This is exactly the sort of problem I predicted in January. That Hurd, who is also a former CEO of Hewlett-Packard and of NCR before that, and Gelsinger, a former CTO of Intel once considered a possible successor to Paul Otellini, have been approached is not surprising, given their tech and managerial bona fides. Nor is the fact that they turned the job down.

The third name jumps out at me simply because I’m not familiar with Greg Summe. His bio on the Carlyle Group site says he spent 20 years as chairman and CEO of PerkinElmer, the $2 billion health sciences company, and before that, he ran the Avionics business at AlliedSignal, now part of Honeywell.

The search is being run by Heidrick and Struggles, Bloomberg says, and the fact that Summe was approached indicates how widely the company is casting its net. The clock, however, is ticking. When I last spoke to someone at the company, not directly involved with the search, I was told that the plan was to have a new CEO named before its next earnings report, scheduled for July 21. That’s 36 days away.

Historically, this is unlike AMD, which has always taken care to have a managerial bench, and like most big companies, has typically had a CEO successor waiting in the wings. Former CEO Dirk Meyer (pictured) was named COO in 2006, tapped by then CEO Hector Ruiz, who had himself been recruited from Motorola’s Semiconductor unit (now Freescale) to succeed AMD’s founding CEO, the colorful Jerry Sanders. Ruiz, however, had been recruited in 2000 because of the surprise resignation in 1999 of AMD’s heir apparent, Atiq Raza, who’s now a tech investor, backing, among others, Violin Memory.

That’s not to say there aren’t internal candidates who could step up. Rick Bergman, senior vice president and general manager of AMD’s products group, has been mentioned as on the list for consideration, though the board has favored an external candidate from the start. But the company has been bleeding talent. Two other internal contenders bolted in February — Bob Rivet, AMD’s onetime COO under Meyer, and Marty Seyer, the well-regarded senior vice president for corporate strategy, who in 2006 personally landed the deal to sell the first AMD server chips to Dell (until then an Intel-only shop) and had been known to occasionally jam with Ruiz on the electric guitar. Other senior managers are bailing out as well. Just last week Jeff VerHuel, corporate vice president of platform strategies, left AMD to join SMSC as its head of engineering.

Meyer’s sudden departure is said to have come after a row with the board of directors, impatient that AMD is not showing up in any meaningful way in the market for chips for mobile devices. The days when it was dealing perennial market leader Intel bruising punches in the punishing business of selling server chips are over. And its overall share of the market for PC and server chips has slipped to 13.2 percent versus Intel’s 86.5 percent as of March, according to Mercury Research. It still makes a compelling case as an alternative supplier for chips in notebooks and desktop PCs, as The Wall Street Journal reported yesterday, but Intel’s lead, given its powerful manufacturing infrastructure — AMD no longer owns its own factories, opting instead to farm those duties out to GlobalFoundries, its onetime manufacturing arm — will as the years progress prove ever more difficult to erode even incrementally.

And even trying will increase the operational costs of an already profit-challenged company. AMD delivered profits in 2009 and 2010, but only after undergoing a massive restructuring to rid itself of its manufacturing operations. Still, the profits are thin: In 2010, AMD reported income of $471 million on sales of $6.5 billion. Compare that to Intel’s $11.5 billion profit on nearly $44 billion in sales, and you see how hard a time even the new, leaner, fabless AMD has competing with Intel.

Competing with Intel for share of its traditional markets is hard enough. If AMD’s board is determined to push the company into the business of selling chips for mobile devices, the path to success looks nearly impossible. Just look at the troubles Intel is having in that space competing with ARM Holdings and its numerous licensees, which include Nvidia, Qualcomm, Broadcom, and Texas Instruments to name but a few. When it comes to mobile devices — tablets and smart phones — ARM-based chips are as ubiquitous as x86 chips are in PCs and servers: They are the standard. Intel’s low-power Atom-based chip has so far been largely unsuccessful in penetrating that business. And if Intel is not scoring any significant wins there, why would anyone want to take on the job of leading AMD into a likely failure? No wonder potential candidates are finding it easy to say no. Bloomberg quotes Gelsinger: “I said no, and I said no again.”

So where does that leave AMD now? There are two paths. First, consider an internal candidate to lead the company. As more external candidates spurn AMD’s approaches, the list of objections AMD’s board may have to hiring internally could shorten. Bergman may get a second more serious look.

The other is to sell the company to someone bigger. That’s another complicated question, mainly because with the terms of its settlement with Intel (or what I like to call the Treaty of Maui) and the terms of its complicated patent-cross licensing agreements that date back the the 1980s, any buyer would have to first pass muster with Intel or find themselves in a very expensive lawsuit. Then there’s the fact that AMD is 20 percent owned by Mubadala Development Company, the investment arm of the Arab Emirate of Abu Dhabi. Buying AMD — at current valuations it would take about $7 billion — would be, to paraphrase Steve Jobs, a “big bag of hurt.”

Even private equity players who specialize in buying troubled companies, fixing them up and spinning them off at a profit, are wary of AMD, having learned well the lessons of the disastrous 2006 buyout of Freescale by the Blackstone Group, Carlyle, TPG Capital and Permira Advisers.

Ultimately there will be no easy options at AMD. No surprise, its shares are trading down by 11 cents or more than 1 percent as of 9:45 am New York Time this morning.

First, the departure has jarred the confidence of investors who have pushed the value AMD stock up by more than 57 percent since September. Shares are down by more than 8 percent today.

Second there’s the problem of hiring a replacement for Meyer, who had been on the job only a little more than two years. I’ve been talking to people both inside AMD and longtime AMD watchers outside of the company and practically all of them have been having trouble coming up with a short list of potential candidates.

For one thing, I’m hearing from people familiar with the thinking of those involved in the hiring process that there’s a strong preference for an external candidate.

Among the criteria are someone with a proven record of running large technology companies, and one with some charisma who can get the marketplace excited about AMD again. While Meyer deserves credit for getting AMD back on relatively stable footing following the divestiture of its manufacturing operations–now GlobalFoundries — and his predecessor, Hector Ruiz, gets the credit for doing the heavy lifting of getting the complicated transaction related to that split, neither could be described as charismatic.

Historically, AMD knows what it’s like to have a charismatic CEO. Jerry Sanders who founded the company and ran it from 1969 until 2002, possessed plenty of it, and some of the more colorful anecdotes about Silicon Valley history concern him. The board wants someone who’s both capable and cool at the same time. Someone who can represent the company well to the outside world, bring an air of stability and competence and elaborate a vision that will move the company forward. That’s a tall order for a company like AMD, whose fundamental strategic problem can be summed up in a single phrase: Competing with Intel is brutal, no matter what you do.

The list of potential candidates isn’t obvious by any stretch. Still in my conversations today, a few names came up, some more idealistic than realistic. One internal candidate who will probably get courtesy consideration I’m told is Rick Bergman, senior vice president and general manager for AMD’s products group. He oversees both the graphics and microprocessor operations and came to AMD in 2006 as a senior executive at ATI, the graphics chip company that AMD acquired for $5.4 billion in 2006. His résumé includes time at Texas Instruments and IBM. He’s described by those who know him as hard-driven and competitive and a capable well-respected manager, though at the end of the day not likely to get the nod.

Another name that has come up is that of Pat Gelsinger, not necessarily because he’d be a candidate for the job, but more as an example of the kind of person AMD would like to hire. Gelsinger was Intel’s CTO from 2001 to 2005 and was senior corporate vice president for the Digital Enterprise Group until 2009, when he suddenly jumped to EMC as president, COO and apparent successor-in-waiting to CEO Joe Tucci.

Finally there’s Michael Capellas, whose name invariably comes up whenever a significant CEO slot comes open. He’s currently running Acadia, a private cloud computing joint venture between Cisco Systems and EMC with investments from Intel and VMWare. Capellas was the CEO of Compaq Computer when Hewlett-Packard acquired it in 2002, then went on to helm MCI and engineered its turnaround and sale to Verizon in 2006. His next stop was the payment giant First Data after it was taken private in a leveraged buyout by the private equity fund Kohlberg Kravis Roberts. He was considered for the CEO job at Hewlett-Packard, before Léo Apotheker was named, but was said not to be interested. He’s got the tech and management chops and has a proven record for getting troubled companies on solid footing. It’s unclear if he would be interested.

Whoever they pick, they may want to do it quickly. AMD has a tough road ahead of it, and uncertainty at the top certainly isn’t going to help.

We have gone through a very difficult time, reacted quickly and decisively, and we are on our way to really have, I believe, a phenomenal transition year in 2008.”

– AMD CEO Hector Ruiz, December 2007

2008 hasn’t quite proven to be the “phenomenal transition year” AMD believed it would be. Despite new leadership and a restructuring of its manufacturing assets, the company was not able to return to profitability by the third quarter of 2008 as it had hoped. And now, AMD (AMD) has reported a greater-than-expected net loss for the fourth quarter of 2008–its ninth consecutive one. A grotesque 33 percent drop in revenue left the company awash in $1.4 billion of red ink.

“The fourth quarter of 2008 is going to be remembered for the severe stresses placed on the global economy and on our industry,” AMD CEO Dirk Meyer told analysts. “The global economic environment led to a softening in end-customer demand for PCs and servers in what is usually the year’s strongest quarter. The reality of today’s global economy require that we redouble our focus on cash management and cash flow control, and we will do so while protecting assets.”

Suffice to say, AMD did not offer a specific forecast for its current quarter, saying only that it expects sales to continue to trend lower “in light of the current macroeconomic conditions, very limited visibility and continued corrections in the supply chain.” Shares in the company, which have lost more than 50 percent of their value since the start of the fourth quarter, closed down nearly 10 percent on the news, although they seem to be recovering today.

Ruiz announced the leadership change during AMD’s second-quarter financial earnings conference call. “The time is right to turn the company over to a new leader,” he said. And, given the company’s ugly $1.19 billion second-quarter loss, he would appear to be right. “We have not been living up to our potential,” Meyer said during a conference call. “Looking forward, we will. We will demand a pattern of sustained profitability…We will execute, execute and execute.”

Presumably, Meyer is refering to the company’s mission here and not AMD employees who’ve suffered enough already, I think.

The new server chip, which puts four processors on a single silicon die, is the first of its kind and AMD’s shot at regaining some of the market its lost to a resurgent Intel. The company’s market share was about 25% in the middle of 2006. By mid-2007, it had slipped to close to 13%. “There is nothing that we would have been more excited about than getting it out earlier,” AMD CEO Hector Ruiz told eWeek. “But you know we are not making excuses. This is a damn difficult thing to do, as I’m sure you can imagine. …This is 600 million transistors on a chip, four cores, complex technology and tremendous architectural features. It was, frankly, a little tougher challenge than we had anticipated and it frustrated the hell out of us because we wanted to get it out there earlier.”

Of course you did. The Quad-Core AMD Opteron arrives at market nearly a year after Intel began shipping quad-core processors of its own and follows a string of consecutive quarterly losses. The stakes here have been high for quite a while. But is the quad-core Opteron the winning hand for which AMD hopes? Perhaps. Perhaps not. “Barcelona is not the sweeping challenge to Intel they wanted to make,” analyst Rob Enderle told the Austin American Statesman. “This keeps them in the game and competing. But it’s not a leadership position.”

Certainly, Intel doesn’t think so. This morning the company announced that it now expects third quarter revenue to be between $9.4 billion and $9.8 billion, improving on its previous guidance of $9 billion to $9.6 billion.