Login:
Password:

Is AMD Returning to Profitability?

By Scott M. Fulton, III, BetaNews

July 20, 2007, 2:56 PM

&otThe old saying, essentially, is, "From here, things can only get better." From where AMD was last April, that's indeed what happened - and perhaps that's no surprise. Yesterday, the company reported rising chip shipments that led to increased revenues and recovering profit margins, though still not yet near the point of being considered "healthy."

A deal announced just two months ago between AMD and one-time Intel-exclusive producer Toshiba is being credited by analysts for an 82% increase in mobile processor shipments over AMD's second fiscal quarter of last year, even though in the real world, AMD could not possibly have shipped that many Turions in a 45-day period.

More likely, the surge was brought on by long-time AMD partner Acer, whose resurgence to most likely the world's #3 notebook computer manufacturer now has another AMD partner, HP, combating it in the courtroom. The Toshiba bounty will most likely be recorded during the third quarter, which will only bring more good news for AMD.

It could really use the good news, after a solid year of being hammered by Intel in all the departments where AMD had demanded that it play fair, including price and performance. While it managed to report a loss for the June quarter of $457 million on $1.37 billion of revenue, that loss was indeed narrower than for the first quarter - as predicted - and revenue was up 11.3% over the previous quarter.

Now, if you put two and two together (as many analysts neglect to do), you conclude that the 82% mobile CPU shipment increase - part of a 38% overall shipment increase over the prior quarter - wasn't reflected in revenues that were only marginally higher, on gross margin up only 5% on the quarter to 33%.

So the quarter you'd expect AMD to cash in on is the third quarter - the current one. And so you'd expect AMD's guidance for this quarter to be more rosy.

Thus the surprise is that there are no roses here. The company's published outlook for the third quarter reads, in its entirety, as follows: "In the seasonally up third quarter, AMD expects revenue to increase in line with seasonality." That's two "seasons" in one sentence.

So there are still problems to contend with, some evidence of which came two weeks ago with the resignation of executive vice president Dave Orton, the former ATI CEO who joined its executive suite during its acquisition. In announcing Orton's resignation ten days ago, AMD even neglected to mention his own position with the company - a sign that he's not exactly being recommended to his next position.

Orton's departure comes as AMD continues exploring the option of creating more while manufacturing less. Last April, CEO Hector Ruiz announced publicly for the first time that his company was considering adopting an "asset-light" production model, where it does more outsourcing of its own designs to contracted manufacturers rather than rely upon its own factories. Such a model helps reduce a company's capital expenditures ("capex"), which analysts typically welcome.

Speculation in that direction increased two weeks ago, after AMD announced a small investment in Transmeta, the low-power processor creator that once competed head-on with Intel.

Also improving AMD's chances for the remainder of the year is that it has apparently halted its bleeding of market share. In the last quarter, according to preliminary estimates released yesterday by independent hardware analyst iSuppli, AMD took back half a point of global microprocessor market share from Intel, moving from 10.9% to 11.4%.

Whether it can continue that upward trend during the upcoming "Barcelona" quad-core era - whenever it finally does begin - may depend on whether its processors actually perform as indicated by benchmarks that the company apparently redacted, after ZDNet blogger George Ou pointed out the performance numbers for future 2.6 GHz quad-core CPUs were simulated rather than observed.

While customers had been hoping for 3.0 GHz frequencies for Barcelona-based server CPUs, AMD tells BetaNews they'll have to wait until later months, and that only the 2.6 GHz models will be available during the third quarter.

Add a Comment (26 Comments)

BetaNews reserves the right to remove any comment at any time for any reason. Please keep your responses appropriate and on topic. Foul language and personal attacks will not be tolerated.

Name (required):

E-mail (required):

Enter Your Comment:

By santuccie

edited Jul 24, 2007 - 5:35 AM

For me, an Intel loyalist, this is really a good thing. Not that I want anything to do with AMD's processors, of course; they're just toooooo sloooooow.

The last Turion I had my hands on was a loaner from Best Buy, while I waited for a Gateway I so foolishly bought to be repaired for the last time before being replaced with a Toshiba under the CA Lemon Law (voltage problem - hard drives going out, and a USB port acting up). I couldn't have been happier to have even my defective Gateway back; the other machine was pathetically slow. Yet the processor was rated higher!

Intel's processors have faster cache, while consuming less energy than equivalent AMD chips, and still leaving them miles behind in the dust. Of course AMD wants Intel to play fair, but this is the business world. Why should Intel cut their own throat and stoop to AMD's level, honestly? It doesn't work that way.

I see good news in the fact that AMD is making deals to stay in the market. This means Intel won't be monopolizing any time soon, which would eventually spell much higher prices for those of us who know better. In addition, it means that Intel will have to continue putting out better processors to stay on top. These past few months have been Utopian for us: low prices, and vastly superior performance...the best of both worlds!

Score: 0

By NULLedge

posted Jul 24, 2007 - 3:01 PM

Intel chips consume less power than AMD's chips? This is news to me. Intels chips are definitely faster. Lets just leave it at that.

Score: 0

By santuccie

edited Jul 24, 2007 - 8:45 PM

Sho nuff. Here's the stats: http://techreport.com/re...07q1/cpus/index.x?pg=13

What few AMD users realize is, while they think they're saving money by purchasing a cheaper chip, they'll be paying more in the long run. :S Intel is the all-win deal.

Score: 0

By Araxen

edited Jul 23, 2007 - 9:29 AM

I'm very very happy to see AMD return back to the black. AMD going bankrupt is something I do not want to ever happen.

An Intel only world is something I do not want to go back too.

Score: 0

By adrian47uk

posted Jul 23, 2007 - 3:57 AM

I'm glad AMD are doing better and starting to get back into profit. I am a long term AMD fan and have a got a dual core AMD, in my desktop and a Intel in my laptop.

I think AMD offers the best power for the price. I know Intel is in front with their chip technology, but Intel reminds me of a bully and treis to push every one else out.

My next chip when it comes down in price will be a Quad core AMD and yes it will fit in my AM2 socket.

Anyway, if Intel was the only manufacture of PC processors, the price would go sky high.

Score: 0

By Paul Skinner

posted Jul 22, 2007 - 4:42 PM

"&ot" Were you aiming for < ?

Score: 0

By Benjamin Linus

posted Jul 22, 2007 - 12:50 PM

How can they return to profitability? They don't have anything to compete with Intel Core 2 Duo and Quads.

Score: 0

By SGD

posted Jul 23, 2007 - 11:06 AM

Hello genius not everybody wants the fastest cpu on the block. I think that most look at price to be important. They also make more than just CPUs.

You wait the new line is about to come out then what will you be saying that they still suck. What they have coming looks great so far.

Their processors are not as bad as you would make them out to be.

Score: 0

By santuccie

edited Aug 1, 2007 - 12:46 AM

Hey SGD,

You're right. Some people do look at price as well as performance. But AMD's chips also consume more energy than Intel's equivalents, which can cost you more in the long run. :o

You're right on another note as well. AMD also has ATI. In fact, both of my computers have ATI chips. Of course the processors are Intel, and the WiFi chip in my laptop is also Intel. :D Cheers!

Score: 0

By Heero

posted Jul 22, 2007 - 4:27 PM

Sure they do... The Opterons are still doing well.

Score: 0

By Benjamin Linus

posted Jul 22, 2007 - 6:30 PM

Still doing OK, I think you will find. They have never been doing well.

Score: 0

By Heero

posted Jul 23, 2007 - 1:20 PM

Wow, you've really got to look around man. The Opterons have been doing quite well.

There is a reason why most of the big sever companies use them. HP, Cray, IBM, Sun, etc...

Score: 0

By SGD

posted Jul 23, 2007 - 11:06 AM

Never, that is a stupid comment because it is not true.

Score: 0

By cranbers

posted Jul 21, 2007 - 3:08 PM

I never understood how a company can lose rediculous amounts of money quarter after quarter and everything is just fine.

Example right now is Amd and Creative. Amd has been in this same position for decades now essentially. Intel continues to get bigger, more profitable and more revenue. Amd doesn't, it just sits there kind of like poking Intel with a stick saying im still here.

I love Amd and I used their products for years starting with the original athlon back in 1999. But I must admit I jumped ship and got a c2d. It overclocks like a dream and performance is crazy fast. Amd did awaken the sleeping giant that is about all you can about that one haha.

Score: 0

By NULLedge

posted Jul 24, 2007 - 3:04 PM

cash flow, sir. it's all in the flow. as long as there is money moving, things will still work.

Score: 0

By deminicus

posted Jul 21, 2007 - 1:29 PM

i hope they stay in the game. It would not benefit the consumer if only 1 company was around imo.

Score: 0

By Latz !

edited Jul 21, 2007 - 12:42 PM

AMD reminds me of 3dfx. They screwed up too and suddenly got bought by nvidia. I think that AMD will get bought out too. Would be funny if nvidia was the buyer. Probably won't be Intel because that would probably be shot down by the FTC.

Score: 0

By cranbers

posted Jul 21, 2007 - 3:04 PM

If nvidia bought Amd they would also aquire ati, that would not fly because there would be no competition then for 3d graphics cards, Intel doesn't make stand alone cards so that doesn't count.

Score: 0

By Heero

posted Jul 22, 2007 - 4:24 PM

What about Matrox? =)

Score: 0

By Alex Stevens

posted Jul 23, 2007 - 1:02 PM

Matrox is still well respected in the professional graphics card market, they make great 2D cards, dual head, etc. Nobody hears about them anymore because they don't make "l33t 3D gaming cardz". They tried a few years ago with the Parahelia but apparently it was an overpriced piece of crap compared to the Radeon and Geforce. I wish they could come up with a good 3D card and get back into the gaming market.

Score: 0

By Heero

posted Jul 23, 2007 - 1:17 PM

Oh, I know... I was having a little fun. =)

Score: 0

By goldensonic

posted Jul 20, 2007 - 5:17 PM

I bought a motherboard with socket s939. not even a year and ahalf ago now they have am2 sockets and i heard they are replacing new sockets, maybe im ignorant but intel tends to stay with one socketfor atleast 3 years and make cpu's for them and not force me to buy new motherboards every year.

And thats why when i buy a computer in august ill have an intel socket because i can actually get a chance to upgrade my cpu

Score: 0

By terminalx

posted Jul 21, 2007 - 12:30 PM

socket 939 came out in 2004 am2 came out in 2006 (thats two years) and did not have ddr2, hence the change in the board and intel does the same thing with their boards as well depends when you buy them.

Score: 0

By khagaroth

edited Jul 21, 2007 - 4:49 AM

All the processors for AM2+ and AM3 will be backwards compatible with AM2, so no need to buy a new motherboard to upgrade your CPU, unless you would like to use DDR3 (but that will be the same with Intel).

Score: 0

By bourgeoisdude

posted Jul 20, 2007 - 3:22 PM

"While customers had been hoping for 3.0 GHz frequencies for Barcelona-based server CPUs, AMD tells BetaNews they'll have to wait until later months, and that only the 2.6 GHz models will be available during the third quarter."

I know this isn't the point of the article, but it's the only statement that I feel I need to comment on.

Since AMD's Athlon FX-74 processor uses the same Socket as the server chips, and it is a 3.0GHz dual-core, what's the holdup? Answer: obviously it'd have to be the supply (especially since the FX-74 is out of stock at almost every online retailer I can find).

Score: 0

By Heero

posted Jul 20, 2007 - 3:31 PM

The hold up is because making Dual-Cores, and Native Quad-Cores is totally different.

Score: 0