▲ | 0x457 4 days ago | |||||||
Yes, but that contract was a result of going fabless and spinning off GloFo into its own entity longer before Zen. AMD went fabless in 2009 during K8 lifecycle. Since then, we had an entire dynasty of failed bulldozer CPUs. I fail to see how going fabless helped them? What helped them is putting the right people in charge of Zen design and intel fumbling 10nm due to their own hubris. | ||||||||
▲ | wtallis 4 days ago | parent | next [-] | |||||||
The point is that AMD didn't really go fabless in 2009. They didn't own the fab anymore but were still tied to it, so they were not free to exercise the number one advantage of being fabless until much later. | ||||||||
| ||||||||
▲ | babypuncher 3 days ago | parent | prev [-] | |||||||
AMD and GloFlo split in 2009 but AMD wasn't able to start actually manufacturing their chips with other foundries until 2019 when GloFlo got downgraded to only providing the IO die for Zen 2. This is because AMD was contractually obligated to continue using GloFlo for that time as a condition of the split. Zen 2 is also where Ryzen went from "exciting and competitive, but not top of the line" to actually giving Intel a run for their money in more than just highly multithreaded workloads. Improved architecture put AMD within striking distance of Intel and the move to TSMC allowed them to pull ahead. | ||||||||
|