SSE3 Royalties

[ahock]

Hi Guys;

Just wanna ask about this. Correct me if I'm wrong but SSE1 SSE2 SSE3 are technology made by Intel. I heard AMD will incorporate SSE3 to its latest processor aside from MMX and SSE2 that they had already. Question is doeas AMD paying any royalties to Intel in borrowing this technology?

 

[Nyati13]

The two companies have a lot of cross-licensing with each other, so AMD gets to use SSE3 for free, and Intel gets to use AMD64 for free.
(Of course, AMD calls their SSE3 addition "SSE3", and Intel calls their AMD64 "EMT64", because they suck)

 

[Midnight Rambler]

(Of course, AMD calls their SSE3 addition "SSE3", and Intel calls their AMD64 "EMT64", because they suck)

Yeah, like AMD would have stuck with the same name if it had been INTELSSE3 instead of just SSE3. You expect Intel to associate AMD's name with it's product ? NEITHER company would so something like that ...

 

[Thermalrock]

well maybe if intel would had called sse3 intelsse3, amd would have dropped the intel in it too. emt is prolly just an encrypted version of the abbreviation 'amd'. kinda rhymes too.

 

[berkut7]

Originally posted by: Nyati13

The two companies have a lot of cross-licensing with each other, so AMD gets to use SSE3 for free, and Intel gets to use AMD64 for free.
(Of course, AMD calls their SSE3 addition "SSE3", and Intel calls their AMD64 "EMT64", because they suck)

Didn't AMD call their SSE implementation 3DNow! Proffesional or something like that?

 

[jiffylube1024]

Originally posted by: berkut7

Originally posted by: Nyati13

The two companies have a lot of cross-licensing with each other, so AMD gets to use SSE3 for free, and Intel gets to use AMD64 for free.
(Of course, AMD calls their SSE3 addition "SSE3", and Intel calls their AMD64 "EMT64", because they suck)

Didn't AMD call their SSE implementation 3DNow! Proffesional or something like that?

They may have, or included SSE (1) under one of the 3DNow! revisions, but they for sure gave this up with SSE2, which they call just that. Same with the (soon to be supported) SSE3.

 

[klah]

Originally posted by: ahock

Question is doeas AMD paying any royalties to Intel in borrowing this technology?

http://www.itworld.com/Comp/10...amd_intel/pfindex.html

The companies have signed four patent cross-license agreements since 1976, said John Greenagel, an AMD spokesman. "Anything that we patent they can use, and anything they patent we can use," he said.

 

[ahock]

is hyperthreading included in cross licensing????

 

[BEL6772]

Well, he did say "anything". I think hyperthreading is kind of a non-issue at this point, though. Both companies are working on multi-core products, so 'virtual' multicore is being replaced by the real deal.

 

[klah]

http://www.geek.com/news/geekn.../bch20040609025489.htm

I had a chance to discuss Intel's microprocessor plans with an Intel marketing manager from Oregon. This Intel employee was able to clarify Intel's plans for both the Prescott and the Pentium M processors. Intel is planning on developing a derivative of the Pentium M for the desktop, but this new processor will not replace Prescott. The main reason for this, according to Intel, is that the Pentium M short-pipeline core is poorly suited to Hyper-Threading.

Probably the same reason it was never implemented in the A64, with higher IPC and a shorter pipeline than the p4 it doesn't help too much.

 

[Duvie]

Originally posted by: Midnight Rambler

(Of course, AMD calls their SSE3 addition "SSE3", and Intel calls their AMD64 "EMT64", because they suck)

Yeah, like AMD would have stuck with the same name if it had been INTELSSE3 instead of just SSE3. You expect Intel to associate AMD's name with it's product ? NEITHER company would so something like that ...

Nice answer...funny how logic passes ppl so often when it appears they really just want to take a shot at INtel or opposing cpu company...

 

[ahock]

the story did not confirm anything but does this mean to say that we will not be seeing any Centrino laptop which supports hyper threading??????

 

[Zebo]

All the deals are secret and speculation from anyone in this thread... who knows?

They simply agreed to stop sueing each other back in 1995 and share some stuff. What stuff, how much, how much money involved is never talked about.

Found a link to deal:

AMD, Intel finally settle dispute
By Brian Fuller

SAN JOSE, Calif. -- It's finally over. The corporate war between Intel Corp. and Advanced Micro Devices Inc. over intellectual-property rights ended last week, when they settled all outstanding lawsuits and agreed to negotiate future cross-licensing.

The settlement covered a half-dozen cases. It came after U.S. Magistrate Patricia Trumbull, presiding over a lawsuit involving the 486, told both sides to try to work out their differences.

They then brought to a close a bitter seven-year legal battle over patent, copyright and contract-law issues that raised and answered many intellectual property questions hanging over the electronics industry. Under the settlement, all litigation involving each company will be dropped. AMD will have a perpetual license to the microcode in the Intel 386 and 486 microprocessors but agreed that it has no right to copy any other Intel microcode, including that of the Pentium, the forthcoming P6 and 486 ICE (in-circuit emulation).

Intel and AMD will negotiate a new patent cross-license agreement that will take effect Jan. 1, 1996.

AMD will pay Intel $58 million in damages related to the in-circuit emulation case. There, Judge Trumbull found that AMD illegally copied the code from Intel's microprocessor, even though AMD never enabled the code. Intel will pay AMD the $18 million awarded by an arbitrator in a dispute involving the two companies' 1976 patent cross-licensing agreement.

AMD, which will drop its antitrust case against Intel, agreed to make no more than 20 percent of its 486 processors using Intel microcode at foundries. The agreement also gives AMD and its customers a license to Intel's Crawford '338 patent, covering memory management. Intel lost its claim on that patent in a similar case involving Cyrix Corp.


http://www.eet.com/news/95/hr832.html#Monday4
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

[ahock]

wow so in the future we may see AMD64 with hyper threading support????? Do you think AMD copied presidio and pacifica that to Intel's Vanderpool and LaGrande???

 

[BEL6772]

Presidio and Pacifica sound very similar to LaGrande and Vanderpool. I imagine that the two companies are sharing information and trying to standardize the interface to the technologies. It would be in the industry's best interest if the technology worked no matter whose chip was plugged in. Also, they both have to work with Microsoft, which has no desire to make two versions of software to do the same thing. They have probably agreed that if their independantly developed solutions turn out to be substantially the same that they won't sue one another. I really doubt that either company is engaged in wholesale copying, though.

BTW, EM64T stands for Extended Memory 64 Technology.

 

[prd00]

Nope.. AMD own hyperThreading patent as in here..
http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi...16&RS=PN/5,944,816

Abstract

A microprocessor including a context file configured to store multiple contexts is provided. The microprocessor may execute multiple threads, each thread having its own context within the microprocessor. In one embodiment, the present microprocessor is capable of executing at least two threads concurrently: a task and an interrupt service routine. Interrupt service routines may be executed without disturbing a task's context and without performing a context save operation. Instead, the interrupt service routine accesses a context which is independent of the context of the task. In another embodiment, the context file includes multiple interrupt service routine contexts. Multiple ISR context storages allow for nested interrupts to be performed concurrently. In yet another embodiment, the microprocessor is configured to execute multiple tasks and multiple interrupt service routines concurrently. Multiple tasks may be executed concurrently by the microprocessor in addition to executing multiple interrupt service routines concurrently. In still another embodiment, the microprocessor includes a primary context and multiple local context storages coupled to each of its execution units. A given execution unit may execute instructions referencing the primary context or the local context connected thereto.

Inventors: Dutton; Drew J. (Austin, TX); Christie; David S. (Austin, TX); Barnes; Brian C. (Round Rock, TX)
Assignee: Advanced Micro Devices, Inc. (Sunnyvale, CA)
Appl. No.: 649809
Filed: May 17, 1996

This is just a proof that HyperThreading was AMD's invention, which Intel claimed as theirs. While AMD64 which Intel will use with EM64T is claimed as also Intel's Invention.. Wow... will they claim that telephone as theirs too? And that Bell stole their invention like they told the IDF about AMD?
Oh.. sorry.. they invented my wife.. alright.. Now tell me, who copies who??

 

[Wingznut]

Oh jeez... :roll:

 

[prd00]

Oh, and it is filed at 1996.. AMD already got HyperThreading technology since 1996. They just didn't use it, or perhaps use them in a way we don't recognize.

 

[LTC8K6]

Yeah, AMD invented everything!

Too bad about that cross licensing agreement they have with Intel...... :beer:

 

[prd00]

Not exactly.. some of AMD's CPU are Intel's too, like those i386 instruction, and those K5/K6 sockets.

 

[Gamingphreek]

AMD processors wont benefit from Hypertthreading as they have a very short pipeline. A cache miss or something would not result in a huge performance gain.

As for SSE and 3dNow how bout this....
Should help... i asked this question a while back, its kinda complicated.

IIRC Intel had to pay a large sum of money for -64 bit extension. THey didn't do an even trade as SSE3 is not worth nearly as much as -64 extensions.

-Kevin

 

[foxkm]

Originally posted by: berkut7

Originally posted by: Nyati13

The two companies have a lot of cross-licensing with each other, so AMD gets to use SSE3 for free, and Intel gets to use AMD64 for free.
(Of course, AMD calls their SSE3 addition "SSE3", and Intel calls their AMD64 "EMT64", because they suck)

Didn't AMD call their SSE implementation 3DNow! Proffesional or something like that?

3dNOW is a different technology than SSE. 3dNOW was introducted in mid 1998 with the K6-2 series. SSE didn't come along until 1999 when the P3 was release as a drop in replacement to the P2

 

[Wingznut]

Originally posted by: Gamingphreek
IIRC Intel had to pay a large sum of money for -64 bit extension. THey didn't do an even trade as SSE3 is not worth nearly as much as -64 extensions.

Where did you get that from?

 

[DAPUNISHER]

Originally posted by: Wingznut

Originally posted by: Gamingphreek
IIRC Intel had to pay a large sum of money for -64 bit extension. THey didn't do an even trade as SSE3 is not worth nearly as much as -64 extensions.

Where did you get that from?

Coming here is getting to be like reading quotes from Baghdad Bob for you now isn't it?

 

[Gamingphreek]

Originally posted by: DAPUNISHER

Originally posted by: Wingznut

Originally posted by: Gamingphreek
IIRC Intel had to pay a large sum of money for -64 bit extension. THey didn't do an even trade as SSE3 is not worth nearly as much as -64 extensions.

Where did you get that from?

Coming here is getting to be like reading quotes from Baghdad Bob for you now isn't it?

?

At any rate i posted that a while back in the Highly Technical thread. I got a very nice definition of what went on i processor extensions.

-Kevin