AMD looks to 'optimise' by cutting 10 per cent of workforce

by Alistair Lowe on 4 November 2011, 11:02

Tags: AMD (NYSE:AMD)

Quick Link: HEXUS.net/qa7wv

Add to My Vault: x

AMD announced yesterday intentions to lay-off 10 per cent of its global workforce, along with the termination of existing contractual agreements, in an effort to make $200 million of operational savings in 2012.

AMD has spun this rather significant piece of news as the company optimising "cost structure to enhance competitiveness and accelerate growth". In other words AMD wishes to trim-the-fat so that it becomes mobile enough to invest significantly and responsively into future sectors, with the company showing particular interest in low-power and cloud markets.

Perhaps this sudden move is a reaction to ARM's recent low-power entry in to the server market or perhaps it has been planned for quite some time. With AMD looking to fund initiatives in 'emerging markets' with little specific direction, we have the feeling that the company is a little insecure and unsure at the moment of its position and is wanting to be ready to make a move as soon as the corporate gut provides it with a path to head down.

Traditionally AMD has always been the value-for-money choice, rarely do its CPUs outperform Intel's but with offerings often at a third of the cost, AMD has made a business for itself. On the other-hand, ARM processors, whilst falling safely short of high-end devices, are increasing in performance at a rate above the rest of the market, whilst maintaining low-cost and low-power consumption. With solid Linux and Android support and more significantly for the first time ever support in Windows 8, ARM devices could forseeability pose a significant threat to AMD in the not too distant future.

AMD expects most of the restructuring plan to take place during the final quarter of this year, with some loose ends continuing into 2012 with an overall expense of $105 million.



HEXUS Forums :: 8 Comments

Login with Forum Account

Don't have an account? Register today!
Yay for race-to-the-bottomnomics.
Its the onlything left that can optimize but I woudn't worry too much, looking at how AMD ‘optimised’ Bulldozer there wont be many people out of jobs.
I feel sorry for the people loosing their jobs especially so near to Christmas! :( However,a company cutting jobs during a recession is a big shock to some people?? Really?? Also this happening after a new CEO too?? Big shock!! :rolleyes:

AMD shed 5% of its workforce in 2008. Intel shed 10000 jobs in 2006 followed by another 6000 in 2009 and the company was still very profitable at the time,ie, they did this since the chaps in charge considered that their profits were not good enough.

In fact AMD had 11000 employees in early 2010 and now has 12000. It looks like the new CEO is trying to get employee count down to around the 2010 level it seems.

The chap now in charge is the same guy who helped transform Lenovo into one of the biggest PC makers in the world.

Jay
Its the onlything left that can optimize but I woudn't worry too much, looking at how AMD ‘optimised’ Bulldozer there wont be many people out of jobs.

So what about its other CPUs namely Zacate and Llano which have been extremely sucessful?? They are unoptimised according to your expert opinion. What about their graphics cards?? Right, so using your logic AMD graphics are also unoptimised.

It seems these new unoptimised products have actually become more popular than their previous ones:

http://www.dailytech.com/AMDs+Q3+Profit+Constrained+by+Manufacturing+Problems/article23137.htm
Traditionally AMD has always been the value-for-money choice, rarely do its CPUs outperform Intel's …

Are we forgetting that is was only five years ago that AMD's finest processors were handing Intel's their rears and cost $999? I don't think a trend of 4 - 5 years really counts as a “tradition”, does it?
+1, when big changes happen the market will tip one way or the other, and it goes back and forth. Core was an incredibly successful architecture but let's not forget ia64 vs x86-64 for example - both giants win some, lose some, and complacency has proven to be a dangerous thing in the CPU world.