backtop


Print 42 comment(s) - last by Chocobollz.. on Jan 1 at 10:18 PM

AMD takes an additional $70 million in restructuring charges

AMD and ATI have not enjoyed the success the two firms envisioned when AMD bought the graphics firm in 2006. AMD is hurting due to the global economy and announced this week that it will take an additional restructuring charge related to the $5.4 billion is spent to purchase ATI.

AMD says that it also laid off 100 more employees than it had originally announced bringing the total laid off over the quarter to 600.

As a result of the additional layoffs, AMD is recording $70 million in restructuring charges rather than the $50 million in charges it has expected. The chipmaker also says that the new cost reduction would result in additional charges though the first half of 2009, though the firm did not specify what the additional charges would be.

EWeek reports that AMD will take an additional goodwill impairment charge related to the ATI purchase from 2006. AMD says that the charge is based on an updated, long-term financial outlook. This isn’t the first impairment charge AMD has taken in relation to the ATI purchase, in June of 2006 AMD took a charge totaling $800 million. AMD will also take a $20 million impairment charge on an investment in flash maker Spansion.

AMD announced in early December that it was cutting revenue forecasts by 25%.



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

RE: Reality 101
By rdeegvainl on 12/30/2008 2:33:06 PM , Rating: 2
I will reward the company that makes the best product at the price I am willing to pay. I will not reward incompetence with my business. They want my money, they need to make a product that I want.


RE: Reality 101
By Beenthere on 12/30/2008 3:10:13 PM , Rating: 4
No one said to reward a company who doesn't make a product that you want. AMD is far from incompetent as Intel is about to see once again. If you want to buy Intel - the folks who tried to eliminate all competition from the marketplace by using illegal business practices for which they are now being prosecuted on three continents - go right ahead. I'm sure Intel would be glad to have a complete monopoly again. Then we can all buy Pentium 90 CPUs at $1000 a pop - like the Bad old days!

There isn't any typical PC user that needs a CPU more powerful or of better financial value than what AMD offers. Yes there are some "power users" who might run software that can take advantage or not of a faster clockspeed or CPU, but they are far and few between. Having a slighty faster frame rate in a video game is a joke for suckers and has zero actual value.

Bottom line, cutting off your nose to spite your face can be pretty painful long term. Buy what makes you happy but understand the consequences of your actions.


RE: Reality 101
By Oregonian2 on 12/30/2008 3:49:42 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
I'm sure Intel would be glad to have a complete monopoly again. Then we can all buy Pentium 90 CPUs at $1000 a pop - like the Bad old days!


Wouldn't work. Apple would go back to PPC's and everybody would go over to Apple boxes. Or to VIA CPU's, or perhaps Samsung versions. Or something left over from AMD's firesale.

After buying AMD exclusively over more than a decade, I've been buying Intel since Conroe. More bang for my buck (CPU + MB). Just replaced MB+processor in my home's backup server that had failed (old Athlon). New Intel based Asus P5KPL-CM MB w/integrated video and Gig-E (sufficient for server) and Intel Allendale dual core CPU (still overkill) was insanely cheap.


RE: Reality 101
By Bateluer on 12/30/2008 4:18:52 PM , Rating: 2
This didn't occur when Intel pretty much ruled the market. It was Intel, Cyrix, Centaur, AMD, IBM, and a few others. Everyone but Intel made the best CPUs, and charged extreme prices for them. People have short memories and don't remember the pre-K62 days. Heck, people don't seem to remember the pre Conroe era where AMD held superior CPUs between the P3 and P4 era.

Shoot, if AMD hadn't been around we'd just be getting Cedar Mill 65nm P4 chips now, and they'd be single core.


RE: Reality 101
By StevoLincolnite on 12/30/2008 10:36:13 PM , Rating: 2
It was never a clear-cut leader back in the older days, Cyrix was a great cheap processor, however it had stupidly bad floating point performance.

AMD's K6 was a great and cheap alternative to the Pentium 2 and early Pentium 3 Katmai's but it's Floating point wasn't up to Intel standards at the time.

Enter the K7 which completely pummeled Intel Pentium 3 Katmai, and Pentium 2's and fixed the floating point performance issues.

However the Athlon quickly lost ground when Intel introduced the Coppermine with it's on-die L2 cache giving it a massive advantage.

Then AMD decided to do add an On-Die L2 Cache to the Athlon around the 800mhz mark, which gave it a massive advantage over the coppermine.
At this point AMD and Intel were in an arms race to reach 1ghz.

The Duron wiped the floor with the Celeron, during this time there seemed to be a new processor released every week, and prices were dropping like flies.

Then Enter the Tualatin, a test chip if you will for a new die shrink which added a larger L2 cache and other goodies, It was very competitive to the Athlon at the time, and it gave the Celeron the needed juice to compete against the Duron.

Unfortunately the Tualatin was short lived and Intel launched the Willamette which was out-performed not only by it's older Tualatin and some of the Higher-end Coppermine chips but by the Duron and the Athlon as well, coupled with the expensive RDRAM and the Athlon was the shining night that everyone needed.

AMD pretty much remained on top, until Intel hit around the 2.8ghz area with the Northwoods, then the Athlons just didn't seem to scale all that well in-comparison to the Pentium 4.

Then AMD released a massive Hammer, the Athlon 64 which pummeled Intel and made AMD the leader in performance for many years.

So yes AMD had superior CPU's but that "Superiority" was never constant.

I remember the early Athlons and how people complained about the heat they produced... If only we knew what the Prescott would bring...


RE: Reality 101
By Oregonian2 on 12/30/2008 10:57:24 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
This didn't occur when Intel pretty much ruled the market.


It was suggested that Pentium 90's would be sold for a grand if AMD went away. Unlike in the olden Pentium 90 days, Apple didn't have the PPC processors available they do now to compete with, nor the associated prices. Such a Pentium 90 sale would NOT now be competing with what they Pentium 90 did in the old days -- it would compete with whatever the best that IBM makes now, and against current pricing made in current IBM production processes.

When was it when Intel charged 1000 times the price/performance ratio of alternative processors as was suggested (to which I responded)? If AMD goes away, Intel will still NOT be the ONLY CPU maker in the world. They would be in the catbird seat in the short term, but they could not abuse it in the way suggested because IBM still makes and uses PPC's, and many other processors (primarily for embedded use) are made by many other manufacturers.

For that matter the VIA CPU that's in some netbooks runs circles around a Pentium 90 and costs maybe ten bucks. That thousand dollar Intel Pentium 90 will outsell the VIA chip?

I don't think so, although whomever "dinged" my posting must think so.

If Intel charged a grand for a Pentium 90 *now*, and that were incorporated into all PC's (and presumably equivalent prices of maybe a hundred grand for what's now a top Intel processor) you don't think a Mac selling for one percent of the price with equivalent performance would start selling REALLY well? Did Apple products ever occur in the past where they had a hundred times the performance/price ratio (in real life, not in ads)? I don't think so.


"This is about the Internet.  Everything on the Internet is encrypted. This is not a BlackBerry-only issue. If they can't deal with the Internet, they should shut it off." -- RIM co-CEO Michael Lazaridis

Related Articles
AMD Cuts 4Q Revenue Forecast 25 Percent
December 9, 2008, 5:43 AM













botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki