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 mmarq on 7/11/2007 4:08:36 PM , Rating: 2
Based on what? Your AMD fanaticism?

Nothing of the kind. Only because HT, DC are around for 5 years, and is acknowledge superior design to shared buses and not only in servers.

Too much spin, no real numbers...;?articleI...

... i dont buy it, not because is Intel but because i despise brainwashers. So implying otherwise without numbers cannot be called Intel fanatism, yes ?

RE: wa
By zsdersw on 7/11/2007 7:14:18 PM , Rating: 2
Lots of things have been around for 5 years.. that are far from immune to being leap-frogged by the competition. HyperTransport's length of time in the marketplace does not mean that any potential competitor cannot possibly be as good or better. There is no basis for you to conclude that CSI won't be at least on par with the rendition of HyperTransport available at the time of CSI's arrival.

And yes.. only in 4S+ servers and workstations is HyperTransport a truly soar-away superior architecture. In everything else (laptops, desktops, 1S and 2S workstations/servers) there is plenty of competitiveness from Intel to muddy the water on HyperTransport's supposed "superiority".

RE: wa
By mmarq on 7/13/2007 2:38:38 PM , Rating: 2
Lots of things have been around for 5 years.. that are far from immune to being leap-frogged by the competition.

Yes nothing is immune to leap-frogging in the IT industry. But where are the numbers about latency, bandwidth that shows that at least Intel intents to do it with CSI ? ( a link please)

And yes.. only in 4S+ servers and workstations is HyperTransport a truly soar-away superior architecture.

NO. Actually HT1 sucks a little at 4 way, and is no improvement at all at 8 way because of bus contention. It doesn't have enough bandwidth to deal with the cache coherency protocol of 4 CPUS all connected to each other much less 8. HT3 has the potential of more than the double the bandwidth and with less latency. It can be pushed to more than 25Gb/s with 16 lanes ~12,5Gb/s in each direction(in and out).

C2D shared bus at 1066Mhz can punch 8,5Gb/s aggregate in all directions. DDR2 at the same speed can punch ~14Gb/s (12,8 at 800Mhz) one direction at a time. Talking about huge waste of memory bandwidth(8,5-14=-5,5GB/s) and bus contention .

HT1 can punch around ~12Gb/s with 16 lanes or ~6Gb/s per direction. But here stops any comparativeness because of the IMC, HT has to pull/push comparatively much less data trough the FSB. A huge benefice IMO

Penryn shared bus at 1333Mhz can only punch 10,6Gb/s aggregate in all directions. DDR3 at the same speed can punch ~24GB/s. Even a more huge waste of memory bandwidth(10,6-24=-13,4Gb/s) and higher bus contention.

HT3 can match DDR3 at 1333MHz, with no theoretical bus contention. And it only has more comparativeness because if you think of SLI or Crossfire, than AMD has a huge advantage.

And that is why Intel move to DDR3 is *PURE MARKETING BS*. They are on the catch up and losing. Can CSI change this to the point of being better than HT3 ?... It would be a huge leap-frogging, and i doubt it very much.

"Google fired a shot heard 'round the world, and now a second American company has answered the call to defend the rights of the Chinese people." -- Rep. Christopher H. Smith (R-N.J.)
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

Copyright 2016 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki