AMD posts fiscal results, makes gains in 2005

By Justin Mann on January 18, 2006, 6:36 PM
A day after Intel announces poorer than expected revenue for Q4 2005, AMD posts their own earnings for the end of the year. AMD's total Q4 sales were $1.84 Billion, which resulted in a net profit gain for the company. AMD's sales rose by 45% in comparison to the year before, an impressive gain. In total, AMD pulled in $5.85 billion for the year, another overall increase for them. They put a lot of the weight of the gain into the huge success of the Athlon64 and the gains that Opteron made in the server market.

”“AMD’s growth rate increased in the fourth quarter resulting in continued market share gains across server, desktop and mobile product lines,” said Robert J. Rivet, AMD’s chief financial officer. “In addition to solid execution against our product and technology strategies, we made significant strides in the quarter to improve our balance sheet by significantly reducing our debt and increasing our cash and short-term investment balance to $1.8 billion.”
With increased revenue, we hope AMD will do the wise thing and continue to improve. Intel is definitely going to be bringing on the heat this year, and AMD will have to introduce a new socket, which often can be met with poor reception. AMD no longer has the price edge they used to for a standard system, and Intel's dual-core laptop CPUs are going to be a hot ticket. I can't wait to see how AMD's dual core mobile chips will perform, and everything else they are planning for 2006.




User Comments: 16

Got something to say? Post a comment
DragonMaster said:
Duh! With what Intel put on the market this year it's not impressing at all.Same thing with M$ and Linux popularity as we can't really talk about money when comparing something free to something expensive.
gamingmage said:
[b]Originally posted by DragonMaster:[/b][quote]Duh! With what Intel put on the market this year it's not impressing at all.Same thing with M$ and Linux popularity as we can't really talk about money when comparing something free to something expensive.[/quote]Hey Intel is going to come around. But yea again congrats to AMD on a successful year.
DragonMaster said:
Yes, Intel's going to take over and then AMD. Then Intel, then AMD... The see-saw effect! ;-)
cyrax said:
I hope with thses profits they actually use it to investigate ways to get better temp. yeilds and lower voltages. Until then, no one really wins.
MonkeyMan said:
I urge all of you not to count Intel out. Intel is improving its company's production, as well as technology line. I think Intel will be able to compete side by side with AMD in 2006. And hey, who knows, Intel may take the lead.
yoyomama said:
Nice to see good performance finally being rewarded as much as good marketing.
otmakus said:
I can imagine AMD's top management people laughing their a** off, as the timing of this press release couldn't be better, one day after Intel announced they couldn't get their expected revenue. I bet AMD planned this, to further embarass Intel.
vigilante said:
Now just wait as Intel finds odd ways to try to sue AMD, to make them look bad.They will try something, not sure what, but Intel will do something significant, and possibly surprising! To turn things around.
exscind said:
With more and more people buying new computers, and with Intel fell short of its expected renuve, AMD better have made a good net gain! The article hit almost-dead on; the Athlon64's were great, but I think the Opterons really gave AMD the push it needed. The article said, "the gains that Opteron made in the server market." I sincerely doubt the Opterons for Socket 940 did significantly, if any, better than before. It was AMD's decision to release the Opterons for Socket 939 that did it. Overclockers screamed in joy at the capabilities of the Opteron CPUs. In fact, Opteron s939 was so successful even AMD got scared. They "intended" the socket 939 Opterons to be in use for servers, but were mainly being bought to overclock. I'm not going to go any deeper into the issue, but let's just say this move made a lot of money for AMD.
asphix said:
[b]Originally posted by otmakus:[/b][quote]I can imagine AMD's top management people laughing their a** off, as the timing of this press release couldn't be better, one day after Intel announced they couldn't get their expected revenue. I bet AMD planned this, to further embarass Intel.[/quote]Hah, I'm willing to bet Intel could care less about being embarrased. All they want to do is make $$$. If the people I work for become "embarrased", myself as an employee woudlnt give it a second thought beyond, "hrmm.. ok.. payday is thurdsay! :D"AMD has had a solid product lineup this year, and they deserve the sales increase. I have no doubt Intel will regroup and get their act together. Their line has become so completely stagnant in the past 2-3 years. The question is, how long will it take them to do so. I'm hoping they take until 2007 to start releasing solid products capable of competing head to head or better with AMD. The more market share AMD can gain now, the better us consumers will be in the future, and the more Intel will be forced to work hard and get paid less.
barfarf said:
Intel is so big they need to worry about too much from AMD. In fact Intel is doing better then AMD in regards of diversification new concepts such as the upcoming Viiv. This help Intel not reply on one product. Don’t get me wrong I love AMD but they still have a long up hill battle to hurt Intel. For starters get more cpu’s in the businesses end and into dell would make then way more competitive.
buttus said:
My My....how the mighty have fallen after the worm turned. Intel is down and missed it's financial forcast...AMD is ever rising.The only word of caution I would offer to AMD is...DON'T become that bloated complacent fat cat that Intel became. Don't forget your supporters and re-sellers that recommend your product.
nathanskywalker said:
[url]http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicl
/archive/2004/10/06/BUGJ794GUU1.DTL&type=business[/url]Hmm
..looks like AMD is doing fine. And yes, i think it has already been mentioned, AMD is awesome for overclocking![QUOTE] I can't wait to see how AMD's dual core mobile chips will perform, and everything else they are planning for 2006.[/QUOTE] No kidding. Of course, Intel fights back:[url]http://www.playfuls.com/news_0764_Intel_Makes_Gian
_Leap_Ahead_In_Technology_Lambastes_AMD.html[/url]Still...
ooks like AMD did pretty good.[url]http://www.pcpro.co.uk/news/82370/amd-on-track-wit
-financials.html[/url]
mentaljedi said:
[b]Originally posted by exscind:[/b][quote]With more and more people buying new computers, and with Intel fell short of its expected renuve, AMD better have made a good net gain! The article hit almost-dead on; the Athlon64's were great, but I think the Opterons really gave AMD the push it needed. The article said, "the gains that Opteron made in the server market." I sincerely doubt the Opterons for Socket 940 did significantly, if any, better than before. It was AMD's decision to release the Opterons for Socket 939 that did it. Overclockers screamed in joy at the capabilities of the Opteron CPUs. In fact, Opteron s939 was so successful even AMD got scared. They "intended" the socket 939 Opterons to be in use for servers, but were mainly being bought to overclock. I'm not going to go any deeper into the issue, but let's just say this move made a lot of money for AMD.[/quote]AMD scared? Intel falling? Wow, things never cease to amaze me. But this was excepcted! Intel goes down, somebody has to go up and by a lot i guess.
PUTALE said:
hehehe. I guess I am partly responsible for their net gain(as I got an amd system in my house:)).
exscind said:
[b]Originally posted by asphix:[/b][quote]AMD has had a solid product lineup this year, and they deserve the sales increase. I have no doubt Intel will regroup and get their act together. Their line has become so completely stagnant in the past 2-3 years. [/quote]I think at this point it is very questionable. It is clear Intel is much more interested in the laptop business than the desktop market from the recent headlines and CES 2006. Intel's big downfall (among others) was its CPUs hovering between the 3-4GHz line far too long. There were really no significant new desktop CPUs by Intel, besides a few sparse Extreme Editions, which most people can't afford anyway. Heat buildup and poor chip architecture are destroying (though slowly!) Intel's desktop market.
Load all comments...

Add New Comment

TechSpot Members
Login or sign up for free,
it takes about 30 seconds.
You may also...
Get complete access to the TechSpot community. Join thousands of technology enthusiasts that contribute and share knowledge in our forum. Get a private inbox, upload your own photo gallery and more.