AMD Quarterly Earnings Report Q2 FY 2019by Brett Howse on July 31, 2019 12:20 AM EST
- Posted in
- Financial Results
AMD announced their second quarter earnings for the 2019 fiscal year, and the company’s revenue was $1.53 billion for the quarter. This is down 13% from the same quarter last year. Gross margin improved from 37% to 41% year-over-year. Operating income was $59 million, down from $153 million a year ago, and net income was down $81 million to $35 million. This resulted in earnings-per-share of $0.03.
|AMD Q2 2019 Financial Results (GAAP)|
|Earnings Per Share||$0.03||$0.01||$0.12|
Although AMD was in the black for yet another quarter, this is certainly a dip that AMD does not expect to last. Their forecast for Q3 2019 is a 9% year-over-year increase in revenue to $1.8 billion, and they’ve recently launched new products that could help them achieve those goals.
|AMD Q2 2019 Computing and Graphics|
Looking back at Q2 though, Computing and Graphics revenue was down 13% to $940 million, and AMD attributes this drop to lower graphics channel sales. This drop was slightly offset though by higher client CPU and datacenter GPU sales. Also good for AMD and their investors is that their average selling price for client processors has increased thanks to more Ryzen sales, and GPU average selling price has also increased thanks to datacenter GPU sales. The Computing and Graphics segment had an operating income of $22 million for the quarter, compared to $117 million a year ago.
|AMD Q2 2019 Enterprise, Embedded and Semi-Custom|
AMD’s other major segment is their Enterprise, Embedded, and Semi-Custom, and this product group also saw revenues fall 12% to $591 million for the quarter. AMD attributes this drop to lower semi-custom product revenue, which you can more or less read as console sales, and that makes sense since the current generation consoles are reaching the end of their life, but both Microsoft and Sony have both committed to AMD platforms for their next generation consoles, so expect this segment’s fortunes to get a bit better soon. Operating income was $89 million for this group, which was up from $69 million last year. The higher operating income is thanks to higher EPYC processor sales, which is also a great sign for this segment.
Although this quarter’s revenue certainly saw a dip, AMD did just launch their latest third generation Ryzen this month, which wouldn’t be reported in their Q2 earnings which ended June 29th. As we saw in our review, this is a great step forward for AMD’s processor designs, and they have also launched their Navi based GPUs in July, so it makes some sense to see a dip prior to a major product launch. We’ll keep our eye on their results for Q3, but as previously mentioned they are expecting this to be a short-term drop, and with their new product lineup, that seems like a safe bet.
Source: AMD Investor Relations
Post Your CommentPlease log in or sign up to comment.
View All Comments
Korguz - Tuesday, August 6, 2019 - linkand intels pricing of its top end cpus is any better ??? come on. you can ask Intel the SAME question each year it releases a new batch of cpu's. ryzen 3900X, $699 cdn, 9900K, $699 cdn as well, and just for contrast to that, the X series of intels cpus, $1210 to $2800 cdn. even the Threadripper 2990WX is less then the top X series cpu at $2500, and that gets you 14 more cores to boot.
ballsystemlord - Tuesday, August 6, 2019 - linkI don't disagree with your latest post at all. Indeed, I'd love it if Intel sold it's processors at a better value for it's customers.
My point of contention is with AMD choosing *not* to sell their products at a similarly good value to the customer as they did in the past. Chiplets were supposed to save money through lessening rejects and having more chips in the higher speed/silicon quality brackets. Why am I expected to pay so much more then?
Even the 5700XT is a 251mm2 square chunk of 7nm silicon and is priced at $400, not to mention the components and GDDR6 RAM (the latest and greatest). Yet we pay $749 for 2 chunks each 80.7651mm2  (see my comments below for the total silicon, it's not worth posting in 2 places in the same thread).
Korguz - Wednesday, August 7, 2019 - link" I'd love it if Intel sold it's processors at a better value for it's customers. " and who wouldnt ? but intel wont, and they will charge what they can because ( at the time ) there was no alternative. but now, there is an alternative. and intel will have to either find a way to make their products worth the price they charge, or lower its pricing.
so what you are saying is, because what AMD charged for their products in the past, and now that they have products that, mostly with the cpu side, compete with intel very well, they dont have the right to charge the same amount as the intel equivalent is priced at ? i would say the value with amd, is the part that for the same price as the 9900k, which is 8core/12 threads, you get 4 more cores/8 more threads. comparing cores/threads, the 8 core version. 3800x, is 150 bucks less, and for the most part, are on par with the intel cpus in performance, correct ? as for the gpu side, i dont know what to say, as for me at least, paying the extra cash for a feature i wont use now, or for the time being, isnt worth it to me, aside from the part that the RTX series, is priced out of my reach. BTW, i WISH the 5700XT was 400 bucks, but here, its 530 for the entry level card. even the 5700 starts at 460
ballsystemlord - Wednesday, August 7, 2019 - linkSee my reply where you said a similar thing below.
RSAUser - Thursday, August 1, 2019 - linkThe TR crowd though, yeah, might be annoyed, but that's not really an issue, instead you should be happy that the next time you buy you're getting way more performance/dollar, and it has been rumored for months that the 3000 series was going to be quite a step up.
In terms of TR pricing, who knows yet, AMD can adjust to what they want. Interesting rumors of the top-end being a 64 core part, I wonder what the Epyc line-up will be.
ballsystemlord - Saturday, August 3, 2019 - linkI'm not at all upset on their account, they obviously have money and it's good for AMD to break into their market. I was waiting patiently as anyone who did not have the funds for TR could do. My comment on them was to point out how AMD is pricing the 3000 series as though it were TR and with less PCIe lanes.
Korguz - Tuesday, August 6, 2019 - link" My comment on them was to point out how AMD is pricing the 3000 series as though it were TR and with less PCIe lanes. " thats funny.. cause it isnt priced that way, maybe it is just in the USA ?
ballsystemlord - Tuesday, August 6, 2019 - linkI can't say what's it's like in your country, but here's what it's like here:
The TR 1920X 12 core had an MSRP of $799 with the 1950X 16 core being $999. It has since dropped to $266.49 as has the 16 core part, but to $469.99 .
The TR 2920X 12 core had an MSRP of $649 with the 2950X 16 core being $899. It has since dropped to $599.99 as has the 16 core part, but to $665.00.
AMD's 3900X 12 core has an MSRP of $499 and the 3950X 16 core has an MSRP of $749.
Therefore, the pricing of the higher end parts in the US is simmilar to the pricing of TR, even at the original MSRP.
* A few of these processors are on sale and the price will rise back up sooner or later.
Korguz - Wednesday, August 7, 2019 - linkwell.. for here.. add a good 200 bucks to each of those prices, and as i mentioned in the other post, TR starts at 860 for the 2920x, and the 3900x is the same price as the 9900k, and IF i was going to upgrade now, i would probably get then 3800x, or if i was able to swing it, the 3900x. as for the 19xx TRs, the 1950x is 699, 1900x, 499, but with TR2 out, why by TR1?? is MSRP even followed when new comp hardware comes out ??
ballsystemlord - Wednesday, August 7, 2019 - linkQ1: I was offering options, not saying I would buy TR1.
Q2: No, but I'm comparing across time for the purpose of assessing value of the current non-TR components.