Skip to main content

AMD

Site reliability engineer at AMD

AMD interviews are technical and hardware-aware, often covering architecture, firmware, verification, compilers, and performance under strict power and memory constraints. Loops are domain-specific, and depth in low-level systems is what distinguishes strong candidates.

Process timeline

  1. 1

    Recruiter and manager

    Domain match and background.

  2. 2

    Technical screen

    Architecture and systems fundamentals.

  3. 3

    Onsite deep dives

    Firmware, verification, compilers, or performance.

  4. 4

    Team fit

    Working style and motivation.

What AMD looks for

What they value

  • Low-level systems and architecture depth
  • Performance reasoning under tight limits
  • Solid verification and firmware instincts

Culture signals

  • Depth in computer architecture
  • Comfort under power and memory constraints
  • Methodical engineering discipline

Interview questions

Site reliability engineer questions worth preparing alongside the AMD rounds described above, drawn from our site reliability engineer question bank.

As asked

A new Deployment rollout is stuck at 3 out of 10 pods Ready. Walk me through how you would debug it in production.

Sample answer outline

Start with kubectl rollout status and kubectl describe deployment. Look at the events: ImagePullBackOff, CrashLoopBackOff, FailedScheduling all point in different directions. Check pod events and pod logs for the failing replicas. Common causes: readiness probe failing because the app needs longer to start, resource requests too high for the available nodes, a config map or secret reference that does not exist, or a PodDisruptionBudget blocking eviction of old pods. Resist the urge to delete pods until you know the cause.

Reference implementation (bash)

Bash
# Triage sequence
kubectl rollout status deployment/api -n prod
kubectl describe deployment/api -n prod
kubectl get pods -n prod -l app=api
kubectl describe pod <pending-pod> -n prod
kubectl logs <crashlooping-pod> -n prod --previous
kubectl get events -n prod --sort-by=.lastTimestamp | tail -20

Expect these follow-ups

  • What if the readiness probe passes but the service is still returning 503s?
  • How do you set sane defaults for readiness and liveness probes?
  • When would you use a startup probe?
kubernetesdebuggingrollout

As asked

Tell me about the worst on-call shift you have personally had. What broke, what did you do in the moment, and what changed afterwards?

Sample answer outline

Pick a real story with measurable user impact. Cover detection (was it self-detected or customer-reported), the diagnosis path (especially the dead ends), the mitigation, and the postmortem actions that actually landed. Interviewers are listening for ownership without blame, calm under pressure, and process changes that prevent the next one. Avoid 'we just restarted it' answers, dig into the root cause.

Expect these follow-ups

  • What did the postmortem find as the contributing factors?
  • Did the action items actually ship, or did they slip?
  • What would you do differently in the first 10 minutes if it happened again?
incidentson-callpostmortem

As asked

You own the checkout service for an e-commerce site. Define a meaningful set of SLOs and explain the error budget policy you would put in place.

Sample answer outline

Pick SLIs that match what the user experiences: availability (proportion of checkout submissions that return a 2xx within 5 seconds), latency (95th percentile under 800ms), and correctness (no duplicate charges). Set the SLO from the SLI: 99.9 percent availability over 28 days gives a 43-minute error budget. Error budget policy: if we burn the budget, freeze feature work on checkout and direct effort to reliability. Spell out the burn-rate alerts (fast: 2 percent of budget in 1 hour, slow: 10 percent in 6 hours) so on-call gets paged on real impact, not noise.

Expect these follow-ups

  • What do you do when the business says the SLO is too strict and they want to ship features?
  • Why is a 99.99 percent SLO usually wrong for a product like this?
  • How do you measure the correctness SLI in practice?
sloslierror-budget

As asked

Walk me through the most recent incident where you were the incident commander. What was the impact, how did you run it, and what fell out of the postmortem?

Sample answer outline

Set the impact in concrete terms (users affected, revenue, duration) up front. Show the roles you assigned: IC, comms, ops, scribe. Walk through the timeline with the key decisions and the rationale for each. The strong answer is honest about the dead ends and the wasted time. Postmortem: blameless review, contributing factors (not 'root cause', plural), and action items with owners and dates. Mention which action items actually landed and which slipped.

Expect these follow-ups

  • How did you keep stakeholders informed without distracting the responders?
  • Did the team trust your decisions in the moment? How do you build that trust?
  • Which action item would you not assign next time?
incident-commandpostmortemleadership

As asked

A team adds user_id and request_id labels to Prometheus metrics and the metrics backend starts falling over. How do you fix it without losing useful debugging signal?

Sample answer outline

Explain that each unique label set creates a time series, so unbounded labels like user_id, request_id, email, or URL path parameters can explode storage and query cost. Remove the high-cardinality labels from metrics and move per-request details to logs or traces, linked by trace_id. Keep bounded labels such as service, route template, status class, region, and dependency. Add instrumentation review, cardinality budgets, and alerts on series growth so this is caught before ingestion fails. Strong candidates preserve the debugging use case rather than just saying 'delete the label'.

Expect these follow-ups

  • Which labels would you allow on an HTTP server duration histogram?
  • How do exemplars help connect metrics to traces?
  • What query patterns become dangerous after cardinality spikes?
metricsprometheuscardinality

As asked

Walk me through how you would set up multi-window burn rate alerts for an error budget. Why use two windows instead of one, and what values would you choose for a 30-day SLO?

Sample answer outline

Strong answers explain that a fast burn rate window (like 1 hour) catches sudden outages while a slow window (like 6 hours) filters noise and confirms the burn is sustained. The candidate should know the math: a 14.4x burn rate over 1 hour consumes 2% of a 30-day budget. They should mention the Google SRE book's recommended thresholds (2% budget consumed in 1h triggers page, 5% in 6h triggers ticket). They should also explain that single-window alerts either fire too late or produce too many false positives.

Expect these follow-ups

  • How do you decide what SLO target to set in the first place, and who signs off on it?
  • If your error budget is exhausted three weeks into a sprint, what concrete actions do you take?
sloslierror-budgetalertingburn-rate

Site reliability engineer interview detail at AMD

How the AMD loop applies to Site reliability engineer candidates

AMD is a big-tech employer headquartered in Santa Clara, and the same 4-stage process described above is what a site reliability engineer candidate walks through, with the technical stages tuned to the infrastructure discipline. AMD interviews are technical and hardware-aware, often covering architecture, firmware, verification, compilers, and performance under strict power and memory constraints. Loops are domain-specific, and depth in low-level systems is what distinguishes strong candidates.

For a site reliability engineer, the load concentrates on technical screen. Those are the stages where the infrastructure signal is read most closely, so they are where preparation pays off most. The non-technical stages (recruiter and manager, onsite deep dives, and team fit) still gate the offer, but they assess fit and communication rather than role-specific depth.

What the site reliability engineer question mix signals

The 6 most-reported site reliability engineer questions cluster around role-specific (4), behavioral (2). That distribution is the clearest read on what AMD actually probes for this role: the more a topic recurs, the more reliably it shows up in the loop, so it is worth weighting practice the same way.

The set spans a easy-to-medium-to-hard difficulty range, topping out at hard problems. Because the topics are concentrated rather than scattered, depth in the leading area matters more than breadth for this particular role.

What moves a site reliability engineer offer forward at AMD

Across the loop, the traits that consistently move a AMD site reliability engineer offer forward are low-level systems and architecture depth, performance reasoning under tight limits, and solid verification and firmware instincts. These are not abstract values; interviewers score against them, so a site reliability engineer who demonstrates them explicitly - naming the tradeoff, stating the assumption, checking the edge case out loud - reads stronger than one who only reaches the right answer silently.

The behavioral and culture stages are checking for depth in computer architecture, comfort under power and memory constraints, and methodical engineering discipline. For a site reliability engineer, the most credible way to show these is through specific, recent examples from real infrastructure work rather than rehearsed generalities.

Salary band

Use the salary page linked below for site reliability engineer bands by city, modeled from BLS, ONS, and Levels.fyi reference medians.

View salary detail

Similar companies