AMD throws down the gauntlet at Intel

[13Gigatons]

If AMD goes out of business then Intel should be broken up.

 

[jagec]

Originally posted by: 13Gigatons
If AMD goes out of business then Intel should be broken up.

If AMD goes under, then it would be pretty hard to argue that Intel was not a monopoly.

 

[sao123]

Originally posted by: frostedflakes

Originally posted by: Lothar

Originally posted by: frostedflakes
When does Intel's IP related to x86 go into public domain? Is it protected by patent, copyright, or both?

I think it's absolutely ridiculous all the hoops AMD and other chip designers have to jump through to use x86 tech, Intel is so anticompetitive it's disgusting. If AMD was ever shut down, I wonder if the government would get involved and split Intel up.

Please...AMD is free to innovate their own computer chip and can call it x89 if they choose to do so.
There is nothing stopping them from doing that.

Yeah, because RISC really worked well for Apple. x86 is heavily entrenched in the industry, developing a completely different instruction set would be a waste of time.

yea... just ask itanium

 

[Fox5]

Originally posted by: Lothar

Originally posted by: frostedflakes
When does Intel's IP related to x86 go into public domain? Is it protected by patent, copyright, or both?

I think it's absolutely ridiculous all the hoops AMD and other chip designers have to jump through to use x86 tech, Intel is so anticompetitive it's disgusting. If AMD was ever shut down, I wonder if the government would get involved and split Intel up.

Please...AMD is free to innovate their own computer chip and can call it x89 if they choose to do so.
There is nothing stopping them from doing that.

Except all software runs on x86, so unless x89 were a superset, it'd be worthless.

It's not the implementation that's protected, it's the instruction set. The arbitrarily defined instruction set. The thing that says when it gets a certain combination of 0's and 1's, it should do this instruction. The language of computers. C's usage is not restricted, why should the underlying instruction set be?
x86 offers nothing innately superior over other instruction sets (and probably inferior in many ways), it simply is entrenched. It also probably takes a fraction of the time to develop extensions to it than it takes to actually implement those extensions well in hardware.

 

[AndrewR]

Originally posted by: her209
Is it true that Intel threatened to raise CPU prices on HP if they started selling AMD?

Possibly not so blatant. What Intel used to do (at least) was pay for advertising costs for computer manufacturers who used their chips which is why you always see the Intel logo and that annoying "bing bing bing!" after commercials for Dell, HP, etc. So, the pressure was exerted by the threat to stop paying for advertising which is worth a GREAT deal of money. They probably also used preferential pricing, but I remember the advertising carrot was a large part of their control.

 

[Regs]

I own the color blue, and I'm still waiting for Intel to pay me.

 

[Aikouka]

Originally posted by: Fox5
x86 offers nothing innately superior over other instruction sets (and probably inferior in many ways), it simply is entrenched.

I've never heard someone say that it isn't . But almost anyone will tell you that even if a far superior instruction set* were to come out, the chances of it being adopted into the mainstream are extremely low.

*Note: This doesn't include a superset/extension such as x86-64.

 

[PlasmaBomb]

Originally posted by: Joemonkey

Originally posted by: Minerva
This reminds me of this...

*snip*

Better Nate Than Lever!

The End.

I thought that too.

 

[her209]

Originally posted by: AndrewR

Originally posted by: her209
Is it true that Intel threatened to raise CPU prices on HP if they started selling AMD?

Possibly not so blatant. What Intel used to do (at least) was pay for advertising costs for computer manufacturers who used their chips which is why you always see the Intel logo and that annoying "bing bing bing!" after commercials for Dell, HP, etc. So, the pressure was exerted by the threat to stop paying for advertising which is worth a GREAT deal of money. They probably also used preferential pricing, but I remember the advertising carrot was a large part of their control.

AMD's filing against Intel. Its long but a good read.

link

 

[her209]

Intel sues NVIDIA over chipset license agreement

You have to wonder two things:
- Is this usual Intel anti-competition antics?
- Does allowing nVidia to produce said chipsets breach Intel's agreement with AMD?

 

[thescreensavers]

Originally posted by: nerp
All I know is I have about 40,000 shares of AMD @ an average of $2.08 so I'm ready to cash out and enjoy my profits today. I'm tempted to hold off for a break past $3, but I'm not banking on that. Profits is profits.

GO AMD!

http://www.google.com/finance?...&rls=org.mozilla:en-USfficial&client=firefox-a&um=1&ie=UTF-8&sa=N&hl=en&tab=we

there higher then 3

 

[her209]

http://www.extremetech.com/art...=ETRSS02129TX1K0000532

So its almost been 60 days. What's up?

 

[SuperSix]

Good job AMD. Keep poking the bear. Last time - you were rewarded with the Core microarchitecture. Does anyone really think Intel will die w/o AMDs tech? It may cost them a lot to bypass it, but money is't something Intel is lacking.