• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

8-core Zambezi confirmed to be priced approx. $300

Page 5 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
without a doubt. I agree on both. The settlement wasnt something hat dirk did on his own and BD had to play a part in this.


-As far as the $$$ in the settlement, ppl only started complaining about how small the cash was after they seen how big nvidias settlement was. Nvidias was huge cause of patents/licenses agreements included. These we intellectual properties that intel payed a hefty price for cause they thought they couldnt live without such property and was willing to pay. Its not like AMD was ripped off or got less money on the same deal. Its really nothing like that!

AMD got $1.25 billion lump sum payment in November of 2009, while nVidia settled last January for $1.5 billion over 5 years(with the first payment occuring in January of this year) so if you factor in present value of nVidia's 5 settlement then AMD actually got more money than nVidia.
 
Maybe the settlements sizes are more significant of actual damages. And AMD's troubles are as much a part of bad upper and middle management and poor engineering decisions than Intel's influence. So they don't get damages for that, it's just mentioned in every AMD/Intel discussion.
Sort of like, the dog ate my homework.
 
-As far as the $$$ in the settlement, ppl only started complaining about how small the cash was after they seen how big nvidias settlement was.
Not exactly. I was part of several discussions where many people were completely baffled as to why AMD settled for so little.

One thing AMD did get that is very significant, they became free to Fab an x86 chip where ever they wanted. There are also quite severe provisions in the agreement if Intel should ever bribe OEMs like they did in the past. So perhaps the board saw the agreement as acceptable given the above, among other provisions.
 
I remember the last time amd had some thing good they charged like $399 for the slowest x2.
So once again amd has double the average cores but this time there selling it at bargin to us.
 
Not exactly. I was part of several discussions where many people were completely baffled as to why AMD settled for so little.

One thing AMD did get that is very significant, they became free to Fab an x86 chip where ever they wanted. There are also quite severe provisions in the agreement if Intel should ever bribe OEMs like they did in the past. So perhaps the board saw the agreement as acceptable given the above, among other provisions.

I can give you that. Maybe the nvidia settlement heated up the stink pot and it spread further more. Regardless its very unlikely that dirk's outing had anything to do with the "low" settlement amount. Huge business deals such as these arent so simple nor can they be valued as such.
 
Regardless its very unlikely that dirk's outing had anything to do with the "low" settlement amount.
You are probably right. I suppose we'll never know exactly why he was forced out. IMO the guy was doing some good things, and is a great engineer. I'm not sure they can replace him on an engineering level, it could really cost AMD in the future.
 
I remember the last time amd had some thing good they charged like $399 for the slowest x2.
So once again amd has double the average cores but this time there selling it at bargin to us.

Yes, but they were the undisputed top dog then, and at the tail end of an extended run in which they had been at/near the top. These past 5 years intel has completely dominated, and things only look to get better for them. How much higher can intel clock their cpus if AMD gets too rowdy? Intel would have zero issues with releasing a 4 ghz i7 2700/2800/2900k if necessary. How high would BD have to be clocked to beat THAT? I would say at least 5 ghz, and probably higher. AMD is only going to charge about $300 because if they go any higher intel will just release a new sku that offers better value.
 
Back
Top