bit-tech.net

AMD finally makes a profit

AMD finally makes a profit

Let's hope it's not a case of mo' money, mo' problems for AMD

It’s been a long time coming – over three years – but AMD has finally made a profit. The company yesterday reported that in the fourth quarter of 2009, its revenues were $1.646 billion and 42 per cent better than the same period last year.

During the fourth quarter, AMD’s operating income (a measure of profit which excludes interest and income tax) was a fairly handy $1.288 billion. That said, AMD’s statement pointed out this includes “a net favourable impact of $1.224 billion. The net favourable impacts were primarily from a legal settlement with Intel Corp.” So while the company is back in the black, much of its profit is actually Intel’s.

[This] quarter marks another milestone in our transformation and underscores our growing momentum,” said Dirk Meyer, AMD president and CEO. “We enter 2010 having completed the transition to a fabless business model, reached a historic antitrust settlement, and made significant progress strengthening our balance sheet. Our innovative strategy for designing the world's most vivid digital experiences continues to generate demand."

While a billion dollars from Intel certainly helped, even without the cash AMD would have had a good quarter, with revenues up 18 per cent compared to the previous quarter of 2009. That period saw AMD return an operating loss of $77 million.

Happy with AMD’s good fortunes? Would you be tempted to invest in the company right now? Or is Intel still the way to go? Let us know your thoughts in the forums.

26 Comments

Discuss in the forums Reply
Digi 22nd January 2010, 14:36 Quote
My next CPU will be an AMD. These guys have been honest and have constantly tried to compete. Someone has to and that's why they deserve some support.

Eventually I hope they will be competing again with Intel on a very real level.
B1GBUD 22nd January 2010, 14:37 Quote
While AMD/ATI have stolen a march on DX11 hardware, I'm afraid I'd stick with Intel as far as CPU's go.
l3v1ck 22nd January 2010, 14:39 Quote
Always happy with that. If AMD were to fold there's be no competition to make Intel competitive on price or performance in future products.
yakyb 22nd January 2010, 14:52 Quote
i'm going to build an AMD based HTPC for my parents i could go either way but performance is not important so thought i would swing towards AMD
okenobi 22nd January 2010, 14:53 Quote
I'm still running an AMD CPU from 5yrs ago and I've just bought my first ATi GPU. Feels good to support them. Although in reality, they're a big business just like any other.
dicobalt 22nd January 2010, 16:11 Quote
This is pretty bad news, AMD has to earn money by suing people? What does that say about the company and the product? AMD lost its focus on producing CPU's because it wanted to go off and do other things. That's all there is to it. AMD will have to stop making CPU's if they can't manage to produce one that is more competitive.
CrapBag 22nd January 2010, 16:15 Quote
AMD didn't have to make money by suing people, they had to claw back what they lost due to Intels unfair anti competitive doings.

All they have done is taken back what should have been theirs.

If AMD had been able to trade as normal during that period then they may well have been more competitive performance wise now because they would have had the money to poor into research and development.
Teelzebub 22nd January 2010, 16:18 Quote
I would only buy the best which atm is intel if I want to be charitable I give my money to cancer research
Drexial 22nd January 2010, 17:12 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by dicobalt
This is pretty bad news, AMD has to earn money by suing people? What does that say about the company and the product? AMD lost its focus on producing CPU's because it wanted to go off and do other things. That's all there is to it. AMD will have to stop making CPU's if they can't manage to produce one that is more competitive.


Yes but AMD had a competitive product, that was better in almost every way. But Intel stiffed their chance at a fair race when they decided in Mob style tactics to maintain an edge. Then Intel was afforded the capital to put into R&D to develop the Core architecture. I feel positive about AMD though considering what they have been able to achieve with their ATi line.

Now this Lawsuit has not only extended their contract for use of the X86 architecture indefinitely(I believe), but has allowed them to go fabless as they wanted. This was something that would not have been possible if Intel didn't fess up to their practices and come to an internal agreement with AMD. This will now allow them to completely devote their time and efforts to chip design.

Yes you can argue the point that Intel didn't actually admit to anything. But they did seem to hand AMD a very nice package to settle. Intel probably could have buried AMD in legal costs if it continued.
Farfalho 22nd January 2010, 17:23 Quote
AMD still made a profit as reported in the news, get everything read and understand before saying such thing.

Have an AMD Atlhon XP 2500+ Barthon still running, my rig is an AMD 9950 BE and my brother a 955 BE, so pretty much AMD here, not fanboys but supporters. I would only buy Intel for two reasons, the first is that some kind of cpu that AMD launches and turns out to be pretty rubbish, then I wouldn't waste my money like that and two, is two equally performant cpu but Intel is cheaper since that isn't going to ever happen, I have only one xD
pimonserry 22nd January 2010, 17:27 Quote
Excellent, competition is always good ;)

I'd have to say though, there's always a reason they were losing money hand over fist. I have an ATI GPU (and it's great), but I wouldn't buy an AMD CPU unless they come out with a killer product at a low price. Performance-wise, Intel just beats them IMO.

I'd use AMD if I needed a budget system though, but I don't suspect they make much profit out of that.
Phil Rhodes 22nd January 2010, 17:40 Quote
Quote:
“We enter 2010 having completed the transition to a fabless business model...

And that's a good thing?
UncertainGod 22nd January 2010, 18:12 Quote
It's an excellent thing, when the two half's of the company were tied together neither were making a profit, since the split both are very healthy companies, yes AMD still need to play safe burning off the crippling debt it gained while trying to fight with Intel when that company wouldn't allow it's partners to work with AMD but it has definitely turned a corner. Global Foundry's has signed some massive contracts of late with the likes of Qualcomm.
banks1990 22nd January 2010, 18:15 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Phil Rhodes
And that's a good thing?

they don't have to constantly upgrade the fab to catch up with intel, which costs a lot of greens.

now they can put more effort and $$ into R&D to create a better cpu/gpu.
frontline 22nd January 2010, 18:42 Quote
Hope the monkey didn't get a wage freeze to obtain these results :(
barndoor101 22nd January 2010, 19:50 Quote
[QUOTE=Drexial]
Quote:
Originally Posted by dicobalt
Yes you can argue the point that Intel didn't actually admit to anything. But they did seem to hand AMD a very nice package to settle. Intel probably could have buried AMD in legal costs if it continued.

nope, the settlement was to stop AMD from testifying in the numerous anti-trust cases against intel - AMD didnt sue intel directly, but now the cases have less support because AMD wont testify.
thehippoz 23rd January 2010, 03:08 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by frontline
Hope the monkey didn't get a wage freeze to obtain these results :(

lol
dec 23rd January 2010, 16:48 Quote
great AMD is making a profit. now make a competitor to nehalem (or better yet sandy bridge) that sells for less.
Lord-Vale3 23rd January 2010, 20:19 Quote
I'm an Intel/nVidia guy and will likely always be, but its good to keep AMD/ATI around, as their competition keeps prices down a bit.
Eggy 24th January 2010, 08:50 Quote
Had an AMD,m now have an Intel. It's all about price/performance, brand loyalty is a bit silly.
Moyo2k 24th January 2010, 12:12 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lord-Vale3
I'm an Intel/nVidia guy and will likely always be, but its good to keep AMD/ATI around, as their competition keeps prices down a bit.

Your an intel/nvidia guy? You do realise that AMD are closer to NVIDIA than Intel is?... Intel can't get along with anyone except microsoft and some of their recent decisions seem to be alienating them too

Back on track go Team AMD :)
Krayzie_B.o.n.e. 25th January 2010, 05:59 Quote
I'm happy for AMD and hope those Directx 11 video cards help them make more money.
Intel has to have good competition.

Yeh I know Intel is better but with the the money I save buying AMD I generally use it for other hardware needs.

Intel Cpus and mobos cost too much. they are the best, by like 1 or 2 FPS in games.

But for bang for buck, I'll go with AMD. The little company with something to prove.
Elton 25th January 2010, 06:03 Quote
Once AMD makes a better platform, and makes a chip that rivals the Nehalems, well I'll buy them.

But in the Budget Sector, AMD still wins.
[USRF]Obiwan 25th January 2010, 08:57 Quote
If you want cheap and good, go AMD. If you want fast and expensive go Intel.

Either way it's a win win situation.
zagortenay 25th January 2010, 23:13 Quote
Misleading article:
"So while the company is back in the black, much of its profit is actually Intel’s."

Yeah, Intel is a charity organization and they were so kind to donate 1.25 Bn$ to AMD.

Open your eyes Alex!
donovan75 27th January 2010, 17:57 Quote
I've been an AMD supporter since they released the K6 processor. My current box is a Athlon 64 X2 4200+, along with my laptop having a 3400+, single core. However, my next box is going to be Intel. Why? Compatibility. One of my big plans is to build a box that can triple boot OSX/Windows/Linux using the EFI-X dongle.

Unfortunately, support for AMD processors is presently not available. :-( When I will be able to build this box is unknown. Hopefully sometime this year. This decision took me a while to make. I've always supported AMD, but when it comes to performance, Intel is always in the lead.

Howerver, AMD has made some major progress. I remember the days of Socket 7 and Super 7, where they had to use what Intel provided them. Then they licensed DEC Alpha's EV6 protocol, and used it with Slot-A. I knew from that point on, AMD would have it's own platform. It took a while for it to start, but now, many years later, they have many manufacturers under their wing.

Intel has also made some great progress. The i7 is simply amazing... And now there's the i9? Not to mention, I've read about the experimental 48 core chip, and even and 80 core chip, and heard the words "hundreds of cores". There is no question that they have products already developed that are just in preparation for release. I will be lucky if I can afford a simple Core 2 Quad at this point in time! :-)

I am glad that AMD has finally made a profit. It's about time! They've been in the hole for a while... The purchase of ATI did put them in the whole, but they are beginning to profit from it. It's just a matter of time before they have a true competing product for the i7. But I don't expect Intel to just sit and do nothing! They will always have something up their sleeve.

Which is good. It keeps AMD on their toes! And visa versa. Competition is always a good thing. I'll always support AMD when I'm on a budget, but I want my next box to be Intel, primarily for compatibility and performance reasons. I'm not giving up on AMD, or becoming an Intel-fan boy, or a AMD-fan boy, I just want a good overall CPU that performs well.
Log in

You are not logged in, please login with your forum account below. If you don't already have an account please register to start contributing.



Discuss in the forums