Texas Instruments will no longer make ARM for phones/tablets (OMAP)

[NostaSeronx]

Not sure if my sarcasmeter is broken but amd uses codenames from Formula 1 venues... Barcelona, interlagos, abu dhabi, etc...at least for the server parts.

They dropped that it is now named after Towns or Cities. The problem with F1 names is that they go fast but crash hard! <-- Joking

The names Abu Dhabi, Seoul, and Delhi were chosen because the foundries AMD will be using in the future are near those tracks.

 

[hans007]

This was foreseen a long time ago, it was why TI got out of the advanced CMOS process node development in the first place beginning with 45nm. They couldn't compete with Qualcomm, contracts are signed 4yrs in advance and we knew all the way back then that we lost pretty much all the business that was going to be had 4 yrs later. We went from ~80% marketshare to 10% marketshare in that time.

If you look at what TI has done in the past 10yrs or so you will notice that they don't really innovate or create anything anymore. Once Tom Engibous took the helm, and Rich Templeton followed in his footsteps, the business of TI is basically about acquisition. They acquire companies that have already innovated and then TI scales them up volume-wise because it has the fabs to do that.

It isn't a bad way to do business, TI's financials are solid, but the innovation engines of TI have long gone cold and the reality of their once crown-gems like OMAP becoming outdated and outmoded is the outcome of that.

Kind of sad this is how it is. But it is a good business model for stable profits. Works even better in software actually.

I worked at Symantec for a while and another place that we eventually got bought by IBM. Without fabs you just buy startups and just need a bigger sales force. Its sad that this is how it is since a t company really innovating just gets sucked into a large org once their vc investors decide they are getting enough instead of growing and innovating more.

Its kind of a wonderful nvidia is still its own company

 

[SPBHM]

They dropped that it is now named after Towns or Cities. The problem with F1 names is that they go fast but crash hard! <-- Joking

The names Abu Dhabi, Seoul, and Delhi were chosen because the foundries AMD will be using in the future are near those tracks.

Abu Dhabi is also used for a GP, and there is a Korean GP (400km away from Seoul), also the Indian GP is held near Delhi


I still have a 386 from TI I think,

 

[NostaSeronx]

Abu Dhabi is also used for a GP, and there is a Korean GP (400km away from Seoul), also the Indian GP is held near Delhi

I'm going to rephrase my what I said:
The names Abu Dhabi, Seoul, and Delhi are the capitals of the Grand Prix destinations because around those capitals AMD will have future foundries to produce MPUs/APUs/SoCs at. That is why AMD choose those names for the capitals not the tracks.

Abu Dhabi = Yas Marina
Seoul = Yeongam
Delhi = Buddh

Where previous server code names were named after the "tracks."

Magny Cours -> Interlagos -> Yas Marina
Istanbul -> Valencia -> Yeongam

Original 2012:
Terramar
Sepang

 

[SPBHM]

I'm going to rephrase my what I said:
The names Abu Dhabi, Seoul, and Delhi are the capitals of the Grand Prix destinations because around those capitals AMD will have future foundries to produce MPUs/APUs/SoCs at.

Abu Dhabi = Yas Marina
Seoul = Yeongam
Delhi = Buddh

Where previous server code names were named after the "tracks."

Interlagos -> Yas Marina
Valencia -> Yeongam

I may be wrong, but the original name for "Interlagos" (CPU) was Sao Paulo (back in 2008/2009), but before release they changed it...

 

[Idontcare]

What good is AMD without the x86 license? It's not transferable. And who wants to take on Intel?

I don't know the details of the x86 licensing agreement, but presumably if AMD could keep its x86 license despite eating ATI, then AMD can also merge with other entities as well and keep its x86 license.

How possible is it to have a technical merger but with AMD being the "acquiring" entity even if it's the smaller entity?

If they wanted to they probably wouldn't be dropping their OMAP line.

Technically TI could buy AMD and still do x86 because TI has its own x86 license.

At one time I personally was involved in the manufacturing of 486 processors in TI's DMOS5 fab. (this was mid 90's).

TI didn't want to stay in the x86 business. They saw it as having worse financials (because of Intel) than the memory/ram market.

So we shut down our x86 business once the 486 chips were no longer sellable and we kept making ram. Then we saw ram as being worthless too so we sold our ram business (and memory fabs) to Micron in the late 90's.

Regarding Cyrix, really a disgusting story of challenged ethics at TI. The story goes that there were these three TI engineers who were good at designing DSP's and they really thought TI should get into the x86 business. So they pulled together a proposal and made the pitch to management that management should create an x86 business project (and put these three engineers on the team).

TI business management said "no, not worth TI's time and effort" and told the three engineers to get back to work designing DSP's for calculators.

Well the three engineers decided management couldn't see the opportunity for what it was worth and so they quit TI to form Cyrix. Cyrix was headquartered in Richardson, literally across the street from TI's North campus (where all the Dallas fabs were back then).

Cyrix designed their 386 processor but they needed someone to manufacture it - they needed a foundry (there is another sad story of missed opportunity by TI there) and naturally they approached TI about it.

TI said "sure, we'll fab that for you" and secured an x86 license from Intel. Cyrix never had an x86 license but TI did which is why Intel didn't/couldn't sue TI for making the Cyrix chips but they could/did sue Cyrix.

But then TI saw $$$ in x86 and we had the contract written with Cyrix such that we basically got equal rights to their cpu designs. Basically we legally stole their design and before Cyrix realized what they had signed we were shipping TI-branded 386 processors out the door that were solely Cyrix designed.

Cyrix was pissed but powerless to do anything, so when they had a chance to jump ship and go to IBM for foundry services for their 5x86 chips they did just that.

So all we had at TI were Cyrix's design for the 386 and the 486, we had no inhouse expertise in making even those designs so we certainly couldn't jump feet first into a pentium-class design and no one on the planet would touch us with a 10ft pole to founder their x86 designs so we had no one else to steal from. So we pulled out of the x86 market once we couldn't make any money on the aging 486 chips.

Pretty crappy of TI, and rather ironic how it all played out. I had no idea at the time it was happening, only when we engineers found out that the cyrix account went to IBM for the 5x86 did we start to hear tidbits about the backstory.

 

[thilanliyan]

I'm going to rephrase my what I said:
The names Abu Dhabi, Seoul, and Delhi are the capitals of the Grand Prix destinations because around those capitals AMD will have future foundries to produce MPUs/APUs/SoCs at. That is why AMD choose those names for the capitals not the tracks.

Abu Dhabi = Yas Marina
Seoul = Yeongam
Delhi = Buddh

Where previous server code names were named after the "tracks."

Magny Cours -> Interlagos -> Yas Marina
Istanbul -> Valencia -> Yeongam

Original 2012:
Terramar
Sepang

I really like the F1 style naming scheme but mostly because I'm a F1 fan...to me the names are much better than the Intel naming scheme...just wish the performance matched...

 

[SPBHM]

pretty interesting post @Idontcare; some dirty business...

I think my TI 386 have a Cyrix logo, but I'm not sure

 

[Idontcare]

pretty interesting post @Idontcare; some dirty business...

I think my TI 386 have a Cyrix logo, but I'm not sure

Unfortunately for Cyrix it was the proverbial "out of the frying pan and into the fryer" kind of a move when they went to IBM.

IBM swung a deal where for every chip they shipped to Cyrix they (IBM) could keep one for themselves to be rebranded and sold as an IBM 5x86 chip.

That probably seemed like an OK tradeoff to people at Cyrix until one day when IBM decided they wanted to sell a bunch of their x86 inventory quickly and so they undercut Cyrix's prices in the open market.

For a long time (months and months) you could buy any equivalent PR rated chip from IBM for a good $10-$20 less than its identical sibling with the Cyrix label silk-screened on it.

Total dick move on IBM's part, but by then the guys at Cyrix were probably use to life in the x86 lane.

 

[nismotigerwvu]

IDC,

Do you know if TI still has an active X86 license or has it lapsed in way shape or form? I've always wondered about how these were setup, especially since the only designs they used are all off patent now.

 

[ShintaiDK]

The ARM business is also terrible cruel. Smartphone and tablet makers can change CPUs, even CPU uArchs with the blink of an eye. (As we can also see with the merciless rapid changes of who makes what.)
Not to mention the very shifting trends in the segments. One day you are in, the other day you are out. And with Atoms gearing up for a frontal full fledged assault. TI made the smart move, because the future certainly wont be any brighter for such products.

 

[Idontcare]

IDC,

Do you know if TI still has an active X86 license or has it lapsed in way shape or form? I've always wondered about how these were setup, especially since the only designs they used are all off patent now.

I don't know for certain. It seems like an odd thing for TI to keep paying to cross-license all these years but according to wikipedia they do have an x86 license still.

 

[ikachu]

Not sure if this is the right thread for it, but I guess what exactly does an 'x86 license' entail nowadays? I know the 486 patents are all expired; and then Pentium came out in 1993 so I assume those patents will expire pretty soon. Is the license just for ISA extensions like MMX and SSE and things like that?

Or does it also include general CPU design patents that would be necessary for creating a modern, competitive CPU?

 

[Idontcare]

Not sure if this is the right thread for it, but I guess what exactly does an 'x86 license' entail nowadays? I know the 486 patents are all expired; and then Pentium came out in 1993 so I assume those patents will expire pretty soon. Is the license just for ISA extensions like MMX and SSE and things like that?

Or does it also include general CPU design patents that would be necessary for creating a modern, competitive CPU?

It is unlikely that anyone who knows the answer is at liberty to divulge the answer in the public domain.

What we do know is that whatever is covered by the "x86 license" it appears to be enough that Via was keen to secure a renewal of said license, and that Nvidia was attempting to secure said license in exchange for something north of a billion dollars (but Intel refused) because without said license Nvidia could not pursue building an x86 compatible chip themselves.

I'm guessing that the license itself is technically needed for only the most recent additions to the x86 ISA, but the real necessity for the cross-license comes in the form of all the IP that is needed to get the IPC up to something competitive with today's x86 processors.

So without a license you could probably build yourself a pentium-compatible x86 processor but it would run like a dog even compared to a pentium of 20yrs ago unless you also had access to all the tricks that went into engineering the microarchitecture as well.

(that is actually how cyrix eventually got their initial x86 license - they were being sued by Intel for not having an x86 license but Intel had used some Cyrix IP to speed up their pentiumII chips so Cyrix cross-sued for IP violation and they both settled to cross-license x86 and the cyrix patents - moral of the story is that it is easier to ask for forgiveness than to beg for permission )

 

[ikachu]

Thanks for the informative post IDC. So, when people talk about Intel revoking AMD's X86 license if they are acquired by another company... couldn't the company that bought AMD turn around and revoke Intel's license for AMD's patents (mainly X86-64)? Or is that specifically prohibited by the settlement agreement between Intel and AMD?

 

[HopJokey]

Thanks for the informative post IDC. So, when people talk about Intel revoking AMD's X86 license if they are acquired by another company... couldn't the company that bought AMD turn around and revoke Intel's license for AMD's patents (mainly X86-64)? Or is that specifically prohibited by the settlement agreement between Intel and AMD?

It is possible, but again why would a company do this?

 

[Idontcare]

Thanks for the informative post IDC. So, when people talk about Intel revoking AMD's X86 license if they are acquired by another company... couldn't the company that bought AMD turn around and revoke Intel's license for AMD's patents (mainly X86-64)? Or is that specifically prohibited by the settlement agreement between Intel and AMD?

Supposedly (and believably) it is prohibited by the contract.

Basically the contract is set so neither side is harmed by the other's actions, but they are harmed by their own actions.

AMD's action of being bought would not harm Intel, Intel's access to x86-64 would continue but AMD's access to Intel's portion would be null and void, and vice versa if Intel did something that was bad (there were some specifics mentioned by AMD the last time they had a big legal battle, something about the way Intel markets their chips is no longer allowed, just an example).

But the contracts do have expirations and renewal dates, so if someone bought AMD and all of AMD's patents then they would have that as a big bargaining stick for renegotiating the contracts. No question.

But as others keep pointing out, the lack of x86 competition is not because of a lack of x86 licenses (save for NV perhaps) but for a lack of companies wanting to go head-to-head with Intel in the x86 space.

Really you have to be extremely well-endowed as a company to have any hopes of outspending Intel for enough years to not only catch up with the juggernaut but to also surpass it.

Intel is spending >$8B R&D per year to accomplish what they accomplish. TSMC spends $1B. Nvidia spends $1B. AMD spends $1.5B. Qualcomm spends $2B.

Nobody is on pace to even catch up with Intel in x86, let alone pass them up.

So who in their right mind would buy AMD and proceed to soak $10B a year into them just in hopes of maybe someday removing Intel from its position of dominance in the x86 segment?

Steve Jobs and Apple could have attempted it, he had the moxy and access to the cash, but he also had the business sense to know he could make even more money by investing that money into something that wasn't x86. And he did.

JHH doesn't have the money, even though he very much wanted to open a can of whoop-ass on Intel.

So that is why this basically comes down to being an academic debate at best, even if what we are talking about were possible (that is even if someone could buy AMD and retain or negotiate a new x86 license) what successful business or business person would see that as a being a good idea?

 

[jpiniero]

But as others keep pointing out, the lack of x86 competition is not because of a lack of x86 licenses (save for NV perhaps) but for a lack of companies wanting to go head-to-head with Intel in the x86 space.

That and it's not necessary. x86 has survived as long as it has largely because of Microsoft's dominance. Now Microsoft's monopoly is crumbling to pieces, taking the need for x86 with it.

 

[bononos]

........
I'm guessing that the license itself is technically needed for only the most recent additions to the x86 ISA, but the real necessity for the cross-license comes in the form of all the IP that is needed to get the IPC up to something competitive with today's x86 processors.
......

So without a license you could probably build yourself a pentium-compatible x86 processor but it would run like a dog even compared to a pentium of 20yrs ago unless you also had access to all the tricks that went into engineering the microarchitecture as well.
......

Why would Intel proprietary microarchitecturing tricks be necessary for a new comer to build their own x86 compatible cpu with good performance (as you said)? Didn't AMD and other competitors build their own cpus under clean room conditions?

 

[SickBeast]

Crazy thought, could TI buy AMD? My god.....

IMO IBM is the only company that could buy AMD and turn them around.

As for the x86 license, if AMD loses theirs through a sale then Intel would have to sell one to someone else otherwise they would be a monopoly.

 

[Mr. Pedantic]

IMO IBM is the only company that could buy AMD and turn them around.

As for the x86 license, if AMD loses theirs through a sale then Intel would have to sell one to someone else otherwise they would be a monopoly.

Ooh, IBM vs Intel in x86. Who would win?

 

[Sable]

Always enjoy reading your posts IDC, interesting stuff.

 

[Coup27]

Always enjoy reading your posts IDC, interesting stuff.

+1.

 

[ShintaiDK]

Ooh, IBM vs Intel in x86. Who would win?

Intel without a sweat. IBM made x86 CPUs before and stopped because they couldnt compete.

IMO IBM is the only company that could buy AMD and turn them around.

As for the x86 license, if AMD loses theirs through a sale then Intel would have to sell one to someone else otherwise they would be a monopoly.

Plenty still got x86 licenses. But I think you dont understand the economics in it. Throwing money into a deep black hole without no chance to get it back is not something thats going to happen. Also IBM dont want to make hardware, they only want to sell you service contracts. Thats where their business model is going because its more profitable. They only sell x86 servers and produce big tin CPUs to make sure you also buy the contracts. In short, nobody in their right mind want to compete with Intel in x86. AMD is only there because they are forced to. They dont have anywhere else to go. And again, IBM made x86 before and got their rearend spanked.

IBM is close to gone in the foundry business as well, because they cant make real money due to their tiny size. By each node the amount of players gets smaller and smaller. Soon only TSMC, Samsung and Intel will be left.

 

[Idontcare]

Why would Intel proprietary microarchitecturing tricks be necessary for a new comer to build their own x86 compatible cpu with good performance (as you said)? Didn't AMD and other competitors build their own cpus under clean room conditions?

AMD cross licenses more from Intel beyond just the x86 license, and Intel from AMD. There is a lot of IP that goes into branch predictors, cache functionality, prefetchers, clock distribution, layout, power-reduction circuitry, etc.

Look at it from another angle - there is a reason it took ~$2B and >4yrs for AMD to create the bulldozer microarchitecture and it wasn't because they forgot to press the "start optimization" button on their computers

Chip design is expensive, ridiculously expensive. And when companies spend that much money creating a product they are going to want to know that they have some manner of legal protection over their investment.