backtop


Print 78 comment(s) - last by mars777.. on Jul 15 at 7:12 AM

Former ATI president and CEO resigns from AMD

AMD today announced Dave Orton, executive vice president of AMD, has resigned. The resignation is effective in the end of July 2007. Orton was the former president and chief executive officer of ATI before the merger with AMD. A new executive vice president has not been appointed yet.

“It is with mixed feelings that I am leaving AMD,” Orton said. “I am very optimistic about AMD’s future. I believe strongly in the strategies that brought AMD and ATI together and the talented employees of the ‘new AMD’ who are committed to winning in the market by delivering the best possible solutions for customers.”

Orton was one of the “key drivers in the successful integration of AMD and ATI,” according to AMD President and Chief Operating Officer Dirk Meyer. “With his integration work complete and the successful launch of key graphics and chipset products earlier this year, the time was right for Dave to take his personal and professional life in a different direction,” he added.

Despite the “successful integration” of AMD and ATI, the company continues to hemorrhage cash, with debts mounting up fast and an estimated $1.1 billion in the bank. The company also posted a first quarter loss of $611 million USD.  



Comments     Threshold


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

RE: wa
By Andrwken on 7/11/2007 12:52:31 AM , Rating: 3
quote:

A 4 core MCM like Penryn at 45nm process will be 107mm2 x2 = 214mm2

Extrapolating a 4 core Barcelona at 45nm process will be
283mm2 x 0,59 = 167mm2

so:
A 2 core Penryn at 45nm process will be 107mm2

a 2 core Phenom at 45nm process will be 83,5mm2


Also, you are comparing 45nm Amd chips to 45nm Intel chips that will never compete directly against each other, Intel will have the Nehalem architecture out before Amd ever shows a 45nm chip.

Not trying to come off too pro-Intel here, but this post has some flaws in its logic.


RE: wa
By CyborgTMT on 7/11/2007 2:03:56 AM , Rating: 1
Both the Nehalem and the Deneb are scheduled for a 2H 2008 release.


RE: wa
By Andrwken on 7/11/2007 2:21:12 AM , Rating: 4
If recent history proves anything, it would be very suprising to see a 45nm deneb in retail by the end of 2008. Don't get me wrong, nothing is saying that intel will have another barn burner with Nehalem, but in the last two years, their timetables have been spot on or early. You just can't say that for Amd as of late.


RE: wa
By mmarq on 7/11/2007 2:11:09 AM , Rating: 3
Nehalem ?

Obviously not this one
http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=74...

And if is this information, than how came can anyone call this interesting news!!
http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/cpu/display/200604281...

Ah! the same old good spin, so typical of the IT industry, noise and lot of 'names', but very few technical details.

So
Penrym is basically a die shrink with 2MB more L2 cache

Nehalem would be a somehow enhanced design on a CSI interconnect.

Interesting times 'we' have ahead. But Nehalem will be 2 core native right ? How would you expect a 4 core 2 chip MCM to compete with a 8 core 2 chip MCM shangai. ?

For one thing i hope that the press wont start posting that that is a unfair match 'apples to oranges', because i'm very interested in the maximum performance benchmarks of those beasts.

Than there is ZRAM. If this paper is correct
http://www.hotchips.org/archives/hc18/2_Mon/HC18.S...
can represent for the expected 6Mb L3 cache of the K10.5(?) Shangai, a maximum size of 36Mb (6x) in exactly the same die area and with about 50% less power consumption, and that in spite of the eDRAM being slower than SDRAM could represent a huge performance gain equivalent to another die shrink!...

Well... we'll see!


RE: wa
By Andrwken on 7/11/2007 2:34:04 AM , Rating: 3
No, that nehalem on that 2003 inquirer link was scrapped for the Core architecture. The new one looks to be a native quad that they will mcm to eight core with hyperthreading on each core. 16 simultaneous threads. Like we need that by next year, lol. I would guess that is what Amd's direct competition to their 45nm will be in 08. The penryn will be competition to the 65nm Barcy's.

Here's a link for you :)
http://www.hothardware.com/articles/Intel_Penryn_a...


RE: wa
By mmarq on 7/11/2007 3:41:19 PM , Rating: 2
Very interesting link thanks...

So it seems i was wrong in my suspicions and Penryn is more than a die shrink, capable of equal or better performance than Barcelona at the same clock speed, and able to achieve much higher clocks... AMD is in trouble if they cannot scale the clock of their Barcelona.

(hmm... IBM managed to get pass 5.0 Ghz(so they claim) in a bigger chip (Power 6), in the same almost exact 65nm process of AMD, why cant they get somehow much closer to that ?)

quote:
The new one looks to be a native quad that they will mcm to eight core with hyperthreading on each core. 16 simultaneous threads


So it seems that its a native quad core.

# Scalable performance: 1 to 16+ threads, 1 to 8+ cores, scalable cache sizes
(very good, and with L2/L3 too... hardly to tell how it compares to decoupled, clustered, speculative multithreading of reverse-hyperthreading rumors and other interviews and slide clues of AMD... if they are true... :
http://citeseer.ist.psu.edu/rd/69795829%2C57813%2C...
http://citeseer.ist.psu.edu/rd/69795829%2C445663%2...
http://citeseer.ist.psu.edu/rd/69795829%2C306699%2...
http://citeseer.ist.psu.edu/rd/69795829%2C227934%2...
http://citeseer.ist.psu.edu/rd/69795829%2C659643%2...
Universitat Politècnica de Catalunya, Barcelona... hmmm... speculative anyway)

# Scalable and configurable system interconnects and integrated memory controllers
(doubt CSI could take on HT3.0, Direct Conect 2.0 at first time)

# High performance integrated graphics engine for client
( Intel dont have hypertransport neither a crossfire like scheme... would they buy Nvidia for not being inferior to FUSION? )

Remarkable year 2008 will be... and if AMD dosent execute much faster than today, and i hope they will, we will have an absolute monopolist... and i would not like to buy my next 8 core CPU at 2000$... thats the only reason not an anti-Intel sentiment.


RE: wa
By mars777 on 7/15/2007 7:12:30 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
(hmm... IBM managed to get pass 5.0 Ghz(so they claim) in a bigger chip (Power 6), in the same almost exact 65nm process of AMD, why cant they get somehow much closer to that ?)


Because the Power architecture is in-order vs the out-of-order of modern multipurpose cpus made by Intel and AMD.

THis makes them more than 20% slower clock-per-clock basis on few-thread operations, which they hide by using some form of hyperthreading.

Anyhow they are not targeted to me and you. Simple as that :)


RE: wa
By vignyan on 7/11/2007 2:46:45 AM , Rating: 2
Dude.. you are going paranoid with your AMD fever. Anyways, correcting all the flaws with your posts in this thread....
First.. The retooling to 65nm and 300mm wafer sizes cost AMD a 2bn hole. and that too has to come back to them from the selling the processors for a profit.
Penryn is not just a die shrink plus a 2MB addition to Core2 architecture... it has advaced SSE4 instructions that help in media encoding and tech computing performace... Also the ATA(Application Targetted Accelerators) instructions in the SSE4... thats not just it.. with all this it has a 25% lower power consumption than the best core2 today.
Another thing is that Nehalem is an architecture... like Core and Core2... not to signify the number of cores. Get ready to be suprised by the way nehalem is going to be introduced... Scalability is the key. You can configure from 1-8+ cores, scalable cache sizes, IMCs (yes IMC s ), system interconnects, integrated graphics engine...

Be Amazed... and SEE...

PS: Yes... i am an Intel fanboy... but only because of the technology that they are innovating and sharing... Used to be AMD's... but now am Intel! ;)


RE: wa
By SmokeRngs on 7/11/2007 10:35:46 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
it has advaced SSE4 instructions that help in media encoding and tech computing performace


In my experience, it normally takes 2-3 years for a noticeable amount of software to incorporate optimizations which make use of one of the iterations of SSE. I haven't really looked recently, but I haven't seen much in the way of advertising of SSE3 optimizations.

Basically, optimizations such as this rarely show any improvement in performance until later down the road. AMD will have SSE4 long before there is widespread use of the instructions so it's unlikely there will be any actual performance gains at Penryn's release due to SSE4.

I'm interested to see how Penryn actually does. I applaud any efforts to increase the efficiency of my computing hardware.


RE: wa
By KnightProdigy on 7/11/2007 10:59:19 AM , Rating: 2
It's funny how AMD and ATI are heading up the on-die graphics arena. Intel revealed their idea for it only 6mo after AMD.
Intel with a better architecture?
LOL
Thats why they have been playing catch up to AMD since the K6 right?

Sure, as soon as Intel gains the speed crown or releases 'new' information, all the fanbois come out trying to make it sound like Intel 'had it' all along.
I used to be an Intel fanboi until they AXED the potential of the Copperhead FORCING their customers to buy the insanely overpriced higher end procs.

Your advanced SSE4 and ATA instructions are only to try to keep up with OLD 3D Now tech. Intel has always sucked on the media end of things and are STILL behind AMD in that market. Gotta look at the bigger picture here.

As far as the 25% less power consumption...true, but in the low power consumption arena, AMD still has them beat in performance/watt (I could be wrong but Penryn cannot even run full speed @ 45w or below).
The new interconnects are only to compete with HT3, and from the specs, it looks to me like even that has come up short. In the desktop and consumer market, analysts have stated that 8 cores will show little to no performance increase over 4 (similar to a RAID affect). After 4, the architecture and innovation needs to come to par to see a significant speed increase. Considering the AMD vs Intel release date information, AMD may have that covered, since they have scheduled a NUMBER of releases in the next year as Intel, well, not so many.

OP of this thread is correct. Do your homework before arguing with someone.
Guess we will have to wait and see.


RE: wa
By zsdersw on 7/11/2007 12:02:41 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Thats why they have been playing catch up to AMD since the K6 right?


You couldn't be more wrong.

quote:
Intel has always sucked on the media end of things


Again, you couldn't be more wrong. Even in the P4 days, Intel was either ahead or very competitive in media encoding. It was a common bright spot in the benchmarks for the P4. Core 2 didn't give anything back to AMD in media encoding (or anything else), either.


RE: wa
By mmarq on 7/11/2007 4:39:56 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
Thats why they have been playing catch up to AMD since the K6 right?

You couldn't be more wrong.

Well since the K6 no, but since the K7 and K8 yes. And AMD can blame itself, and the huge influence of Intel upon the spin bullshitting press for not being able to dent a much much larger dent on Intel market share.


RE: wa
By zsdersw on 7/12/2007 12:04:07 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
but since the K7 and K8 yes.


Incorrect. Core 2 has places Intel in the lead. Now it's AMD's turn to catch up.


RE: wa
By zsdersw on 7/12/2007 12:33:17 PM , Rating: 2
has *placed* Intel in the lead, I meant to type.


RE: wa
By mmarq on 7/11/2007 4:23:31 PM , Rating: 2
Dont take me wrong

But what does an Intel fanboy doing working as an accountant for AMD!... (The retooling to 65nm and 300mm wafer sizes cost AMD a 2bn hole )

Much of the problem is not 'funboyism', anyone has preferences, but is the BS spin that floats around by the ton.


"It's okay. The scenarios aren't that clear. But it's good looking. [Steve Jobs] does good design, and [the iPad] is absolutely a good example of that." -- Bill Gates on the Apple iPad

Related Articles
AMD's Large Debt Mounting Up Fast
April 29, 2007, 1:54 PM
AMD Posts $611 Million Net Loss in Q1
April 19, 2007, 9:13 AM
AMD-ATI: A Done Deal
July 24, 2006, 5:00 AM













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