Tiger teams can work in some scenarios, but it seems unlikely that's going to work at AMD. The reason the driver is bad is a lot to do with the fact that the driver team have to basically make lemonade out of the lemons that the hardware team hand them. The hardware team have a difficult enough job just to get the hardware to work and they're where the core success of the business (traditionally) was seen. So the driver team have to do the best they can, but at the end of the day they can't independently solve the problem because they're downstream of the hardware. So yes, you could spend some money and get better engineering on the driver side, but there's a limit to how much you can do without re-prioritizing the hardware team to be more responsive to software requirements and at that point you're talking about full scale organisational change. Only a handful of companies can do that. Look at Gelsinger trying to change Intel - the stock market is not thanking him for his efforts, we're at the point where they're a legitimate acquisition target for Nvidia (ignoring anti-trust concerns)

* elite engineers are expensive

* tiger teams or specialist troubleshooters and project pushers are almost certainly already a thing in AMD

* their "this shit is on fire assign it to a tiger team" criteria may have absolutely nothing to do with Geohot's complaints. things like legal or compliance issues, Taiwan getting attacked by China, high rates of turnover on [specific team], or a problematic design may rank a lot higher than some rando who got headlines a few years back for some good cracks.