ARM & The Future

Thankfully, Rory isn't HPing the company. AMD will continue to build its own x86 CPUs and GCN (and future) GPUs. The difference is that AMD will now consider, where it makes sense, using other architectures. AMD didn't come out and say it, but it's clear that the other ISA under consideration is designed by ARM. In the markets where it makes sense, AMD might deliver an ARM based solution. In others it may deliver an x86 based solution. The choice is up to the market and customer, and AMD is willing to provide either.

What's most interesting is that AMD was very clear about not wanting to be in the smartphone market. It believes, at least today, that the smartphone SoC market is too low margin to make financial sense. With smartphone SoCs selling for under $20 and given how hard it has been for Intel and NVIDIA to break into that market, I don't blame AMD for wanting to sit this one out. However, smartphones have been a huge success for ARM. If AMD is to offer ARM based SoCs coupled with their own CPU/GPU IP in other markets, it's unclear what the reception will be. The flexibility is definitely appreciated and it's a far more defensible position than saying that all future products have to use x86, but simply embracing ARM isn't a guarantee for success.

Rory Read presented a vision of the future where a large, vertically integrated device manufacturer may want to deliver custom silicon for everything from tablets to notebooks to TVs. AMD's goal is to be able to provide silicon to companies like this, while differentiating based on its own internal IP (x86 CPUs, GPU cores). One current example would be Microsoft's Xbox 360. AMD designed much of the silicon for that console, although it's using 3rd party CPU IP. In other words, should a customer want an ARM based solution mated with an AMD GPU, they could have one. If a customer wanted a strange x86/ARM APU, that would be a possibility as well.

AMD did a good job outlining that it would be more agile and flexible, however it didn't outline what specific products we'd see that implement this new architecture agnostic mentality. I suspect AMD's lack of specific examples is a result of the simple fact that the new management team has only been in place for a handful of months. It will take a while to develop outlines for the first products and a clear roadmap going forward. Until then, it's all about executing on the APU, GPU and server CPU fronts.

The New Focus: Client Mobility
Comments Locked

84 Comments

View All Comments

  • arjuna1 - Friday, February 3, 2012 - link

    Yeah yeah, the butt hurt one reporting, you can't understand because you weren't into brand loyalty, I did have an "arbitrary affinity" for AMD products, heck, I still do, but I certainly did get into building systems recently.

    I'm glad you want an APU in your next desktop build, I do not, if I did I would be looking to purchase a laptop or any other mobile device.

    I want to empathize again, I get it that it's healthy for AMD to focus on where the money is, but doing so at the expense of they desktop offerings is forgetting about those of us who helped build and sustained AMD phenom II point.

    There is no other projected desktop CPU other than Vishera, and that on itself is a low end server part being sold as a high end part, the 3rd generation BD will go to Kaveri, which is an APU.

    If that does not sound like forfeiting the game, I don't what does, even Anand acknowledges AMD is out of the high end desktop CPU race.
  • B-Unit1701 - Friday, February 3, 2012 - link

    AMD is not 'forgetting' those who got them here, they are finnaly ending their torture. For years we've been waiting with huge erections for the unveiling of AMDs newest, and then get let down with sad, sad performance. They are ending the cycle of pain and going towards what they do well instead. I say good deal, make some money and improve.
  • mhahnheuser - Friday, February 3, 2012 - link

    What is missed in all this discussion is that Llano is a far far better purchase out of the box than Sandybridge, not just better, AMD first daylight second and Intel some distance back in the dust. It's only when you add a third party GPU that SB even gets in the picture.

    Why would AMD want to put all this effort and expense chasing ultra low volume, outright single core IPC performance and get peanuts for it when it can get uber-prices for stand alone GPU's of which they are currently pulling around 50% of the Intel platform. It's the GPU which provides the uber performance not the CPU, and a 7970, 50 0r 90 will make more than double the money for AMD than a Bulldozer CPU that can manage to outperform a SB-E by 10 FPS with the same high end GPU.

    They're (AMD) in a pretty good space to persue more lucrative market segments.
  • frozentundra123456 - Saturday, February 4, 2012 - link

    I see no reason at all to purchase llano on the desktop. Just get an Intel CPU for better performance and add a discrete 50.00 card if you want good graphics. If I were buying a laptop I would probably get llano, but on the desktop it is mediocre at everything, and a discrete card is a much better solution.
  • seapeople - Saturday, February 4, 2012 - link

    That's the same thing as saying a 10-speed bicycle is a far far better purchase out of the box than a Porsche 911. It's only until you add a third party combustible hydrocarbon that the Porsche 911 becomes a better means of transport.
  • mhahnheuser - Friday, February 3, 2012 - link

    ...and just for good measure, with Intel chasing the gamer enthusiast market is actually doing AMD's work for them in driving aplications toward increased GPU performance, which long term has got to be in AMD's interest, given their future plans for more GPU utilisation, so theirs is not a dumb strategy to let Intel do most the heavy lifting in the enthusiast segment.
  • dicobalt - Saturday, February 4, 2012 - link

    Intel will be rolling out 14nm in 2014. AMD really needs to get Globalfoundries to speed up. It's really disappointing to hear AMD isn't interested in competing on process. I can't see AMD as being able to compete.
  • rocketbuddha - Saturday, February 4, 2012 - link

    Worse is that AMD has no advantages other than being fabless.
    a) Its die-size at similar nodes is bigger than competition
    b) Reduces yields.
    c) No longer a tight coupling with the foundries. Going forward I see GF not neccessarily accomodating AMD's concerns on Node race.

    While I am disappointed I think Rory Read made the right decision with the cards he has been dealt with. AMD should be extra smart....
  • tipoo - Monday, February 6, 2012 - link

    I don't think AMD has that kind of pull at GloFo anymore. They got rid of most of the controlling share, if I recall.
  • Rictorhell - Saturday, February 4, 2012 - link

    Wow. I've been a computer fan for years now and suddenly, people care more about cellphones and smartphones then they do about actual computers. When did that happen? How is it that the internet has been popular for years now, but yet, very little has actually changed? The technology still feels slow to me, in many ways.

    We have Facebook and Twitter and Youtube, yeah, but are these really exciting and amazing advancements in technology? I've read and heard reports that there just aren't many people taking up computer science and computer programming and from what I have seen, I can kind of believe those reports.

    Unless, the majority of people that are really interested in working in the computer field are focusing mainly on videogames or IT.

    I don't really have anything against smartphones, except the fact that to really get a good amount of use and enjoymment out of them, you have to sign a contract with Verizon or some other service provider. I love PDAs and I still use one, I just wish there was an interest in developing modern PDAs that did not require monthly payments or contracts.

    I like the idea of things like the Ipod Touch and the Samsung Galaxy Player, but both of those pieces of hardware are basically inferior to their smartphone counterparts, created by the same companies.

    What if I want a device with the same quality of screen as the Iphone 4 or the Samsung Galaxy Nexus, but I just don't want to sign a contract? If I am willing to pay for a quality gadget, I would hope that someone out there would be willing to build it, but that doesn't seem to be the case.

    I kind of see tablets as a bigger and better version of PDA, but I need something with a decent amount of storage space and processing power.

    The upcoming WIndows 8 tablets might be just what I am waiting for, but I am hoping for some actual innovation and creativity and not just a more mobile version of what I already have.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now