AMD rumored to be prepping for massive layoffs

AMD could be preparing to give some of its employees bad news sometime next week. The PC processor and graphics maker, which has already predicted that its third quarter earnings will be well below previous expectations, is now rumored to be thinking about cuts in its workforce that could affect 30 percent of its team members.

News.com reported on the possible layoffs, via unnamed sources, but added that the workforce cuts could turn out to be lower than 30 percent. On Thursday, AMD announced that its third quarter financial revenues will be 10 percent lower compared to revenues of a year ago. The company previously predicted that its revenues would be just one percent lower.

AMD said that the revisions were "due to weaker than expected demand across all product lines caused by the challenging macroeconomic environment." AMD will report its full financial results on October 18th.

AMD has always been the number two PC processor maker, behind Intel. However, the company has yet to make much a mark in the growing tablet market, unlike Intel, which will have several tablets with its chips inside running Windows 8 later this fall. AMD announced a new low power chip this week, the Z-60 APU, which it says will be put inside a number of upcoming Windows 8-based tablets. So far, there has been no specific announcements on which tablets and PCs will use the new AMD chip.

Source: News.com | Image via AMD

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

Best Buy stores already displaying Windows 8 PCs

Next Story

Dual screen Windows 8 Asus Taichi notebook priced at $1,299

19 Comments

Commenting is disabled on this article.

All these layoffs could be avoided if greed wasn't the #1 thing on everyone's mind. Rich buggers need to give some of their wealth to the less fortunate. Money is material while people are not.

soldier1st said,
All these layoffs could be avoided if greed wasn't the #1 thing on everyone's mind. Rich buggers need to give some of their wealth to the less fortunate. Money is material while people are not.

Lol.

Like many others, I had AMD from that first 500ghz "badass" chip around 2000 right up til intel went multicore...from then on it's been all Intel. Now that time is money, I just can't get the performance from AMD...but to be honest, I just stopped looking...they need a "holy ****" wow product. I know I'm rooting for them, competition is good.

i had a AMD cpu (Athlon XP) and ATI card (9800) which were awesome at a time and i loved them

however, the rest of the time, i found offers by intel and nvidia better. i went through 4-5 intels and 7-8 nvidia cards (approx)

so, on average, i was much more pleased with intel. AMD will always be an underdog... it seems

Master of Earth said,
AMD need some breakthrough stuff in order to battle with intel. plain and simple

Not necessarily breakthrough, but at least something comparable to intel. Similar speed + cheaper =win.

Unsurprising given how badly their CPU sales have tanked, however I truly hope this isn't a sign they're on the way under because they still make great graphics cards.

Beyond Godlike said,
Should lay off all the engineers who decided that all of their products should be slower and inferior than 2 year old intel processors.

QFT.

I'm sure they deliberately chose that rather than being forced to by the lack of the centillions of dollars that Intel can invest on R&D.

francescob said,
I'm sure they deliberately chose that rather than being forced to by the lack of the centillions of dollars that Intel can invest on R&D.

If only they hadn't bought ATI they would have had the money for proper R&D.

francescob said,
I'm sure they deliberately chose that rather than being forced to by the lack of the centillions of dollars that Intel can invest on R&D.

BS. And whoever rated you up are also idiots.

AMD managed to make a better CPU than Intel years ago with the Athlon 64. It was superior to anything Intel had at the time.

And the fact that AMD's new Bulldozer and Piledriver CPU's actually perform WORSE than AMD's own last gen CPU's in many tasks also backs up the fact that AMD simply designed a very poor CPU. They failed. Get over it.

NoClipMode said,

BS. And whoever rated you up are also idiots.

AMD managed to make a better CPU than Intel years ago with the Athlon 64. It was superior to anything Intel had at the time.

BS my ass. AMD managed to outclass Intel for a short time because Intel was struggling enormously to replace the Netburst architecture with Nehalem (the so-called Pentium 5). In the end Nehalem was delayed and the Core architecture was inserted as a short-term alternative so all Intel could do in the meanwhile was pushing for the MHzs as much as they could in Pentium 4s and Pentium Ds: this is why AMD managed to catch up so easily. AMD engineers didn't do a miracle, it was Intel that failed miserably leaving AMD years to catch up.

That said, Intel is an extremely big and profitable company while AMD is small and every year nearer to the bankrupt, thinking they could easily release better CPUs than Intel is just naive.

Beyond Godlike said,
Should lay off all the engineers who decided that all of their products should be slower and inferior than 2 year old intel processors.

Gonna love watching you Intel fanboys pay $1000 for a low-end CPU.

Mike Frett said,

Gonna love watching you Intel fanboys pay $1000 for a low-end CPU.

I use whatever suits my needs. AMD's bulldozer would do that for my gaming machines. I use intel now because at the time of each purchase, AMD had no offering worth mentioning.

Beyond Godlike said,

I use whatever suits my needs. AMD's bulldozer would do that for my gaming machines. I use intel now because at the time of each purchase, AMD had no offering worth mentioning.

I think what he means is, if AMD were to fall through and cease to exist, Intel have no reason NOT to charge $1000 for a processor, since they'd have no direct competition in the desktop space.

AMD have always been handy at keeping Intel honest(ish). The Athlon 64 is THE reason why Intel processors are so good now. AMD caught Intel with their pants down, and for a good few years beat them all round the houses until Intel fought back with the Core 2 range. The problem they have now is that they don't have the money to compete in the high end with Intel after Bulldozer's poor performance. Their failure with Bulldozer has reduced them to competing mainly in the low-end processor market, where there's basically no profit.

It would be a shame if AMD were to fade into obscurity though. They do make good processors, and on a price/performance scale, they compete (and often best) Intel. It's just a shame that they've fallen so far behind in the raw performance figures.