AMD: Second-quarter revenue will fall short of estimates

Here’s the latest in AMD’s ever-growing string of misfortunes. After posting a $590 million loss last quarter, AMD proudly announced that its revenue would grow by 0-3% in the second quarter. Today, the chipmaker revised that forecast. Revenue is now expected to drop by "approximately 11 percent."

Whoops.

That’s a sequential drop, by the way. Since AMD’s first-quarter revenue was $1.59 billion, revenue for the second quarter will probably add up to around $1.42 billion. That would be about 10% below the $1.57 billion AMD posted in Q2 2011.

What went wrong this time? Here’s what AMD has to say for itself:

The lower preliminary revenue results are primarily due to business conditions that materialized late in the second quarter, specifically softer-than-expected channel sales in China and Europe as well as a weaker consumer buying environment impacting the company’s Original Equipment Manufacturer (OEM) business.

Translation: demand slumped toward the end of the quarter. If that’s true, then other hardware makers undoubtedly felt the pinch, as well. We’ll have to see how their own Q2 results turn out.

Happily, there may be a silver lining in AMD’s disappointing results. The chipmaker’s gross margin should meet guidance, and operating expenses should actually be 8% lower than expected, thanks to "tightly controlled expenses in the quarter." (AMD previously forecast $605 million in operating expenses.) Whether that prevents AMD from posting another loss remains to be seen. The company will announce its full second-quarter results after the bell on Thursday.

Comments closed
    • ryko
    • 7 years ago

    While a lot of their problems undoubtedly stem from their poor performing bulldozer/piledriver CPUs, I really think they shot themselves in the foot with their gpu pricing this generation. Where is the $150-200 mainstream video card? This is the price range that most people feel comfortable buying in, but if you want amd you have to go with last generation’s 6850/6870.

    There is a gapping hole in their lineup that they seem content to ignore. I know they just announced price drops, but it’s for everything except the 7850. So there is still a huge segment from the $135 7770 to the $235 7850 that they are ignoring! It is mind boggling!

    Prices should be as follows, and then they would sell like hotcakes.

    7750 $75
    7770 $125
    7850 $175
    7870 $225
    7950 $275
    7970 $325
    7970GE $375

    • kristi_johnny
    • 7 years ago

    One of their mistakes was dropping their semiconductor fab, now they have to rely on GloFo to build the CPUs and TSMC to build GPUs, and we know TSMC had problems with new fab processes

      • NeelyCam
      • 7 years ago

      Keeping the fabs would’ve made it worse; selling them was the lesser of two evils

    • ronch
    • 7 years ago

    AMD’s few advantages have been falling out in recent years. They lost their precious fabs, they’ve been trailing Intel for years, their latest [promising] CPU architecture shot itself in the foot in terms of manufacturing cost/performance/energy efficiency, they keep bleeding talent, they keep losing mindshare and credibility, and they’re now dabbling in a crowded ARM industry with no real unique weapon apart from their graphics tech, but Nvidia has that too and they’ve (NV) proven that just because you have in-house graphics to put inside your SoCs doesn’t mean you’ll have the best products to leap ahead of your competition (although yes, I believe Tegra is doing quite well). It’s a crowded room where AMD has no prior experience and trying to squeeze themselves in.

    If I were AMD, I wouldn’t give up on x86 CPU development rat race but still try to take on the ARM market.

    • Anarchist
    • 7 years ago

    amd will have to spin-off their graphics division …

      • sschaem
      • 7 years ago

      Yea, sell it to Apple for 75 million.. like they sold their mobile division to Qualcomm for 65 million.

      “Money in the bank!”… “to pay for my golden parachute”… said Dirk the dirk….

      • ish718
      • 7 years ago

      That would defeat their whole purpose. Fusion is their last stand…

      • Anonymous Coward
      • 7 years ago

      No, they’ll just be forced to abandon high-end computing.

    • sschaem
    • 7 years ago

    So AMD still spend over 200 million a month, without having ANY fabs?

    Thats over $18,000 per month per employee ?!?!

    And they cant even keep key people, so for sure they are not really paying well at all the R&D teams.

    Where is that money being spent on if its not going to their R&D team or for any form of infrastructures or fabrication ?!

    This is mind boggling, no wonder they are going nowhere and losing their business.

      • NeelyCam
      • 7 years ago

      Health care costs? And those hardware engineers aren’t particularly cheap either..

    • tfp
    • 7 years ago

    They are doing so much better without GloFlo

    • burntham77
    • 7 years ago

    I’ve had my eye on an AMD-based x86 Acer tablet… might be time to trade in the Xoom.

    • Chrispy_
    • 7 years ago

    Delays is why.

    I’ve been holding off a laptop purchase for [i[at least[/i] nine months now, waiting for Trinity to become available. It’s trickling onto the market so slowly that I’ve yet to see an A10-4600M in the UK so I just bought an i5 with a Kepler. Way more powerful, turned out cheaper. Waiting time was zero.

    If AMD want to make money outside of their GPU division, they’ll need to actually put products on shelves so that people can buy them.

      • chuckula
      • 7 years ago

      Indeed.. I’d *love* to see *any* review of the ultrathin parts (A6-4455m), but they are nowhere to be found on the Internet. Technically the parts are supposed to be shipping in notebooks, but actually getting a notebook is different than seeing a press release about the notebook.

    • HighTech4US2
    • 7 years ago

    [quote<]Happily, there may be a silver lining in AMD's disappointing results. The chipmaker's gross margin should meet guidance, and operating expenses should actually be 8% lower than expected[/quote<] This is kindly known as "Putting lipstick on a Pig". Release some horrible news (massive revenue shortfall) but take out a stick of lipstick and state some low end (which maybe only one time) savings ("margin should meet guidance", "operating expenses should actually be 8% lower") to dress up that pig. And if some of the savings in "operating expenses" comes from reduced R&D that will directly effect future revenue. Companies that start down the path of cutting R&D usually fall further behind their competitors. The elephant in the room is the huge loss of revenue and nothing was said that it would increase in the future. In fact AMD may have stuffed the channel so much with their WIN initiative that they may again have lower sequential revenue next quarter. [quote<]Whether that prevents AMD from posting another loss remains to be seen. [/quote<] Since AMD only had a Gross Profit of $105 million in 2011Q2 and their revenue has dropped by $159 million it looks like a loss is again coming. [url<]http://finance.yahoo.com/q/is?s=AMD[/url<] (Click on "Income Statement" on left side of page (under Financials) then click "Quarterly Data" to see 2011Q2 (July 1st, 2011).

    • HighTech4US2
    • 7 years ago

    [quote<]Translation: demand slumped toward the end of the quarter. If that's true, then other hardware makers undoubtedly felt the pinch, as well.[/quote<] No, this seems to be an AMD induced problem alone. [quote<]Alex Gauna of JMP Securities said the weaker-than-expected sales in China reflect stronger chip updates by rivals NVIDIA (NVDA.O) and Intel (INTC.O). "Both Intel and NVIDIA have out-executed AMD," he said. [/quote<] [url<]http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/07/09/us-amd-idUSBRE86818V20120709?feedType=RSS&feedName=globalMarketsNews&rpc=43[/url<]

      • NeelyCam
      • 7 years ago

      That would make sense, but I don’t believe anything analysts say anymore

    • ronch
    • 7 years ago

    No worries. AMD just took a one-time charge this quarter. Next quarter will be better. 🙂

      • Silus
      • 7 years ago

      They took a one-time charge last quarter too and the reaction at that time, was similar to yours: “next quarter will be better…”
      Here we are with the “next quarter” and yet again another “one time charge” and the reaction is “next quarter will be better”…from a company with no apparent strategy for new markets while essentially staying the same or losing in their usual markets…

      When exactly are bad news, bad news for AMD fans ?

        • chuckula
        • 7 years ago

        I think Ronch was being slightly sarcastic with his comment there….

          • ronch
          • 7 years ago

          Sarcasm is my middle name. 🙂 And it was obviously a joke.

          Don’t worry, Silus should start to lighten up… next quarter. 🙂

            • derFunkenstein
            • 7 years ago

            It’s hard to discern sarcasm even with your smiley, because some people really DO react like that.

      • MadManOriginal
      • 7 years ago

      Where have I heard that before…oh, practically every AMD quarterly report for half a decade.

      • HisDivineOrder
      • 7 years ago

      They’re always making excuse after excuse. And always losing money, quarter after quarter.

      They’re on the Titanic. The band’s still playing, but the ship’s going to be exploring the bottom of the Atlantic eventually.

      And then we’ll have only Intel and nVidia to overcharge us and delay new products repeatedly. We’ve already seen hints of this with the mainstream becoming a $300-400 price point and IB being delayed to give Intel months more to milk last year’s product.

      When AMD goes, all of that will be worse. Unfortunately, I can’t say I’m surprised or even sorry to see AMD go with all the crap they’ve been doing lately (ie., Bulldozer, milking the gamer with the 7xxx series, focusing on Trinity at the exclusion of all quad-core CPU’s (their version of hyperthreading does not make those chips true 8 core chips any more than Intel’s selling 8-core chips with hyperthreading)).

      Imho, we need a real competitor in the space who knows what they’re doing to shake things up. Too bad that’s going to be hard to find in this day and time.

      • Meadows
      • 7 years ago

      Oooh, this one’s good. (And frankly, it burns.)

        • ronch
        • 7 years ago

        [quote<](And frankly, it burns.)[/quote<] Though probably not as much as an FX processor when you put your finger on it while it's running full blast and burning 125W.

    • shank15217
    • 7 years ago

    This means amd will actually make money this quarter. Why don’t some of you geniuses learn to add/subtract before posting doom and gloom. Amd had to write off like 700 million to glofo last semester so they made no money. That expense won’t exist, and their operating cost went down by 8% so they are bound to make money, just not as much as they predicted.

      • blastdoor
      • 7 years ago

      last semester? 🙂

        • ludi
        • 7 years ago

        Interestingly, some schools and universities actually run by quarterly schedules, so that may be how he made the transposition…

      • HighTech4US2
      • 7 years ago

      [quote<]This means amd will actually make money this quarter.[/quote<] AMD will be lucky if they break even. Since AMD only had a Gross Profit of $105 million in 2011Q2 and their revenue has dropped by $159 million I don't see how they will make money this quarter. Oh they may have trimmed some expenses but again will that be enough to cover the $54 million shortfall.

    • dpaus
    • 7 years ago

    Haven’t we been hearing report after report of how tablet sales are cannibalizing PC sales?

    • Unknown-Error
    • 7 years ago

    Sad to see a once promising tech company like AMD become a such a mess & laughing stock. And unlike some other companies facing financial gloom, AMD cannot be bought by a 3rd party because the x86 license would be toast. Hector Ruiz what have you done?

    Edit: Agreed with [b<]blastdoor[/b<]. Changed "great" to "promising".

      • NeelyCam
      • 7 years ago

      Sort of what happened to Nokia…

        • blastdoor
        • 7 years ago

        Nah, Nokia was way bigger than AMD.

          • Silus
          • 7 years ago

          Still is…

            • NeelyCam
            • 7 years ago

            And Nokia’s Dividend yield is >13%!!!! Every high-dividend-yield portfolio should have this gem in it!

            • BobbinThreadbare
            • 7 years ago

            How do they pay a dividend when they’re losing money?

            • NeelyCam
            • 7 years ago

            MS money pays for a lot of dividends

      • blastdoor
      • 7 years ago

      More like a “once promising”… not sure they were ever “great.”

      Intel handed AMD such a huge gift with the Pentium 4 + Rambus Cluster-fart. AMD blamed all sorts of bogeymen for not being able to capitalize on that (Intel shenanigans, lack of third party board support, etc) but at the end of the day the thing that really killed AMD was that they just flat out couldn’t deliver product on time and in volume. I remember paying over $500 for the first Athlon X2 (due to supply shortages), and that was at a time when OEMs were eager to buy AMD chips and third party motherboards were plentiful. But AMD *still* couldn’t deliver. Instead of upgrading their manufacturing capabilities, they wasted $5 billion buying a fading graphics company when they could have just licensed GPU tech for inclusion in Fusion products (notice how Apple — which has more money than god — doesn’t go around buying multibillion dollar companies? They buy little tech companies and license the IP they need — I’ll say it again, the ATI buy was a horrible mistake).

        • Unknown-Error
        • 7 years ago

        Yup, “once promising” is more appropriate…

        • Essence
        • 7 years ago

        ATi is whats keeping part of AMD alive and is totally relevant to the future AMD wants to peruse (APU), AMD could easily retain the money they lost via selling ATi for almost double to intel, apple and every other company you can think of pursuing or using GPU`s.

        The APU was never going to be a short adventure, it was a minimum of 8 years strategy, that strategy is beginning to show, that strategy is also forcing intel to go this route – plus nvidia and the rest of ARM chip makers.

        We are about 3 years away from seeing what the APU is really capable of and intel is desperately playing catchup (doing a really good job) because intel and ARM know it is the future

        • Anonymous Coward
        • 7 years ago

        You people that just don’t get over the ATI buyout are really annoying.

        Spending that 5 billion on upgrading production would get them [i<]nowhere[/i<]. Its irrelevant that Apple (and even Intel) license little tiny GPUs for low performance products. Further, you might have noticed that [i<]not only[/i<] is ATI the most competitive part of AMD, but [i<]also[/i<] AMD wants much tighter CPU-GPU integration in the future. Hence, "fusion". Not "glued on GPU".

      • Deanjo
      • 7 years ago

      If AMD did go under, I’m pretty sure that the gov’t would step in and have intel make the license available to another. A lot of gov’t tenders require more then one bid.

        • blastdoor
        • 7 years ago

        maybe… but it might depend on timing. So far Intel and ARM have been inhabiting different spaces, but that’s changing.

        I wonder if Samsung would buy AMD, were the price to go low enough. Samsung has plenty of financial resources, is a strong fabber, and already has a strong ARM business. At the right price, adding x86 to the Samsung portfolio could be appealing.

          • sweatshopking
          • 7 years ago

          the x86 license is not transferable. samsung wouldn’t get it.

            • NeelyCam
            • 7 years ago

            We don’t know if the Intel-AMD settlement changed those terms… many have speculated that the license is transferable now

            • blastdoor
            • 7 years ago

            And anti-trust authorities might decide that it is transferrable.

        • HighTech4US2
        • 7 years ago

        [quote<]If AMD did go under, I'm pretty sure that the gov't would step in and have intel make the license available to another.[/quote<] That would just be a waste of taxpayers money. And who in their right mind would want to start a company who had Intel as their main competitor. If AMD can't make it why do you think that someone else could?

          • Deanjo
          • 7 years ago

          [quote<] That would just be a waste of taxpayers money. [/quote<] And gov'ts [b<]NEVER[/b<] waste taxpayers money right? [quote<] And who in their right mind would want to start a company who had Intel as their main competitor. [/quote<] Same could be said for MS but yet I'm sure there are more then enough people out there that would love to own Apple. [quote<] If AMD can't make it why do you think that someone else could? [/quote<] If they found someone with deep enough pockets they very well could make a go at it. It's been done time and time again.

            • Anonymous Coward
            • 7 years ago

            [quote<]If they found someone with deep enough pockets they very well could make a go at it. It's been done time and time again.[/quote<] Really? I can't think of such a thing happening. However the EU could maybe be tempted, if there wasn't already a huge money leak down in southern Europe. [quote<]Same could be said for MS but yet I'm sure there are more then enough people out there that would love to own Apple.[/quote<] Apple and MS have been competing much longer than MS has been a big company. Additionally they occupy slightly different market spaces, which helps them coexist.

            • moose17145
            • 7 years ago

            actually, I could totally see Samsung buying out AMD… And anyone who thinks they wouldn’t at least take a serious look at doing so is a fool…

            Not only could Samsung probably straiten out AMD and make them profitable again, they would probably make them successful enough to give Intel a run for their money after a decade or so of R&D. And remember… Samsung is a hell of a lot bigger than Intel with a infinitely more diversified product lineup than Intel has… example…. my parents refrigerator, washer, and dryer are all made by samsung. The dish washer in my house… Samsung. Then they also have their SSD and IC’s they are already making, along with the fab plants they own that can very quickly be retooled into making logic chips like CPUs or GPUs… Their TV and computer market… the fact is… Samsung would be the PERFECT candidate to not only buy AMD, but to directly take on Intel at their own game. They have the infrastructure, money, and ability to take a larger losses than even intel could handle right now because of their massively diversified business strategy. Even if they lost massive amounts of money on AMD while they were fixing them, they could still turn a huge profit because of what the rest of their company is doing. Sure many will claim it won’t happen because their major stock holders might cry over it… but honestly i don’t think they would. With how successful Samsung is and has been, I am fairly certain Samsung would be very good about making sure their stock holders know that such a purchase would be a 5 – 10 year investment looking at a short term loss with long term overall gains.

            Actually to be quite honest even without the AMD acquisition, Samsung is already more or less coming into direct competition with Intel… a purchase of AMD would only expand their product lineup even more and only speed up their already current chip plans…

            just based off of a quick google search I am not the only one who is seeing this…
            [url<]http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2012-06-23/hardware/32381195_1_processors-mobile-chip-intel[/url<] samsung is already trying to enter parts of the market that will very soon bring them into direct competition with Intel... Sure intel might be the giant of its own particular industry... but just keep in mind... there are companies out there that are far larger than intel that are hardly scared off by them.

            • NeelyCam
            • 7 years ago

            Your post was a bit difficult to read with the lack of clearly defined sentences and everything.. but overall I agree with you.

            Samsung has been doing all sorts of stuff for years – they make assault weapons, and even tried making cars. As far as semiconductor companies they are definitely #2, and the only one that does [i<]everything[/i<] from top to bottom in mobile electronics. The way I see it, they are the only one that can compete with Intel, and buying AMD would only help. But Intel is still well ahead of even Samsung in semiconductor process technology.

            • moose17145
            • 7 years ago

            My apologies for the incoherent sentences and such. It was late and I was only awake because the two year old is sick and kept waking us up from crying. So my brain was not quite firing on all cylinders to say the least.

            But yes I agree that Samsung does have some ways to go in terms of semiconductor technology to catch up to Intel. But I don’t think they are really all as far off as people think they are. An Acquisition of AMD would immediately push them almost to right on par with Intel IMHO.

            Actually after I made that post I realized that Samsung is already not only DIRECTLY competing with Intel in certain markets… but also beating them! Their 830 series SSD’s are IMO a better drive than Intels new 520 lineup. The 830’s seem to be more consistent in their awesome performance, but also (a quick newegg check reveals) the 830 is cheaper than the 520’s!

            • NeelyCam
            • 7 years ago

            Yes; Samsung is beating Intel in some markets; their TVs and refrigerators are pretty good.

            All kidding aside, Samsung would gain instant expertise in x86 and graphics design by buying AMD, and they already have a solid semiconductor process. But they can’t buy their way to the same process expertise level with Intel.. Intel is simply two years ahead, and that doesn’t change overnight regardless of who Samsung buys.

            • moose17145
            • 7 years ago

            Very true. But, with the resources and raw income that samsung could bring to the table i have a feeling they could close that two year gap in a relatively rapid time frame. That and samsung would likely completely restucture AMDs upper level management, which imo would probably be a good thing.

        • Essence
        • 7 years ago

        “If AMD did go under, I’m pretty sure that the gov’t would step in and have intel make the license available to another”

        Just imagine this new company bringing a product to market after 4+ years, lol that is funny

      • clone
      • 7 years ago

      AMD has always been more failure than success, they tasted success during K7 but prior to that they were desperate and following K7 they’ve been desperate although I believe they are more desperate today.

      while under the tutelage of Jerry Sanders one could argue they were a bigger laughing stock but then again he got out in time.

        • Deanjo
        • 7 years ago

        They were very successful with the K7. In fact it was their “do or die” architecture.

      • HighTech4US2
      • 7 years ago

      <DELETE>

    • Farting Bob
    • 7 years ago

    How long can AMD continue to bleed money before people stop loaning them more? I see a dark future for AMD, which sadly will result in stagnation in both CPU and GPU markets with just 1 dominant, financially stable company in each. Shame is the cost of entry is so high i cant see anybody else wanting to get in on the action. Chip designs are so ridiculously complex these days its not something you can just throw money at and be profitable the next year.

      • Bensam123
      • 7 years ago

      As far as CPUs go, possibly… I don’t know how it would pertain to GPUs though. AMD GPUs aren’t anything to look down upon.

        • Farting Bob
        • 7 years ago

        Certainly not, but they are the same company, if AMD as a whole suddenly finds the money has dried up, there is only so much their GPU division can do to keep the pace upon development.

        • Silus
        • 7 years ago

        Technologically speaking ? No, not at all. Their hardware is good.
        Financially speaking ? Yes, they are. They had two generations where they were the first to market, yet they GPU division barely made any money. And continues that trend for that matter.

        If you can’t capitalize on any advantage you have over your competitors (in this case, time to market), then everything else doesn’t matter.

      • BobbinThreadbare
      • 7 years ago

      No one can even build an x86 chip if they had the money. Only Intel and AMD have licenses.

        • Silus
        • 7 years ago

        Wrong VIA has one too.

          • BobbinThreadbare
          • 7 years ago

          Forgot about them, but still, it’s an exclusive club.

    • Tristan
    • 7 years ago

    This is nothimg new. AMD is falling constantly over the years. Their CEO confirmed this. He continue ‘drop strategy’ invented by his predecessors. Dropping fabs, better cores, performance, high-end, SOI, fight with Intel etc

    • chuckula
    • 7 years ago

    [quote<]What went wrong this time?[/quote<] That's always the question when AMD reports its quarterly results...

      • NeelyCam
      • 7 years ago

      One-time charges…?

      EDIT: ronch beat me to it..

        • HighTech4US2
        • 7 years ago

        [quote<]One-time charges...?[/quote<] Actually this quarter it is not a one time charge. Which is actually worse because it may continue going forward. The reason for the shortfall this quarter is because of a loss of revenue (sales). And the loss of revenue probably will continue next quarter because AMD stuffed the channel. And if AMD also cut R&D the revenue losses may continue indefinitely.

    • codedivine
    • 7 years ago

    Ivy Bridge launch probably bit AMD more than what Trinity launch could offset. Or maybe PC sales are down in general?

      • blastdoor
      • 7 years ago

      Wasn’t Ivy Bridge a few months late?

        • derFunkenstein
        • 7 years ago

        Not to mention that we’re STILL waiting for Trinity.

          • blastdoor
          • 7 years ago

          One would almost think that shipping late and in low volume is part of AMD’s mission statement. Has it ever been otherwise?

    • NeelyCam
    • 7 years ago

    It’s hard to get revenue when you’re forced to price yourself out of the market due to high chip cost. How much of this is because of poor TSMC/GloFo yield is anybody’s guess…

    It will be interesting to see if Intel beats the estimates… again

      • Arclight
      • 7 years ago

      Had they really not anticipated the costs and design the chip accordingly? I mean, they have worked with TSMC for some time….how could the blame lie entirely on the foundries?

        • forumics
        • 7 years ago

        even if it was anticipated, what could they do?
        intel has the power/performance advantage with a smaller chip and much better manufacturing process. everything AMD does intel does better.
        this time round nvidia’s offerings are finally able to match the raedons so AMD lost a huge segment of the pie on that front too.

        bulldozer isn’t the technological marvel that was the athlon and phenom2 has carried AMD to its last legs. squeezed by intel and faced with a finally competent nvidia, they don’t have the resources to compete on a design front, nor do they have the technological IPO to leap forward either.

        i don’t think there’s anything much AMD could do but to take the hit. unfortunately for AMD i don’t think piledriver will be able to reclaim anything from intel either.

          • chuckula
          • 7 years ago

          [quote<]even if it was anticipated, what could they do?[/quote<] Not make a pretty large error in estimating their revenues 10 weeks ago... the big news is not that AMD isn't making money, but that they were *way* off in estimating the revenue for this quarter.

            • derFunkenstein
            • 7 years ago

            not sure why you got -‘d there but I un-done it. If it was anticipated, then surely the estimates would account for it.

            • NeelyCam
            • 7 years ago

            Why? Same reason I do – because it’s an AMD article and we dare open our mouths

            • derFunkenstein
            • 7 years ago

            It’s not about you. :p

      • dragosmp
      • 7 years ago

      Apparently AMD has a “huge backlog of unsold chips” according to Bloomberg. Afaik they chose to keep their margins high in stead of decreasing the prices to sell their inventory. It’s better to actually sell the chips at lower prices than not sell them at all, right?

      /2cents

        • ermo
        • 7 years ago

        Well, given how poorly AMD’s chips perform, it’s a small wonder that they have a “huge backlog of unsold chips”.

        … said the longtime AMD apologist who finally crumbled and bought a lightly used 2600K to replace his trusty 955BE, which itself was originally bought as a dirt cheap stopgap measure when BD was delayed last year.

        Sucks to be AMD right now.

Pin It on Pinterest

Share This