AMD in Stealth Viral Marketing - "Advocacy Program" free HW

grstanford · **Joined:** Sat Apr 24, 2010 11:19 am **Posts:** 5002

apoppin wrote:

http://www.amd.com/us/press-releases/Pages/amd-clean-capitalism2012feb08.aspx

Quote:

AMD (NYSE: AMD) was today named by Corporate Knights to its inaugural list of the S&P 500 Clean Capitalism Ranking, placing among the top twenty companies to be recognized. Corporate Knights, which defines “clean capitalism” as “responsible, resource-productive and socially just”, employs a transparent, quantitative methodology to compile its ranking, evaluating factors such as energy and carbon productivity, leadership diversity and employee turnover.

“By combining a strong set of quantitative metrics with transparent, best-in-class research, Corporate Knights is providing a valuable tool to help key stakeholders decide which companies are truly committed to corporate responsibility,” said Allyson Peerman, corporate vice president, AMD Public Affairs. “AMD’s worldwide stakeholders should celebrate not only this prestigious recognition, but also their commitment to a company that walks the talk.”

AMD was also recognized recently by Trust Across America, a think tank dedicated to promoting and recognizing trustworthy business behavior, as one of the Top Ten Most Trustworthy Public Companies for 2011.

Their capitalism seems so clean because all their filth gets routed through their PR channels. The Corporate Knights were looking in the wrong places. I'm not so sure about the carbon productivity bit either -- AMD produces an awful lot of hot air, and most man made hot air is rich in carbon dioxide..........

apoppin · Posted: Wed Feb 22, 2012 9:21 am

BoFox wrote:

Seems like you have gotten lots of it done.

In order to gain THAT much more publicity regarding this issue, it really ought to be posted as an article on the main page. A LOT MORE publicity, trust me!

There is still quite a bit to go. Once it is finished here, we can think about what to do with it.

There is no answer from AMD regarding their Social media policies. Nvidia, Intel and Kingston replied to us and they all have carefully established guidelines for their employees to either not post on tech site forums or to identify employer affiliation. We can assume that AMD doesn't want to talk about it.

We do know for a fact that AMD blacklists at least one tech site because they don't like what is said on that site's forum about them.
:think:

grstanford · **Joined:** Sat Apr 24, 2010 11:19 am **Posts:** 5002

Stealth Viral Marketing breeds ignorance and gross stupidity among those exposed to it and don't recognize it for what it is. Witness the following post from Anandtech Video Forums.

http://forums.anandtech.com/showpost.ph ... stcount=41

NUSNA_Moebius wrote:

Barfo wrote:

Nvidia make good cards but they are also douches.

How so? Both Nvidia and AMD/ATi have their share of duds and winners. If you're talking about Nvidia being douchey over the original Xbox's GPU prices, I don't blame them. It was Nvidia's and MS's first real foray into such a venture, so it's only natural that conflicts abounded when it came to pricing, licensing and production.

What is interesting is that the original Xbox was slated to have an 600 MHz AMD Athlon and while they didn't get the contract, some of AMD's work made it into the actual machine. I can't remember, but I think it was either the northbridge or the chipset with GPU combined that AMD designed to be used with the Athlon. Microsoft liked the feature enough to keep it despite the move to an Intel CPU as Intel was able to afford MS better prices on production silicon.

If Nvidia doesn't make it into a console this next go, it's not all lost. It means Nvidia can focus more on their other projects, especially scientific computing and the Tegra line, both of which are bringing Nvidia notoriety and success that AMD does not possess in those same sectors.

Ummm, no, sorry, but there isn't any AMD technology in the original XBOX at all (unless you want to count their open Hypertransport tech which nvidia co-developed). The XBOX chipset is completely nvidia designed, it's Nforce 1 in console form (or if you like nForce was born out of the chipset work nvidia did for XBOX 1). The GPU is nvidia designed. In fact about the only silicon in XBOX 1 not nvidia designed is the CPU, the ram, the audio codec, sundry I/O and voltage regulators.

Keysplayr · Posted: Fri Feb 24, 2012 7:07 am

grstanford wrote:

Stealth Viral Marketing breeds ignorance and gross stupidity among those exposed to it and don't recognize it for what it is. Witness the following post from Anandtech Video Forums.

http://forums.anandtech.com/showpost.ph ... stcount=41

NUSNA_Moebius wrote:

Barfo wrote:

Nvidia make good cards but they are also douches.

How so? Both Nvidia and AMD/ATi have their share of duds and winners. If you're talking about Nvidia being douchey over the original Xbox's GPU prices, I don't blame them. It was Nvidia's and MS's first real foray into such a venture, so it's only natural that conflicts abounded when it came to pricing, licensing and production.

What is interesting is that the original Xbox was slated to have an 600 MHz AMD Athlon and while they didn't get the contract, some of AMD's work made it into the actual machine. I can't remember, but I think it was either the northbridge or the chipset with GPU combined that AMD designed to be used with the Athlon. Microsoft liked the feature enough to keep it despite the move to an Intel CPU as Intel was able to afford MS better prices on production silicon.

If Nvidia doesn't make it into a console this next go, it's not all lost. It means Nvidia can focus more on their other projects, especially scientific computing and the Tegra line, both of which are bringing Nvidia notoriety and success that AMD does not possess in those same sectors.

Ummm, no, sorry, but there isn't any AMD technology in the original XBOX at all (unless you want to count their open Hypertransport tech which nvidia co-developed). The XBOX chipset is completely nvidia designed, it's Nforce 1 in console form (or if you like nForce was born out of the chipset work nvidia did for XBOX 1). The GPU is nvidia designed. In fact about the only silicon in XBOX 1 not nvidia designed is the CPU, the ram, the audio codec, sundry I/O and voltage regulators.

Are you saying that the person who's quote you highlighted is the viral marketer? Or the victim of one?

Keysplayr · Posted: Fri Feb 24, 2012 7:30 am

What really has been run rampant lately is "leaks" or fake reports of benchmarks, actually made to look like the company itself leaked them. Like this GK107 video that "leaked" out. I don't know if it's faked or not, but everyone seems to think so and blaming nvidia for marketing the GK107 in this way.
I guess as far as viral marketing goes, you try to make it look like it's the competitions company leaking these things and make it look like they're lying.
That is the message I'm getting anyway. If anybody thinks this isn't the lowest form of pond scum in the marketing industry................

grstanford · **Joined:** Sat Apr 24, 2010 11:19 am **Posts:** 5002

Keysplayr wrote:

Are you saying that the person who's quote you highlighted is the viral marketer? Or the victim of one?

The victim of one (or more) hence happily running around the place spouting nonsense about things he hasn't the first clue about (all too common on the internet nowadays).

grstanford · **Joined:** Sat Apr 24, 2010 11:19 am **Posts:** 5002

Keysplayr wrote:

What really has been run rampant lately is "leaks" or fake reports of benchmarks, actually made to look like the company itself leaked them. Like this GK107 video that "leaked" out. I don't know if it's faked or not, but everyone seems to think so and blaming nvidia for marketing the GK107 in this way.
I guess as far as viral marketing goes, you try to make it look like it's the competitions company leaking these things and make it look like they're lying.
That is the message I'm getting anyway. If anybody thinks this isn't the lowest form of pond scum in the marketing industry................

Just like the rumor that came off of the japanese site, where the admin supposedly banned a nvidia operative for planting the rumor. Get real! As I said at the time it's totally obvious to anyone with a functionng brain that it's AMD PR behind the leak trying to make it look like it was nvidia.

Keysplayr · Posted: Fri Feb 24, 2012 8:10 am

grstanford wrote:

Keysplayr wrote:

What really has been run rampant lately is "leaks" or fake reports of benchmarks, actually made to look like the company itself leaked them. Like this GK107 video that "leaked" out. I don't know if it's faked or not, but everyone seems to think so and blaming nvidia for marketing the GK107 in this way.
I guess as far as viral marketing goes, you try to make it look like it's the competitions company leaking these things and make it look like they're lying.
That is the message I'm getting anyway. If anybody thinks this isn't the lowest form of pond scum in the marketing industry................

Just like the rumor that came off of the japanese site, where the admin supposedly banned a nvidia operative for planting the rumor. Get real! As I said at the time it's totally obvious to anyone with a functionng brain that it's AMD PR behind the leak trying to make it look like it was nvidia.

Right. The Chiphell campaign. It's pretty funny to watch things unfold when you know what's going on or more importantly in this case, NOT going on. LOL

apoppin · Posted: Fri Feb 24, 2012 8:46 am

At the very least, this article serves as informational. "Pond scum" marketing is very effective - especially if the company directing it can play the eternal faux victim.
:think:

BoFox · Posted: Fri Mar 09, 2012 4:28 pm

Another word on AMD's "dishonest" marketing:

Dave Baumann wrote:

A published transistor number is really a marketing number - it has no practical use and the reported number will make no difference on how an application works, it is immaterial to all intents a purposes (and the difference in numbers just relates to what is actually counted and whether it is consistent with previous numbers released). Discussing and detailing how an architecture works does have real implications to terms of how an application performs; although the operation is abstracted from developers documentations and tools are provided so that developers can accurately tune their code to a given target or at least understand application behaviours from one solution to another.

from: http://forum.beyond3d.com/showpost.php? ... tcount=105

Dave Baumann joined ATI as technical marketing manager, and is now AMD Product Manager. He was originally Beyond3D's chief editor, before being hired by ATI. What was being discussed in the above quoted post is the misleading number of 2 billion transistors for Bulldozer that AMD published at the time of launch. About 3 months after launch, the number was revised to 1.2 Billion transistors, a huge 800M difference (Anandtech did an article on this issue alone: http://www.anandtech.com/show/5176/amd- ... 12b-not-2b )

So, I replied over there at that thread:

Quote:

Your point is completely understood.

But (yes, there's one but..) to mislead people with the "reported transistor number" is not quite ideal for those who have been discussing the transistor density of chips such as HD 7970 vs HD 7770 vs HD 7870 back and forth in other threads. Not to be argumentative.. just thought I should add that, that's all.

AMD in Stealth Viral Marketing - "Advocacy Program" free HW

Who is online