AMD delays the delay -Kaveri- is its last competitive market gone?

[Yuriman]

Originally Posted by nehalem256

Do you really think Intel would not have been smart enough to protect itself in the licensing agreement for the potential of AMD going bankrupt?

Of course, but I'm curious how.

[MisterMac]

Originally Posted by Yuriman

Of course, but I'm curious how.

Basically Intel gets off scotch free and retains IP for AMD64.

Atleast as far as i understood.

[Vesku]

Whether it's Kaveri or Trinity 2.0, AMD needs to have a fully functional HSA product out in 2013. They got some decent GPGPU adoption with Trinity, the easier they make it for developers the better off they'll be.

[ShintaiDK]

Originally Posted by aaksheytalwar

Why can't amd focus on video cards and mobile dev?

Because they have a board and management that refuses to accept their proper place.

[ShintaiDK]

With x64, that IP will also expire in a few years if I aint mistaken. Cant be much more than 3-4 years left.

But again, Intel is already protected in terms of all AMD CPU IPs.

[ShintaiDK]

Originally Posted by Vesku

Whether it's Kaveri or Trinity 2.0, AMD needs to have a fully functional HSA product out in 2013. They got some decent GPGPU adoption with Trinity, the easier they make it for developers the better off they'll be.

AMD wont have HSA products out for along time, and certainly not the tools either. HSA is another dreamer it seems. Even at best case we talk 2015-2016 for the first one.

HSA is still at the idea stage.

[NTMBK]

Originally Posted by Denithor

Unfortunately I hate to think about what's going to happen to PC gaming when all the devs are shooting for is A10-ish performance...

The A10 is what is in the early devkits, not what is going into the consoles...

[Idontcare]

Originally Posted by nehalem256

Do you really think Intel would not have been smart enough to protect itself in the licensing agreement for the potential of AMD going bankrupt?

Originally Posted by Yuriman

Of course, but I'm curious how.

Originally Posted by MisterMac

Basically Intel gets off scotch free and retains IP for AMD64.

Atleast as far as i understood.

If AMD truly entered into bankruptcy then Intel's fate would be determined by the manner in which AMD exited the bankruptcy proceedings.

If AMD exits as a debt-reorganized entity with little else changed then the existing contracts will continue to be legally enforceable.

But if AMD doesn't exit the bankruptcy, and instead they are disassembled and the assets are divided up amongst their creditors, then pre-existing contracts are no longer legally enforceable.

Intel can't draft a license that survives bankruptcy proceedings any more than a creditor can draft a loan agreement that will survive bankruptcy proceedings (only the federal government gets to do that with student loans).

The only legal structure that Intel could concoct which would survive a bankruptcy liquidation and assure Intel maintains access to the IP would be a contract in which Intel is named co-owner of the asset/IP. A JV the likes of which they have with Micron for example.

But right now they just have your bog standard cross-licensing agreement and if AMD were liquidated then Intel would basically be relying on the financial incentive that the creditors would aim to recapture some of their loan losses from the AMD bankruptcy by selling/licensing the AMD IP to Intel on a continuing basis.

Which is basically guaranteed (the re-licensing of the IP to Intel), the banks don't like to have foreclosed home assets on their banksheets, they'll sell them for pennies on the dollar just to move them off their books and the creditors will do the same with AMD's assets, including IP, if and when it came to that stage of a bankruptcy for AMD.

[podspi]

The Trinity refresh essentially means that Steamroller won't be ready by 2013. I imagine we'll still get:

1) HSA improvements slated for Steamroller (where possible)

2) Boost in GPU performance (hopefully #1 will include some way to get around memory bandwidth issues)

3) power/clock improvements


This will probably be enough to keep the IGP ahead of Haswell. As for actually being a competitive product, imho it doesn't look great. Trinity is easily 'fast enough', and the battery life is good, but its major selling point (fast IGP) is already hampered by lackluster CPU. Maybe they'll get lucky and get the CPU paired with higher-resolution panels? Bet not... . Though if I was AMD I would be pressuring OEMs as much as I could to make it happen.

[GreenChile]

Originally Posted by Yuriman

I was thinking along these lines: if AMD gets bought out, the cross licencing agreement is broken. The company that buys AMD will not be able to produce x86 CPUs. Is not the same true of Intel? They would need to renegotiate with AMD's new owner as I'm sure all of their modern CPUs use some AMD IP. What am I missing?

God not this again! Intel retains full access to all cross licenses even if AMD fails to survive or is bought out.

[Idontcare]

Originally Posted by GreenChile

God not this again! Intel retains full access to all cross licenses even if AMD fails to survive or is bought out.

Such a feat would be impressive considering there is zero legal footing for such a contract surviving bankruptcy proceedings. Intel's contract doesn't trump creditors during liquidation, and the IP assets will be given to creditors for them to do with as they wish at that point.

Re-licensing the IP to Intel would seem an obvious outcome since the creditors will want to recoup their losses by selling off the assets, but it is not something that Intel or AMD can require the creditors to do beforehand.

[GreenChile]

Originally Posted by Idontcare

But if AMD doesn't exit the bankruptcy, and instead they are disassembled and the assets are divided up amongst their creditors, then pre-existing contracts are no longer legally enforceable.

I disagree, although I am no lawyer so I can't say that I am interpreting this correctly.

Section 365(n) of the United States Bankruptcy Code
11 U.S.C. §365(n)

(2) If the licensee elects to retain its rights, as described in paragraph (1)(B) of this subsection,
under such contract—
(A) the trustee shall allow the licensee to exercise such rights;
(B) the licensee shall make all royalty payments due under such contract for the duration
of such contract and for any period described in paragraph (1)(B) of this subsection for which the
licensee extends such contract

So the licensee retains all rights to cross license for the remainder of the contract life.

Also I believe the cross license contract between Intel and AMD includes a clause that states in the event of bankruptcy, the other company retains full use of the cross license.

[GreenChile]

Originally Posted by Idontcare

Such a feat would be impressive considering there is zero legal footing for such a contract surviving bankruptcy proceedings. Intel's contract doesn't trump creditors during liquidation, and the IP assets will be given to creditors for them to do with as they wish at that point.

Re-licensing the IP to Intel would seem an obvious outcome since the creditors will want to recoup their losses by selling off the assets, but it is not something that Intel or AMD can require the creditors to do beforehand.

http://bankruptcy.cooley.com/uploads...0Objection.pdf

I believe this legal brief, if that's what it's called, is an example of the circumstances we are discussing. No idea how the judge ruled in this case though.

[MisterMac]

Originally Posted by Idontcare

If AMD truly entered into bankruptcy then Intel's fate would be determined by the manner in which AMD exited the bankruptcy proceedings.

If AMD exits as a debt-reorganized entity with little else changed then the existing contracts will continue to be legally enforceable.

But if AMD doesn't exit the bankruptcy, and instead they are disassembled and the assets are divided up amongst their creditors, then pre-existing contracts are no longer legally enforceable.

Intel can't draft a license that survives bankruptcy proceedings any more than a creditor can draft a loan agreement that will survive bankruptcy proceedings (only the federal government gets to do that with student loans).

The only legal structure that Intel could concoct which would survive a bankruptcy liquidation and assure Intel maintains access to the IP would be a contract in which Intel is named co-owner of the asset/IP. A JV the likes of which they have with Micron for example.

But right now they just have your bog standard cross-licensing agreement and if AMD were liquidated then Intel would basically be relying on the financial incentive that the creditors would aim to recapture some of their loan losses from the AMD bankruptcy by selling/licensing the AMD IP to Intel on a continuing basis.

Which is basically guaranteed (the re-licensing of the IP to Intel), the banks don't like to have foreclosed home assets on their banksheets, they'll sell them for pennies on the dollar just to move them off their books and the creditors will do the same with AMD's assets, including IP, if and when it came to that stage of a bankruptcy for AMD.

Lets imagine it happens.

Who would AMD's creditors be?

Banks, GF?


It would be in GF's interest to play hardball and not let Intel retain IP would it not?

If that happened - would it account for future designs ?
What about current production designs?

[Kippa]

Is there a company with enough money to buy out AMD and seriously invest in R&D? How about Apple?

[mrmt]

Originally Posted by MisterMac

It would be in GF's interest to play hardball and not let Intel retain IP would it not?

GLF is a subordinated creditor. Senior creditors (AMD debt is entirely composed of Senior notes) would decide whether to license patents to Intel or not. And as IDC pointed out, they likely would.

[Idontcare]

Originally Posted by MisterMac

Lets imagine it happens.

Who would AMD's creditors be?

Banks, GF?

Yep, whoever holds their bonds.

Originally Posted by MisterMac

It would be in GF's interest to play hardball and not let Intel retain IP would it not?

It would be in absolutely no one's financial interest to hold out on Intel and not let them have access to the IP. In fact if a business attempted to do so then they could probably be sued by the FTC on the grounds of witholding access to essential patents.

What the patent holders would do, naturally, is negotiate for some absurdly high royalties. Intel would balk, naturally, but what choice would they have at that point?

AMD doesn't make it painful for Intel to cross-license because AMD also wants access to Intel's patents. But an IP company that might own AMD patents would not need such a cross-license, so they gain a considerable upper-hand in those negotiations.

The smart thing for Intel to do in this situation is to approach AMD with an offer to buyout their entire IP portfolio for some ridiculous amount of cash (AMD needs cash), say $5B, with the guarantee of a contract for free licensing rights to the IP forever.

The prospects of Intel going bankrupt before AMD are pretty much zero, so no risk there to AMD. That would minimize Intel's risk while at the same time unlock shareholder value within AMD while AMD can still benefit from the unlocking of said shareholder value.

[zlatan]

Originally Posted by Yuriman

If AMD goes under and gets parted out or sold, will Intel be able to keep producing x86-64 CPUs?

If the buyer will renew the cross-licensing agreement, then yes. But this is not just about the x64. Intel is now using a lot of ATI graphics patents. They alowed to use them when AMD bought ATI.

[zlatan]

Originally Posted by Yuriman

I was thinking along these lines: if AMD gets bought out, the cross licencing agreement is broken. The company that buys AMD will not be able to produce x86 CPUs. Is not the same true of Intel? They would need to renegotiate with AMD's new owner as I'm sure all of their modern CPUs use some AMD IP. What am I missing?

Yes, they need to renegotiate with the new owner. In this case there are a temporary license construction that allows them to sold the products until they renew the cross licencing agreement.

[exar333]

Originally Posted by Idontcare

Yep, whoever holds their bonds.



It would be in absolutely no one's financial interest to hold out on Intel and not let them have access to the IP. In fact if a business attempted to do so then they could probably be sued by the FTC on the grounds of witholding access to essential patents.

What the patent holders would do, naturally, is negotiate for some absurdly high royalties. Intel would balk, naturally, but what choice would they have at that point?

AMD doesn't make it painful for Intel to cross-license because AMD also wants access to Intel's patents. But an IP company that might own AMD patents would not need such a cross-license, so they gain a considerable upper-hand in those negotiations.

The smart thing for Intel to do in this situation is to approach AMD with an offer to buyout their entire IP portfolio for some ridiculous amount of cash (AMD needs cash), say $5B, with the guarantee of a contract for free licensing rights to the IP forever.

The prospects of Intel going bankrupt before AMD are pretty much zero, so no risk there to AMD. That would minimize Intel's risk while at the same time unlock shareholder value within AMD while AMD can still benefit from the unlocking of said shareholder value.

This.

I am sure this has already been drafted on the Intel side to execute at a time they needed it for. I can't imagine they (Intel) would not hedge this potential risk they could essentially buy-out ahead of time.

[Vesku]

Originally Posted by ShintaiDK

AMD wont have HSA products out for along time, and certainly not the tools either. HSA is another dreamer it seems. Even at best case we talk 2015-2016 for the first one.

HSA is still at the idea stage.

Guess we will see, but imo if they don't deliver on HSA in 2013 they'll have squandered the recent improvement in developer relations. One of the few good changes out of AMD in quite some time.

[Yuriman]

Perhaps AMD is moving toward ARM because they are planning to (offer to) sell Intel all of their X86 related patents? That might give them enough cash to make it a few more years.

Just thinking out loud.

[MisterMac]

Originally Posted by Yuriman

Perhaps AMD is moving toward ARM because they are planning to (offer to) sell Intel all of their X86 related patents? That might give them enough cash to make it a few more years.

Just thinking out loud.

This exactly sounds kind of plausible.


If i take IDC's 5 billion cash in a strapped hardball situation - perhaps a few billion for AMD in a direct sellout isn't unlikely.

That cash would make them not only survive but gain enough to execute HSA dreams and GCN\SR\ARM mixes.

The gamble would be obviously - does intel think it's worth waiting for a crashout or not.
I'd wager they'd rather get it over with - and make AMD just another "ARM" player.

[Nemesis 1]

Originally Posted by Idontcare

Such a feat would be impressive considering there is zero legal footing for such a contract surviving bankruptcy proceedings. Intel's contract doesn't trump creditors during liquidation, and the IP assets will be given to creditors for them to do with as they wish at that point.

Re-licensing the IP to Intel would seem an obvious outcome since the creditors will want to recoup their losses by selling off the assets, but it is not something that Intel or AMD can require the creditors to do beforehand.

Really . So who ever ends up with AMDs IP gets to re licnse to intel for mony . What good is AMDs IP Intel has Alot of X86 IP that AMD doesn't own . So buyer beware. I think it doesn't matter what AMD does intel still keeps the IP. The only way it doesn't work is if Intel breaks the agreement

[nonameo]

Originally Posted by MisterMac

This exactly sounds kind of plausible.


If i take IDC's 5 billion cash in a strapped hardball situation - perhaps a few billion for AMD in a direct sellout isn't unlikely.

That cash would make them not only survive but gain enough to execute HSA dreams and GCN\SR\ARM mixes.

The gamble would be obviously - does intel think it's worth waiting for a crashout or not.
I'd wager they'd rather get it over with - and make AMD just another "ARM" player.

yeah but would the FTC go with that?