this post was submitted on 01 Aug 2024
486 points (98.6% liked)
Technology
59549 readers
3262 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related content.
- Be excellent to each another!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Approved Bots
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Honestly, I think AMD doesn't even have the choice to be anywhere near as complacent as Intel.
ARM is on the rise, and that means multiple competitors incoming, both in the PC and console space.
Nvidia wanted to buy ARM, and despite that falling apart, Nvidia will be coming out with ARM CPUs (I imagine they're, smartly, letting Qualcomm and MS sort out the teething issues with Windows on ARM before they swoop in and look polished and stable right out of the starting gate).
AMD also doesn't have to pay a shitload to maintain, expand, and improve fabs - that's all on TSMC. So the whole aspect of choosing between investing tens of billions or letting fabs stagnate isn't a thing for AMD.
Yeah they could stay on the same process for 5 years, but I highly doubt they'd do that given the ARM competition, doubly so because they don't want somebody else to take away their "we're TSMC's second favourites behind Apple" position.
In other words, I don't think AMD has the financial incentive to stagnate like intel did. From a business perspective, it was an absolute no-brainer for Intel to stagnate; AMD's comeback was an unlikely one. To date they're the only company that's recovered in the x86 space after falling back into complete irrelevance.