AMD stock value on the rise following buyout chatter

I'm going to Frys next weekend here in Atlanta to pick up a couple parts! They have incredibly prices for a physical store.

In my opinion AMD is right where they need to be at this time, just needs a few tweaks. The bulldozer architecture has its major perks, and can really do well in the server market do to the ability to have so many cores for so cheap. They still compete well with intel in the desktop CPU range, maybe not enthusiast range (to me that's $500-$1000 CPUS), but that's only a small fraction of PC users. Intel has the architecture, AMD has the flexibility, all AMD cpus can be overclocked in some way. Where as only Intel K chips can be overclocked and they cost more then there non K brethren. But where I finally see AMD moving ahead of intel is in the laptop and small computer department, The APU designs from AMD are remarkable, they offer amazing balance and prices for the power your getting. Looking at just the new Trinity A10 chips, 35 watts gets you a decent quad core CPU( about on par with mobile i5's) and then a amazing integrated graphics, which in some laptops can then be crossfired with a dedicated GPU as well. As programs get coded to take advantage of that APU technology and offload certain work loads onto the built in GPU, I think you could see AMD close some performance gaps for sure. There graphics are very competitive and just need better more reliable drivers and they would really help there odds on nvidia (but the market isn't split that hard at this time), not a fan boy of any company really, just think that AMD needs to stay focused on there current road plans and make the markets they want, like what intel does.

^^ If existing AMD server users are upgrading their C32/G34 sockets, then Bulldozer makes some appeal. If the buyer is starting from the ground up then Intel Xeon E5 is pretty much the go to proposition. From what I've read, if Abu Dhabi (Piledriver), Steamroller and Excavator ALL hit their designed performance targets and are on time then forecasts are ~17-20% market share for AMD in server by 2016-17 (I.e. double their present market share)

Client (desktop/mobile) don't look that bright. Ivy Bridge is killing AMD in both segments. The fact that AMD are carrying $830 million in inventory (almost $250 million up on the last quarter) means that AMD missed the mark with OEM's with Trinity/Llano/Zambesi. Unsurprising that Intel and Nvidia gained the 13% revenue that AMD lost. AMD's APU's might be a good mix of processing and graphics, but Intel is rapidly closing the gap on the latter for most users...Haswell will likely make the difference minimal unless something radical happens in game development or screen resolution in the interim. The fact that major OEM's like Apple turn to Intel+Nvidia instead of APU and APU+ hybrid crossfire, means AMD have an fight ahead of them -and that's without taking into account the looming spectre of ARM x64.

Graphics are (and have been) AMD's saving grace for the most part. As per usual, AMD/ATI churn out great hardware- they just don't have many clues about marketing or forging long term alliances with OEM's and devs- probably because the focus shifts within AMD management too often. Personally, I'd like to see AMD merge, or be bought out by a company with some serious financial muscle and a willingness to pour cash into R&D. Failing that, AMD to spin off the graphics division (and negotiate licences for APU use) and use the capital to concentrate on processors and make a dent in the $US2.02bn debt they're carrying. AMD perpetually limping along on a shoestring budget and a self interested/disinterested board of directors isn't doing anyone any good.

BTW: The AMD buyout rumour (the basis of the article) is likely bogus. These kinds of rumours tend to "surface" whenever a stock takes a nose dive. A convenient takeover rumour has a stabilizing effect on a stock in freefall.

I comprehend that, yes. But I don't run any servers at home and servers are a real small percentage of built computers (even smaller than gamers), don't you agree? I mean, to the average user, PCI-E 3.0 is like running a V-8 supercharged engine to power a lawnmower...

You're kind of missing my point. PCI-E 3.0 isn't a must have for gamers, it isn't a must have for the average PC/mobile buyer either. It is however, a must have for OEM's - as a selling point for new systems ( telling customers that their next product release is just the same as the old stuff isn't a great selling point) and both a selling point AND must have in the server/ workstation/ datacentre/HPC markets. It's not a happy coincidence that the largest PC suppliers also happen to be the worlds largest suppliers of professional/enterprise systems (HP, Dell, Lenovo - of which, both HP and Dell have significantly higher revenue than Intel)

I've already mentioned the fact that AMD's inventory ballooned by $250 million this quarter - that isn't from DIY'ers and guys not ordering from Newegg, that's OEM's looking at AMD's product stack and saying "no thanks, we can't sell this because there's no differentiation between this stuff and the old stuff" - Trinity doesn't offer a compelling feature set over Llano, nor Zambesi over Phenom II. If you think that is a false assumption just look at OEM's product lines. Do you think it likely that if Intel keep hitting their bullet points that AMD's $830m worth of warehoused hardware is going to gain in marketability ? and if it doesn't and AMD have to cut and run, what does that do for their balance sheet and their R&D budget?

As far as servers, HPC and datacentres, PCI-E 3.0 is kind of a big deal since the performance bottleneck is latency, and while these aren't massive markets now...they will be if/when cloud computing becomes more mainstream*..which brings us back to AMD making a huge deal out of HSA...but not following through with the hardware. Why? because Bulldozer and Piledriver are a done deal and need to use an existing PCI express controller and PCI-E 3.0 will need to wait until it can be incorporated into the CPU design. All this brings us full circle - note that AMD's 800 series chipset was a 2010 release. The 900 series chipset is virtually identical to the 800's and was released last year....do you see any murmerings about a 1090X/FX, 1070 range of chipsets for this year -No. No change in feature set = No new chipset = No new selling point or marketing bullet point....You think Asus, Gigabyte, Sapphire, MSI etc will be happy (and making money) pushing existing 990/970 chipset boards into 2013 ? More to the point, how much mileage can Dell, HP, Lenovo, Acer et al get out of the same three-year-old hardware

In the greater scheme of things, PCI-E 3.0 is just an example of where AMD's marketing/sales, architects and management aren't anywhere close to being on the same page. It's a solitary example I picked to highlight a point. I could just as easily noted AMD hitching its wagon to the IBM gate first foundry process, or AMD placing an over reliance upon an ever changing spec for a server CPU to pull them out of the sh compost (that would be Bulldozer), or...well, you get the point.

Gauging a companys position by the product stack they have at the present time is a false economy, requirements change both for vendors and end users* Decisions made today won't see the light of day for around two years. This has been AMD's disadvantage for some time- the management have been reactive to market change, not a shaper of the market. And yes, that is partly due to Intel's dominance. It is also more than partly due to AMD's myopic and unenthusiastic board of directors.

Frys matches competitors prices, at least they do in my area. (TX)