• 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.

IBM, AMD to Develop New Microprocessors

M

mamisano

Platinum Member
Wednesday January 08, 2003 2:21 PM (NEW!)



http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tm...&cid=581&u=/nm/20030108/tc_nm/tech_ibm_amd_dc

SUNNYVALE, Calif./EAST FISHKILL, N.Y. (Reuters) - International Business Machines Corp. (NYSE:IBM - news) and Advanced Micro Devices Inc. (NYSE:AMD - news) on Wednesday said they would jointly develop high-performance microprocessors that would be commercially available within two years.

The companies said they will collaborate on 65 nanometer and 45 nanometer technologies to be implemented on 300 millimeter silicon wafers.

A nanometer is a billionth of a meter.

The chips, which serve as the brains of computers and electronics devices, will be based on advanced processes and materials such as high-speed silicon-on-insulator transistors, copper interconnects and improved "low-k dielectric" insulation, the companies said.

IBM and AMD said they expect first products based on the new 65 nanometer technologies to appear in 2005. Companies are currently moving from 130 nanometer technology to 90 nanometer.

 
This is proably gonna be the best breakt that AMD has had in quite some time. If this works out how its suppose to, I'm sure more people and companies will start to buy more AMD when the have a name like IBM backing them. Also, I wonder what IBM is going to get out of this? Rights to some new "phatty" processor for their server line? Who knowz.......
 
IBM still does make the best high end server chip in my opinion (PowerPC). The sparc is starting to loose ground. It is relatively underpowered. I would consider the alpha to be a close second. I think this will definitly help amd. Hopefully they can kick intel's *ss
 
Sorry for bringing a old thread back to life.

But just for clarification for some of you other folks, IBM and AMD have been wrapped in with each other since IBM gave AMD first life.

Ever hear of Lucent? They had a commercial a while back. "We make the the things that make things work.". All they were was a break off of IBM when the head hauncho's at IBM decided that they can make more money by breaking the company up instead of having it all under one umbrella.

AMD is the same. It just happened before Lucent. In essence they are the same company.
 
Originally posted by: SinfulWeeper
Sorry for bringing a old thread back to life.

But just for clarification for some of you other folks, IBM and AMD have been wrapped in with each other since IBM gave AMD first life.

Ever hear of Lucent? They had a commercial a while back. "We make the the things that make things work.". All they were was a break off of IBM when the head hauncho's at IBM decided that they can make more money by breaking the company up instead of having it all under one umbrella.

AMD is the same. It just happened before Lucent. In essence they are the same company.
Click to expand...

SO you are saying that AMD is a subdivision of IBM?

hold on.....

MWUHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH

Thats pretty funny....😀


"In essence they are the same company" <---- LOL
 
No, that would be like saying NBC is totally independant of Microsoft. While they are all of the same company, they are not. (I know that sounds f^cked up). If Microsoft, as in the OS company as we know it goes tits up tommorrow, NBC will be uneffected unless they need to switch their servers/computers to linux... can you imagine the headache.
 
>AMD is the same. It just happened before Lucent.

I never heard of this. Could you give more info about this or a reference. AMD goes way back. AMD used to make many specialized and unusual ICs before they got in the x86 business as a competitor to Intel.

Now Intel and AMD were fomerly associated. They had mutual cross-licensing from the days when no-one would commit to buying a chip which was available from only a single source. They had the rights and access to Intels die designs. That is the origin of AMD making Intel style CPUs (later AMD bought NexGen).

IBM has always had massive R&D and leading edge FAB capability (way before Intel became a force). I really don't think they split off a chunk of it decades ago to create AMD. People leaving IBM to form another company on their own is pretty common though. The guy that runs Cyrix for VIA was once a honcho for IBM research in Austin long ago. In fact I'd guess 90% of anybody who is a force in computer technology and is over 40 has been an IBM employee.
 
When IBM was declared a monopoly, part of their R&D team to prevent damage to themselves seperated along with a chunk of change given to them from IBM. They enhanced a already formed, but at the time a 'nobody' AMD. That is a very vague discription of how it happened and not totally accurate. But essentially that is how it sums up. If it were not for IBM, AMD as we know it today would not exist.

Think of IBM as a divorced father and AMD as a adopted child. While they are different companies, but the ties that they have together are pretty much unbreakable. They want to see one another prosper.

The ties now-a-days that AMD has with Intel is totally different. Like Microsoft and Apple. Mainly in each others stock. So they want to make sure neither goes belly up, but on the other hand. Do not want to let the other gain supremecy.
 
I correct myself about the Lucent thingy. They were broken up from Bell Labratories and somehow joined a partnership with IBM. However IBM and AMD are much more closely related.

----editted to add----

I know for a while IBM was producting the x86 chips AMD R&D was developing. For sure till the 486 and quite possibly the 586 days. Somehow the two companies are joined at the hip... not just holding hands. My memory is faded and do not really care to search though history to get the story spot on.

Point being though without IBM, AMD as we know it today would not exist as I stated. They have been so closely related it is hard to tell the difference between them other than what they mainly advertise and what they put on the market. Rest assured though that the products you see today would not be on the market if they were not working together.
 
Originally posted by: OS
don't you guys really mean cyrix and ibm, not amd?
Click to expand...

I dont think so.

From first post.
SUNNYVALE, Calif./EAST FISHKILL, N.Y. (Reuters) - International Business Machines Corp. (NYSE:IBM - news) and Advanced Micro Devices Inc. (NYSE:AMD - news) on Wednesday said they would jointly develop high-performance microprocessors that would be commercially available within two years.


 
Originally posted by: SpeedTester
Originally posted by: OS
don't you guys really mean cyrix and ibm, not amd?
Click to expand...

I dont think so.

From first post.
SUNNYVALE, Calif./EAST FISHKILL, N.Y. (Reuters) - International Business Machines Corp. (NYSE:IBM - news) and Advanced Micro Devices Inc. (NYSE:AMD - news) on Wednesday said they would jointly develop high-performance microprocessors that would be commercially available within two years.
Click to expand...

I meant the people speaking about the historical aspects.

 
Originally posted by: OS
don't you guys really mean cyrix and ibm, not amd?
Click to expand...

I think you are right that SinfulWeeper has some facts crossed. IBM fabs made the later Cyrix chips (6x86/MII) until National bought Cyrix and paid a fabulous fortune to get out of the contract. Cyrix never had any fabs until the one National Semiconductor built for the purpose. IBM also made the Cyrix chip with the IBM brand on it. I'm sure this was a condition of the contract with IBM.

Earlier Cyrix chips that I remember were made by Texas Instruments. (My recollection of the original Cyrix is that it was an independent design company formed from capital supplied by several semiconductor manufacturers with the intention of legally cloning Intel's designs, so as to get a piece of Intel's action. It was a separate corporation to insulate the chip manufactures from liabilty in case the legalistics did not work out. By the time of the 6x86 the supporting companies had given up, and Cyrix was simply an independent design corporation.)


>I know for a while IBM was producting the x86 chips AMD R&D was developing. For sure till the 486 and quite possibly
>the 586 days
I don't recall that, although I don't see why AMD might not have contracted IBM to do it. I think AMD had its own fabs to produce 286s, 386s, and 486s. AMD and Intel had mutual cross-licenses to produce and sell each others designs going back to the time when chip buyers would not buy chips that had only a single source. Intel screwed AMD by not producing AMD chips as an alternate source, leaving AMD hanging. Up to and including 486s, AMD produced improved versions (usually faster and much cheaper) of Intel chips using Intel's die design obtained through Intel. Intel wanted to break the contract and took AMD to court with the 486. There were huge legal battles of course. AMDs sales soared as people rushed to obtain the superior and cheaper chips before they might be taken off the market by the courts. During periods when the court rulings were unfavorable to AMD, they said some 486s produced were AMD's own design.

AMD produced some 586s of its own design and some much better ones from the NexGen purchase.

> Somehow the two companies are joined at the hip... not just holding hands. My memory is faded and do not
>really care to search though history to get the story spot on.

>Point being though without IBM, AMD as we know it today would not exist as I stated.

Could be. But the more you say about things I recall differently, the less believable what you say sounds.

> They have been so closely related it is hard to tell the difference between them other than what they mainly advertise and
>what they put on the market. Rest assured though that the products you see today would not be on the market if they were
> not working together.

I know AMD is working with a lot of companies. Most chip-making subsystems are contracted and bought from other companies. This goes for every chip maker really, and this sort of thing is the general case with all corporations. Ford does not make the seats it puts in its cars. Intel does not make the 300mm wafers it uses in its fabs. The HD heads used in the major manufacturers drives are bought from IBM. But I really don't think IBM is tied to AMD any closer (or less) than Intel. I'm sure AMD would love to be though.

At one time IBM used to make altered versions of Intel's 486 (486SLC2) with the IBM brand. I owned a motherboard that had one (actually I still have it -somewhere). IBM didn't make CPUs with Intel's brand. IBM just had rights to make special versions for its own purpose. Younger people may find this hard to believe, but IBM was such a major force then it could get contractual favors unlike any other. As I understand it, IBM got Intel to agree as part of their contract to buy Intel chips.

I really think IBM has wanted rights to produce x86 chips ever since it gave up the contract with Cyrix. AMD probably would like to improve its finances, and getting together with IBM could help. Don't be surprised if you see IBM motherboards with chips that seem eerily like Athlons some day.

IBM - Intel - 486
IBM - Cyrix - 6x86/MII
IBM - AMD - ???

 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top