What's next for AMD?

Jay Goldberg

Posts: 75   +1
Staff
Editor's take: As shown off during AMD's industry analyst day last week, the company has a solid product portfolio, but investors hoped to see more progress on AI. AMD makes the case that customers want an alternative to Nvidia, but Nvidia has 11 billion counter-arguments to that. AMD came in force with updates to its laptop CPUs, its server CPUs and a formidable new GPU tailored for AI, and yet its stock fell 5% on the news.

Most likely, this decline in stock value can be attributed to the phenomenon of "Buy the rumor, sell the news," as many of their product announcements had already been foreshadowed elsewhere. No one we spoke to seemed to have any issues with the performance of the new products, which all appear to be well-positioned against the competition. Some financial analysts expressed disappointment that the newest product, especially the AI accelerator, did not come with customer announcements. However, we believe that expecting large volume customer announcements for a product that has not begun major sampling is a bit premature. Besides, executives from Microsoft, AWS, and Facebook gave glowing reviews of other AMD products on stage – isn't that hint enough?

Editor's Note:
Guest author Jonathan Goldberg is the founder of D2D Advisory, a multi-functional consulting firm. Jonathan has developed growth strategies and alliances for companies in the mobile, networking, gaming, and software industries.

AMD's prospects are squeezed between its two major competitors – Intel and Nvidia. They have great products, but even those are bound by the laws of physics, meaning there's no silver bullet to drastically change the market position. Their products currently have some competitive advantages, but competitors will eventually launch new products, keeping the industry's wheel turning.

On one hand, Intel retains a strong incumbent position in both the server and client CPU markets. AMD's products have clear performance advantages here, which are enough to further erode Intel's market share but not completely oust them. Intel still exerts considerable channel control in the PC market, that plus a healthy dose of price cuts allow them to tread water in the segment for now. On the data center side, Intel's share loss is more noticeable and painful. But data center customers make purchase decisions based on Total Cost of Ownership models, so even if the performance side slips, the cost-effectiveness can work in their favor. Many investors we speak with remain skeptical about AMD's potential market share in the data center industry. While there's room for growth, it's not infinite.

Also read: The Rise, Fall and Renaissance of AMD

And naturally, the primary focus of attention is on AI and Nvidia. AMD claims that customers are irritated by Nvidia's increasing stronghold in this market niche. This is a plausible argument, but Nvidia has 11 billion reasons to disagree this quarter, leaving it unclear when or if customers will voice their frustration with actual orders.

That being said, we think there is a real opportunity for AMD in data center AI. The training market is lost to them for the foreseeable future, they barely mentioned the topic during their presentation, a sensible omission. On the other hand, the market for data center inference is going to be much larger. All those generative AI models are currently hampered by the cost of user queries, a bottleneck for which AMD now has a solid solution.

The question remains will customers take advantage of their offering, and the answer is unclear. There is no doubt that customers would like to explore alternatives to Nvidia, given its limited supply and rising costs. Set against this are two factors. Countering this are two factors. First, customer inertia - the hyperscalers prefer a limited number of vendors, and sticking with Nvidia is often the path of least organizational resistance. (As the saying goes, no one gets fired for buying Nvidia, though CFOs may have different thoughts on the matter.)

The second factor is Nvidia's CUDA software, which simplifies the optimization of Nvidia GPUs, an essential feature at AI scale. We got into a fairly deep debate with AMD executives on this subject. They convincingly argued that CUDA is not the ultimate authority in AI software, pointing to their partnerships with both PyTorch and Hugging Face, two pivotal AI software projects. Despite this, CUDA still has its merits. In a market where software requirements are rapidly evolving, a known solution is an easy default fallback. While CUDA may not be a permanent competitive moat for Nvidia, there are few practical signs of that on the ground.

Despite all this, AMD looks well positioned. We can debate the right share price, but strictly from a business perspective, they continue to execute incredibly well. Their CEO, Lisa Su, is one of the best in the industry, and their product line-up reflects this. Thus, the ongoing debate about AMD's stock revolves around how much more market share they can acquire and how much of this emergent AI market they can capture. Overall, they are in a strong position, and the deciding factor will be how much further they can progress.

Permalink to story.

 
It's nice that they're doing fine in processors, though they're still at a mere 20% of desktop market share, but... GPUs and AI are trailing as always with no signs of the leap forward they need...
It's a 'pebble in the shoe' situation.
 
Let's not forget they are in the sampling phase of mi300 which will ramp up production in q4 2023. If they were already shipping now, then the market would probably respond accordingly. Nvidia was prepping the market for years with their ai solutions and has Hardware shipping yesterday H100 ( q1 2023).
 
Let's not forget they are in the sampling phase of mi300 which will ramp up production in q4 2023. If they were already shipping now, then the market would probably respond accordingly. Nvidia was prepping the market for years with their ai solutions and has Hardware shipping yesterday H100 ( q1 2023).
This type of product is purchased in bulk orders, even before it is produced. The market is experiencing profit taking,
 
Problem with AMD is they seem to have no real intention of competing with Nvidia, just playing second fiddle.
 
Problem with AMD is they seem to have no real intention of competing with Nvidia, just playing second fiddle.

I don't think that's accurate.
I think AMD is being careful and methodic with which market segments they are going for as they don't have the monetary ability to directly beat NV at their own game.

There is FAR more money to be made in the data center space (which is vast) than the consumer space (which accounts for a virtually small % of the whole market share).

As such, it stands to reason their priority will be there.
Ryzen was a resounding success for them and this gave them the necessary footing to start getting back into the game in the data center space (which gave them the needed money to refine Zen uArch as a whole, and then also their GPU's).

NV did delve into AI first, but lets be frank here, they were in a position of power to do that. AMD at the time was in no position to do anything of the kind.
So, they decided to wait with AI until they could sufficiently recover to do something about it (which is where their acquisition of XilinX comes in).

Right now, with AI, I'd say that the picture is pretty much similar like it was when AMD delved against Intel in data centers.

Sure, NV may have set the stage for their success, but they also locked everyone to porprietary methods (CUDA and OptiX) as opposed to Open source ones.

Admittedly, AMD's software for that (ROCm/HIP) is not quite good, but after their latest MI300 presentation, they are committed to changing that bit for the better as well.

Its actually a bit worrying that it took AMD this long to start putting more effort into it, but in fairness, the proverbial 'explosion' in AI may have forced them to rethink that... which culminated with the creation of MI300 that will also require proper software implementation.

So, even if AMD's MI300 is adopted in small quantities, it will give them even MORE money to continue improving their hw and software to the point to progressively grab more market share in AI space too.

As for the consumer segment... actually, AMD's products are not really any worse than NV.
My suggestion is that if people are already on RNDA 2 or RTX 3xxx, they can comfortably skip RDNA 3 and RTX 4xxx until the next generation is ready.

NV only really improved CUDA performance by a significant enough degree in 4xxx generation, which is great for content creators and productivity, but so can be said for AMD (although, software devs do NOT readily implement ROCm/HIP like they do CUDA - but I suspect with the improvements coming to ROCm software and impending release of MI300, that could easily change very quickly).

So, give it time.
AMD can't retake market share from Intel and NV overnight... it takes careful planning, investment and patience.

There's also something to be said for mindshare... because Intel and NV have become such a 'recognizeable presence' across different markets that AMD has to be careful how they approach it.
 
Problem with AMD is they seem to have no real intention of competing with Nvidia, just playing second fiddle.
I wouldn't count AMD out just yet. What they seem to be doing and what they are doing are two different things.

In the past, AMD bragged about what they were doing and when it came time to deliver, (Bulldozer) they failed dismally. I think AMD learned a major lesson from this, and I bet that they are very reluctant to show their hand before they actually have something in it. Fortunately, Lisa Su has a much better head on her shoulders, IMO, than Rory Reed who was at the helm for the Bulldozer fiasco.

AMD's data center business, especially in CPUs is taking off, and I bet that is giving them the revenue they need to reinforce their R&D and new product development. IMO, they would be wise to be doing just that.
 
Last edited:
Its actually a bit worrying that it took AMD this long to start putting more effort into it, but in fairness, the proverbial 'explosion' in AI may have forced them to rethink that... which culminated with the creation of MI300 that will also require proper software implementation.

There's also something to be said for mindshare... because Intel and NV have become such a 'recognizeable presence' across different markets that AMD has to be careful how they approach it.

It takes years to develop new processors, you're just seeing the result of AMD watching nVidia and then making a counter move.

They also just bought Xilinx so this is probably what they were working on.
 
I don't think that's accurate.
I think AMD is being careful and methodic with which market segments they are going for as they don't have the monetary ability to directly beat NV at their own game.

There is FAR more money to be made in the data center space (which is vast) than the consumer space (which accounts for a virtually small % of the whole market share).

As such, it stands to reason their priority will be there.
Ryzen was a resounding success for them and this gave them the necessary footing to start getting back into the game in the data center space (which gave them the needed money to refine Zen uArch as a whole, and then also their GPU's).

NV did delve into AI first, but lets be frank here, they were in a position of power to do that. AMD at the time was in no position to do anything of the kind.
So, they decided to wait with AI until they could sufficiently recover to do something about it (which is where their acquisition of XilinX comes in).

Right now, with AI, I'd say that the picture is pretty much similar like it was when AMD delved against Intel in data centers.

Sure, NV may have set the stage for their success, but they also locked everyone to porprietary methods (CUDA and OptiX) as opposed to Open source ones.

Admittedly, AMD's software for that (ROCm/HIP) is not quite good, but after their latest MI300 presentation, they are committed to changing that bit for the better as well.

Its actually a bit worrying that it took AMD this long to start putting more effort into it, but in fairness, the proverbial 'explosion' in AI may have forced them to rethink that... which culminated with the creation of MI300 that will also require proper software implementation.

So, even if AMD's MI300 is adopted in small quantities, it will give them even MORE money to continue improving their hw and software to the point to progressively grab more market share in AI space too.

As for the consumer segment... actually, AMD's products are not really any worse than NV.
My suggestion is that if people are already on RNDA 2 or RTX 3xxx, they can comfortably skip RDNA 3 and RTX 4xxx until the next generation is ready.

NV only really improved CUDA performance by a significant enough degree in 4xxx generation, which is great for content creators and productivity, but so can be said for AMD (although, software devs do NOT readily implement ROCm/HIP like they do CUDA - but I suspect with the improvements coming to ROCm software and impending release of MI300, that could easily change very quickly).

So, give it time.
AMD can't retake market share from Intel and NV overnight... it takes careful planning, investment and patience.

There's also something to be said for mindshare... because Intel and NV have become such a 'recognizeable presence' across different markets that AMD has to be careful how they approach it.
Demand will be so great that they will buy GPUs from anyone, TSMC's production capacity is not unlimited. It will be an event similar to ethereum mining
 
Dear AMD, you released great 7945hs CPUs for laptops with amazingly good graphics for integrated CPUs (rdna3).
But these cpus go to the most expensive laptops, which coincidental already have even better dedicated GPUs!
please instruct laptop makers to use these for cheaper laptops and advertise as extra thin mid tier gaming laptops.
 
Back