mobile). Overall the drop seems to be the same for nV and AMD picking up half of that if intel is competing.

There's also a nice stat about price/ratio mixture.

qxtgg0.jpg


Evergreen finally kicking ass and picking up in a market that is down?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top