AMD Files Antitrust Complaint Against Intel in U.S. Federal District Court

Page 12 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Acanthus

Lifer
Aug 28, 2001
19,915
2
76
ostif.org
Originally posted by: Sixtyfour
Since slot-a athlons up to 3ghz P4 AMD was performance leader, and it leader again after releasing A64 and Opterons.
Mobile XP was good and centrino wasn't there, but still sony dropped AMD from it's product line.

Now there is Opteron dual core that gives 80% of the performance of 4 way xeon MP with just single socket.
Please compare MSSQL license prices for single socket Opteron and 4way xeon and explain why anyone buys Intel, or why would they take it for free ?

Saving in licenses would be 48000$ for MSSQL enterprise :D

The 2.4C slaughtered the 2400+, the 2.8C beat the 3200+ in most benchmarks... im not going to argue the past any further... AMD and Intel have been trading blows with releases, its not a one sided match for either company. For now the ball is clearly in AMDs court for Server, Workstation, and Desktop. Intel still controls Mobile, Ultra High end server/workstation (the Itanic II, i still wonder why companies buy these) and has a mediocre product for the desktop and workstations. It is very clear that Intel does not have a good server product to compete with Dual Core Opterons.
 

Sixtyfour

Banned
Jun 15, 2005
341
0
0
2.4c did not "slaughter" amd, but what ever, it's old stuff.

How about that licensing of software ?
Does it make sense to buy a Dell if you use MS or IBM database software ?
(both charge per socket for x86 cpu's)
 

wayliff

Lifer
Nov 28, 2002
11,720
11
81
Go AMD!!

CPU History
AMD TBird 1000Mhz
AMD Athlon XP 1700+
AMD Athlon XP 2500+
AMD Athlon XP 3000+

And hope to jump into the new generation of CPUs soon.
 

OneOfTheseDays

Diamond Member
Jan 15, 2000
7,052
0
0
I think part of Intel's problem is that they have underestimated AMD. Instead of trying to innovate and produce competitive products, they've used their strong-arm tactics to try and eliminate all competition, which in this case means eliminating AMD. Anyone who is defending Intel should realize that this is bad for all of us when a company is doing something like this. If AMD does not exist, then competition does not exist, which means crappier processors and higher costs for you.

As of right now, AMD is the performance king almost across the board. They are innovating and producing wonderful cheap processors that deliver stellar performance. They deserve their piece of the pie.
 

archcommus

Diamond Member
Sep 14, 2003
8,115
0
76
I :heart: AMD.

Only my first processor I've ever owned was an Intel, a Pentium 200 MHz. Everything after that AMD - an Athlon 550, Thunderbird 1.4, two XP 2100+s, and my current, a 64 3200+.
 

clarkey01

Diamond Member
Feb 4, 2004
3,419
1
0
Originally posted by: Soviet
Intel has my support. They INVENTED the fricking processor in the first place. You wouldnt have CRAP without them!!

You amd fans simply like the underdog for some inexplicable reason....

Only reason i own an amd is because it performs better in games. Intel will come back with a totally kickass cpu and slaughter amd in the future and ill be buying Intel once again :) Bash the P4 all you like, Intel is still top dog, they still make way more than amd. Therefore P4 = success.

As for the strongarm tactics, so what? I wouldnt give any processors/money to somone who was also buying from the enemy! Amd needs to pull their finger out and fricking advertise rather than bitch about intel. So far ive seen the amd logo on the tv ONCE, that was for a turion laptop. Yea makes sense, lets advertise for the platform where we perform the WEAKEST.... yea.... Who drugged the amd marketing team? Where have they been past 5 years?


My point in short = Intel rules. Nothing wrong with strongarm tactics. Amd are where they are because of their OWN doing, not enough advertising.

Your full of sh*t and dont even have the first idea about the semi conductor industry.

 

alien42

Lifer
Nov 28, 2004
12,882
3,309
136
Originally posted by: clarkey01
Originally posted by: Soviet
Intel has my support. They INVENTED the fricking processor in the first place. You wouldnt have CRAP without them!!

You amd fans simply like the underdog for some inexplicable reason....

Only reason i own an amd is because it performs better in games. Intel will come back with a totally kickass cpu and slaughter amd in the future and ill be buying Intel once again :) Bash the P4 all you like, Intel is still top dog, they still make way more than amd. Therefore P4 = success.

As for the strongarm tactics, so what? I wouldnt give any processors/money to somone who was also buying from the enemy! Amd needs to pull their finger out and fricking advertise rather than bitch about intel. So far ive seen the amd logo on the tv ONCE, that was for a turion laptop. Yea makes sense, lets advertise for the platform where we perform the WEAKEST.... yea.... Who drugged the amd marketing team? Where have they been past 5 years?


My point in short = Intel rules. Nothing wrong with strongarm tactics. Amd are where they are because of their OWN doing, not enough advertising.

Your full of sh*t and dont even have the first idea about the semi conductor industry.

their user name is 'soviet' and they obviously dont play friendly with capitalism, hmmm.
 

Maximilian

Lifer
Feb 8, 2004
12,604
15
81
Originally posted by: clarkey01
Originally posted by: Soviet
Intel has my support. They INVENTED the fricking processor in the first place. You wouldnt have CRAP without them!!

You amd fans simply like the underdog for some inexplicable reason....

Only reason i own an amd is because it performs better in games. Intel will come back with a totally kickass cpu and slaughter amd in the future and ill be buying Intel once again :) Bash the P4 all you like, Intel is still top dog, they still make way more than amd. Therefore P4 = success.

As for the strongarm tactics, so what? I wouldnt give any processors/money to somone who was also buying from the enemy! Amd needs to pull their finger out and fricking advertise rather than bitch about intel. So far ive seen the amd logo on the tv ONCE, that was for a turion laptop. Yea makes sense, lets advertise for the platform where we perform the WEAKEST.... yea.... Who drugged the amd marketing team? Where have they been past 5 years?


My point in short = Intel rules. Nothing wrong with strongarm tactics. Amd are where they are because of their OWN doing, not enough advertising.

Your full of sh*t and dont even have the first idea about the semi conductor industry.

I suppose your an expert in the semi conductor industry huh?

If so then post a proper fvcking point rather than simply saying im full of "sh*t".....
 

Babbles

Diamond Member
Jan 4, 2001
8,253
14
81
Originally posted by: Soviet
Originally posted by: clarkey01
Originally posted by: Soviet
Intel has my support. They INVENTED the fricking processor in the first place. You wouldnt have CRAP without them!!

You amd fans simply like the underdog for some inexplicable reason....

Only reason i own an amd is because it performs better in games. Intel will come back with a totally kickass cpu and slaughter amd in the future and ill be buying Intel once again :) Bash the P4 all you like, Intel is still top dog, they still make way more than amd. Therefore P4 = success.

As for the strongarm tactics, so what? I wouldnt give any processors/money to somone who was also buying from the enemy! Amd needs to pull their finger out and fricking advertise rather than bitch about intel. So far ive seen the amd logo on the tv ONCE, that was for a turion laptop. Yea makes sense, lets advertise for the platform where we perform the WEAKEST.... yea.... Who drugged the amd marketing team? Where have they been past 5 years?


My point in short = Intel rules. Nothing wrong with strongarm tactics. Amd are where they are because of their OWN doing, not enough advertising.

Your full of sh*t and dont even have the first idea about the semi conductor industry.

I suppose your an expert in the semi conductor industry huh?

If so then post a proper fvcking point rather than simply saying im full of "sh*t".....

He posted a basic history of the semi-conductor industry via Wikipedia. Besides being full of shjt you can not seem to read well either.
 

Maximilian

Lifer
Feb 8, 2004
12,604
15
81
Originally posted by: Babbles
Originally posted by: Soviet
Originally posted by: clarkey01
Originally posted by: Soviet
Intel has my support. They INVENTED the fricking processor in the first place. You wouldnt have CRAP without them!!

You amd fans simply like the underdog for some inexplicable reason....

Only reason i own an amd is because it performs better in games. Intel will come back with a totally kickass cpu and slaughter amd in the future and ill be buying Intel once again :) Bash the P4 all you like, Intel is still top dog, they still make way more than amd. Therefore P4 = success.

As for the strongarm tactics, so what? I wouldnt give any processors/money to somone who was also buying from the enemy! Amd needs to pull their finger out and fricking advertise rather than bitch about intel. So far ive seen the amd logo on the tv ONCE, that was for a turion laptop. Yea makes sense, lets advertise for the platform where we perform the WEAKEST.... yea.... Who drugged the amd marketing team? Where have they been past 5 years?


My point in short = Intel rules. Nothing wrong with strongarm tactics. Amd are where they are because of their OWN doing, not enough advertising.

Your full of sh*t and dont even have the first idea about the semi conductor industry.

I suppose your an expert in the semi conductor industry huh?

If so then post a proper fvcking point rather than simply saying im full of "sh*t".....

He posted a basic history of the semi-conductor industry via Wikipedia. Besides being full of shjt you can not seem to read well either.


No idiot, Jassi posted that. Clarkey which is who i am referring to, posted nothing useful....

It appears you have reading difficulties...
 

HumblePie

Lifer
Oct 30, 2000
14,665
440
126
LOL it's funny how this argument has turned out. It went from people like Pap and Prince thinking AMD was "weak" for filing a "lawuit" which isn't what they did and had to be pointed out. Now it's degenerated into fanboi's arguing who's CPU is going to beat up who's CPU! Yah well my dad can beat your dad!
 

Sixtyfour

Banned
Jun 15, 2005
341
0
0
Originally posted by: Soviet

No idiot, Jassi posted that. Clarkey which is who i am referring to, posted nothing useful....

It appears you have reading difficulties...

Learn to quote, it makes reading much easier and knowing what you are referring to.

 

Zebo

Elite Member
Jul 29, 2001
39,398
19
81
Originally posted by: Continuity27
Ideal situation: AMD wins the case, various companies like Dell, Gateway, Best Buy carry both products on a fairly equal basis. Better competition = better performance, better price, happier consumers. Otherwise you get giants who sit on technology like Intel.

Just the opposite will happen. Intel's illegal business practices which have prevented many AMD customers from even selling AMD products, you better believe all those companies (HP, DELL, Sony etc etc ) that have been blackmailed by Intel will be A LOT more interested in selling AMD products now that the shat has hit the fan and they can come out of hiding. People tend to remember shat, especially in the small world of biz. If Intel's execs end up in prison where they belong for all those alleged felonies it could be even worse.



Edit to address fluff:

No offense guys but the issue before the courts is not performance or price or some such other BS nerds only nerds are interested in, but instead violations of law.

 

Zebo

Elite Member
Jul 29, 2001
39,398
19
81
As for the strongarm tactics, so what? I wouldnt give any processors/money to somone who was also buying from the enemy!

Ever been arrested? I bet you have with an attitude like that so young..which pretty much precludes you from ever becoming a corporate officer so no reason to worry about what you'd do. The SEC does'nt let crimminals run publically traded companies..even for youthful indescresion like strong-arming some guy at a bar.

Fact is many charges levied against intel are serious felonies under united states law... Now alls AMD's gotta do is prove it and you'll be buying your next processor from cons.

http://straylight.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode15/usc_sup_01_15.html
TITLE 15 > CHAPTER 1 > § 2 Prev | Next

§ 2. Monopolizing trade a felony; penalty


Release date: 2004-05-18

Every person who shall monopolize, or attempt to monopolize, or combine or conspire with any other person or persons, to monopolize any part of the trade or commerce among the several States, or with foreign nations, shall be deemed guilty of a felony, and, on conviction thereof, shall be punished by fine not exceeding $10,000,000 if a corporation, or, if any other person, $350,000, or by imprisonment not exceeding three years, or by both said punishments, in the discretion of the court.


MORE....



TITLE 15 > CHAPTER 1 > § 13 Prev | Next

§ 13. Discrimination in price, services, or facilities


Release date: 2004-05-18

(a) Price; selection of customers
It shall be unlawful for any person engaged in commerce, in the course of such commerce, either directly or indirectly, to discriminate in price between different purchasers of commodities of like grade and quality, where either or any of the purchases involved in such discrimination are in commerce, where such commodities are sold for use, consumption, or resale within the United States or any Territory thereof or the District of Columbia or any insular possession or other place under the jurisdiction of the United States, and where the effect of such discrimination may be substantially to lessen competition or tend to create a monopoly in any line of commerce, or to injure, destroy, or prevent competition with any person who either grants or knowingly receives the benefit of such discrimination, or with customers of either of them: Provided, That nothing herein contained shall prevent differentials which make only due allowance for differences in the cost of manufacture, sale, or delivery resulting from the differing methods or quantities in which such commodities are to such purchasers sold or delivered: Provided, however, That the Federal Trade Commission may, after due investigation and hearing to all interested parties, fix and establish quantity limits, and revise the same as it finds necessary, as to particular commodities or classes of commodities, where it finds that available purchasers in greater quantities are so few as to render differentials on account thereof unjustly discriminatory or promotive of monopoly in any line of commerce; and the foregoing shall then not be construed to permit differentials based on differences in quantities greater than those so fixed and established: And provided further, That nothing herein contained shall prevent persons engaged in selling goods, wares, or merchandise in commerce from selecting their own customers in bona fide transactions and not in restraint of trade: And provided further, That nothing herein contained shall prevent price changes from time to time where in response to changing conditions affecting the market for or the marketability of the goods concerned, such as but not limited to actual or imminent deterioration of perishable goods, obsolescence of seasonal goods, distress sales under court process, or sales in good faith in discontinuance of business in the goods concerned.
(b) Burden of rebutting prima-facie case of discrimination
Upon proof being made, at any hearing on a complaint under this section, that there has been discrimination in price or services or facilities furnished, the burden of rebutting the prima-facie case thus made by showing justification shall be upon the person charged with a violation of this section, and unless justification shall be affirmatively shown, the Commission is authorized to issue an order terminating the discrimination: Provided, however, That nothing herein contained shall prevent a seller rebutting the prima-facie case thus made by showing that his lower price or the furnishing of services or facilities to any purchaser or purchasers was made in good faith to meet an equally low price of a competitor, or the services or facilities furnished by a competitor.
(c) Payment or acceptance of commission, brokerage, or other compensation
It shall be unlawful for any person engaged in commerce, in the course of such commerce, to pay or grant, or to receive or accept, anything of value as a commission, brokerage, or other compensation, or any allowance or discount in lieu thereof, except for services rendered in connection with the sale or purchase of goods, wares, or merchandise, either to the other party to such transaction or to an agent, representative, or other intermediary therein where such intermediary is acting in fact for or in behalf, or is subject to the direct or indirect control, of any party to such transaction other than the person by whom such compensation is so granted or paid.
(d) Payment for services or facilities for processing or sale
It shall be unlawful for any person engaged in commerce to pay or contact for the payment of anything of value to or for the benefit of a customer of such person in the course of such commerce as compensation or in consideration for any services or facilities furnished by or through such customer in connection with the processing, handling, sale, or offering for sale of any products or commodities manufactured, sold, or offered for sale by such person, unless such payment or consideration is available on proportionally equal terms to all other customers competing in the distribution of such products or commodities.
(e) Furnishing services or facilities for processing, handling, etc.
It shall be unlawful for any person to discriminate in favor of one purchaser against another purchaser or purchasers of a commodity bought for resale, with or without processing, by contracting to furnish or furnishing, or by contributing to the furnishing of, any services or facilities connected with the processing, handling, sale, or offering for sale of such commodity so purchased upon terms not accorded to all purchasers on proportionally equal terms.
(f) Knowingly inducing or receiving discriminatory price
It shall be unlawful for any person engaged in commerce, in the course of such commerce, knowingly to induce or receive a discrimination in price which is prohibited by this section.



 

Sixtyfour

Banned
Jun 15, 2005
341
0
0
Originally posted by: Rock Hydra
I'm interested in Intel's resoponse to this. They've been quiet.
They have at least once denied all charges.

But i think that there is so much against Intel that, the court soon has only the option to do Intel what they did to standard oil, crush it.
But that won't happen, which means this case is going to dry, and AMD is forced to accept 25% market share and 1% annual growth to that, or something..

It would not be free competition, it would be goverment controlled market like communism.
It can happen, they just do it behind closed doors.

ps. remember, they all are licking a-holes of the demons.
 

Auryg

Platinum Member
Dec 28, 2003
2,377
0
71
One question to anyone smart enough to answer..is now a good time to buy AMD stock? They're publically traded, right?

I mean, if AMD wins, their business will probably go up tenfold.
 

yukichigai

Diamond Member
Apr 23, 2003
6,404
0
76
Except for the processor which came in the Dell Optiplex I purchased for $50, I have never purchased anything but AMDs CPUs. My Athlon64 keeps me quite happy.
 

Sixtyfour

Banned
Jun 15, 2005
341
0
0
Originally posted by: Auryg
One question to anyone smart enough to answer..is now a good time to buy AMD stock? They're publically traded, right?

I mean, if AMD wins, their business will probably go up tenfold.

AMD seems to be the best stock to buy in the IT industry, and it has been that for years...
But previously success hasn't materialised due to Intels actions, but if AMD has major win in court...
Who is going to stop AMD getting 50% of marketshare ?
Remember, when HP sold without limiting AMD took 60% in that quarter !!

But all stock investing has it risks..

Thumbs rule: if you buy keep for a long time and don't keep all the eggs in the same basket. :)

ps. this is BAD time to buy Intel, but i guess you figured that one by yourself.. :D
 

Wingznut

Elite Member
Dec 28, 1999
16,968
2
0
Originally posted by: Sixtyfour
but if AMD has major win in court...
Who is going to stop AMD getting 50% of marketshare ?
Their manufacturing capacity. Even with F36 ramping up next year, they still aren't close to being able to meet half of the world's demand.
 

C'DaleRider

Guest
Jan 13, 2000
3,048
0
0
Originally posted by: Acanthus

Did i say AMDs chips were bad? No i didnt. I said their supporting chipsets were buggy, buggier than intels chipsets at the time.

Unstable chipsets are however AMDs fault, for not making official chipsets. LIke i also said, it has vastly improved since the tbird and older days.


This has always been my complaint with AMD......no official release of chipsets along with their processors. Instead, they completely depend upon the motherboard manufacturers to create stable motherboard chipsets for their processors. Intel, on the other hand, always releases chipset(s) for their processors upon release....and Intel boards (at least the boards built-by-Intel), no matter what anyone says, are stable as granite. They can take damned near any RAM you can throw in them, any video cards, any sound, etc., etc. I still see AMD-compat. boards with "well, that board doesn't like this-or-that RAM" or "That chipset----board doesn't do well with this-or-that video card."

I've always wondered why AMD does this......after all, it's not like AMD can create a cpu without a chipset to run the darned thing on in testing. Release a chipset for the cpu and then license the design out to board manufacturers.......like Intel does and makes a bundle of money from licensing......maybe AMD could learn that lesson.

Before you think I'm an Intel-fanboi, I've run AMD chips from way back.......my first was a 386DX40 cpu........the fastest 386 cpu then in existence.

I've had both Intel and AMD...........and unfortunately, Intel-based chipset boards have always proven more stable and tolerant of different hardware than AMD-based chipsets, at least until nVidia entered the scene. I gave up on AMD for a few years after numerous problems with AMD-based systems....not that they blew up or anything, but having to find this particular RAM to make the board work smoothly, or this version of driver instead of that version that caused crashes, and on and on. The Intel boards just worked out of the box without drama or having to look for any speical hardware.....just pick out any old RAM, video card, whatever.....it worked.

Finally, a manufacturer that is producing chipsets that seem MUCH more mature and stable for AMD than VIA had. Not knocking VIA, but many of their earlier designs really blew chunks!!!

Honestly, two major chip manufacturers is better for competition......reduces complacency and stagnation in design, keeps prices down (kinda.....but looking at AMD's dual-core prices vs. Intel's, I begin to wonder these days.......), and is just healthy.

 

Sixtyfour

Banned
Jun 15, 2005
341
0
0
Originally posted by: Wingznut
Originally posted by: Sixtyfour
but if AMD has major win in court...
Who is going to stop AMD getting 50% of marketshare ?
Their manufacturing capacity. Even with F36 ramping up next year, they still aren't close to being able to meet half of the world's demand.

Not true, AMD has currently capacity to at least 30%, there just is shortage for some top models.
After FAB36 AMD definetly has capacity for 50% or close to it, maybe even more.

I believe that some retailers just say there is shortage because of Intel...