Comment by vegabook

Assuming you're not just here to troll (doubtful given your comment history, but hey I'm feeling generous):

> lol AMD flogged its floundering foundry waaay before Intel ran into any problems.

Not wanting/being able to spend to compete on the leading edge nodes is an interesting definition of "floundering". Today there is exactly 1 foundry in the world that's on that leading edge, TSMC. We'll see how Intel Foundry works out, but they're years behind their revenue/ramp targets at this point.

It's fairly well known that Brian Krzanich proposed spinning out Intel's foundry operations, but the board said no.

The irony is that trailing edge fabs are wildly profitable, since the capex is fully amortized. GloFo made $1 billion in net income in FY2023.

> in fact most of your points about AMD's lack of dough can be traced back to that disaster. The company wasn't hit by some meteorite. It screwed up all by itself

Bulldozer through Excavator were terrible architectures. What does this have to do with what's now known as Global Foundries?

GloFo got spun out with Emirati money in March 2009. Bulldozer launched in Q4 2011. What's the connection?

AMD continued to lose market share (and was unprofitable) for years after the foundry was spun out. Bad architectural choices, and bad management, sure. Overpaying for ATI, yep. "Traced back" to GloFo? How?

> Then lucky it had that duopolistic X86 licence to lean on or it would have gone the way of Zilog or Motorola. 'Cos it sure can't rely on its janky compute offering.

"Janky" when? "Rely" implies present tense. You're saying AMD compute offerings are janky today?