Send News. Want a reply? Read this. More in the FAQ.   News Forum - All Forums - Mobile - PDA - RSS Headlines  RSS Headlines   Twitter  Twitter
Customize
User Settings
Styles:
LAN Parties
Upcoming one-time events:

Regularly scheduled events

AMD Sues Intel

AMD Files Antitrust Suit Against Intel reports an antitrust lawsuit filed by Advanced Micro Devices versus Intel:

SUNNYVALE, Calif. - Chip maker Advanced Micro Devices Inc. has filed an antitrust lawsuit against Intel Corp., accusing its market-dominating competitor of forcing customers into exclusive deals to keep them from buying AMD microprocessors.

The suit, filed Monday in U.S. District Court in Delaware, alleges Intel has bullied 38 companies, including large-scale computer-makers, wholesale distributors and retailers, to secure a monopoly in the highly competitive x86 microprocessor market.

The microprocessors run the Microsoft Windows, Solaris and Linux families of operating systems. Santa Clara-based Intel's current market share of x86 microprocessors is about 80 percent of worldwide sales by unit volume and 90 percent by revenue.

"Everywhere in the world, customers deserve freedom of choice and the benefits of innovation ó and these are being stolen away in the microprocessor market," said Hector Ruiz, president and chief executive officer of the Sunnyvale-based AMD.

He added that "people from Osaka to Frankfurt to Chicago pay the price in cash every day for Intel's monopoly abuses."

An Intel representative could not be reached before business hours Tuesday.

View
77 Replies. 4 pages. Viewing page 1.
< Newer [ 1 2 3 4 ] Older >

77. Re: It is amazing Jun 29, 2005, 11:03 Creston
 
Yeah, it literally dates back to when Intel licensed the 80386 ISA out to a few vendors. The contract was apparantly not as ironclad as Intel would've liked it to be, and it gave AMD the right to clone future chips as well. The flip side, however, is that any improvements that AMD makes are automatically licensed to Intel as well.

So, AFAIK, Intel didn't pay a dime for it. They didn't have to.


Ah, okay, I wasn't aware of that. Wow, imagine that, two competitors basically sharing information. How often does that happen?

Creston

 
Avatar 15604
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
76. Re: No subject Jun 29, 2005, 10:38 Tim
 
there is no merit is suing  
___________________
I'll sell your memories for fifty pounds per year.
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
75. Re: It is amazing Jun 29, 2005, 09:24 Zathrus
 
They HAVE a cross licensing deal?

Yeah, it literally dates back to when Intel licensed the 80386 ISA out to a few vendors. The contract was apparantly not as ironclad as Intel would've liked it to be, and it gave AMD the right to clone future chips as well. The flip side, however, is that any improvements that AMD makes are automatically licensed to Intel as well.

So, AFAIK, Intel didn't pay a dime for it. They didn't have to.

 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
74. Re: No subject Jun 29, 2005, 09:10 Creston
 
Hmm well I researched before I did my last upgrade and frankly AMD couldnt touch the intel 3.0c hyper threading chip, so I dunno what you are all talking about. Understand this is at the time I bought it, the 3.0c 800 FSB was the fastest thing around, best AMD could do was 533 FSB. Also AMD has had alot more f'd chips then intel.

I would strongly suggest that you do better research next time.


Compare dollar to dollar. And it has been back and forth. Creston, I was referring to dollar per dollar, back about two years ago Intel was killing AMD. Their chips were slightly more expensive but you could overclock them more. An overclocked P4 was outperfoming a similarly priced overclocked AMD.


As I said, AMD has had the upper hand more often, but it has by no means been the slaughter some people are making it out to be.



Don't any of you read Anandtech regularly?


daily, actually. I also hang out on their tech support forums from time to time, when I'm bored.
I'm sorry Beamer, but in my recollection, there has NEVER been a time when "dollar for dollar" Intel was anywhere NEAR AMD. How could they be? It's only been up until about a year and a half ago that their cpus have been even slightly affordable. It used to be that an Intel equivalent of an AMD cpu was almost twice as expensive. And you think that dollar for dollar, Intel was better??

As for overclocking, AMD has had a hardon against it for awhile, which the really really truly hardcore have always found annoying, but overclocking is really a very tiny segment of the market, so basing an argument that says "Well, Intel > AMD" on it seems a bit flawed.

Creston

This comment was edited on Jun 29, 09:14.
 
Avatar 15604
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
73. Re: It is amazing Jun 29, 2005, 09:07 Creston
 

Thwap. You deserve a beating for that. Thwap.

You mean just like AMD has copied the entire x86 ISA including MMX, SSE, SSE2, and SSE3?

The only reason AMD could do that is because they have cross-licensing agreements with Intel (which date back to the 80386), and vice versa (which is why Intel could "copy" x86-64).


They HAVE a cross licensing deal? Because I was under the impression that Intel basically copied the x86-64 architecture, and AMD never saw a dime for it...

And if you've read this far, you get a cookie

I'm on this no carb deal for two weeks, I can't have cookies

Creston


 
Avatar 15604
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
72. No subject Jun 29, 2005, 08:33 TorTorden
 


Innocently leaves cookie jar in plain sight.

leaves

----------------------------
Yes, I abuse grammar for a profession.
 
----------------------------
Yes, I abuse grammar by opening my mouth.
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
71. Re: No subject Jun 29, 2005, 05:52 1badmf
 
sigh... tim i'm not even going to write out a cogent reply to you. you are truly sad if you don't see the merit of AMD's complaint.

intel's business practices, after having read the entire text myself, are plainly monopolistic and uncompetitive. if you still support them after all they've done you should go live in cuba or china where state run monopolies are the way of life and, by the way, so is poverty and hunger.

 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
70. No subject Jun 29, 2005, 00:05 Tim
 
AMD needs not to act as if they are running to the headmasters office, because the bully has them naffed off.

AMD knows they have the Enthusiast sold; thatís the sector they spend a lot of development effort on, which is why they manufacture first-rate processors. Donít you see they want their needle dick in your cell phone and your icebox. How is that any good for you?...unless your icebox is not worth a toss, they want to become Intel.
 
___________________
I'll sell your memories for fifty pounds per year.
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
69. Why even buy Intel? Jun 28, 2005, 23:50 Narf2029
 
I haven't used an Intel since Intel's first 1GHz cpu that was outperformed by AMD's offerings at a significantly lower speed. It's almost like Intel broke the 1GHz barrier by just printing "1GHz" on their chips.

--Infantryman
Proud to be part of the ACASM.

"Is it so hard to teach a child not to shoot people?"
 
Huh? I'm sorry, I was thinking about cake.
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
68. Re: . Jun 28, 2005, 23:42 The Half Elf
 
FILTHY!?!

Might I kindly point you to the direction of a small town off the Sword Coast, where the Innkeeper/Bartender will tell you how clean Elfs are.. especially their backsides.

*licks the cookie and gives it back to Enahs*

Fine I don't like nuts anyway.

 
Avatar 12670
 
"I've never seen a feature like this before. It warms your ass. It's wonderful" -Walter Bishop
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
67. Re: No subject Jun 28, 2005, 22:30 Zathrus
 
as an end user I suppose the current state of affairs of market share is fine

And I'm sure you would've loved Standard Oil too. And AT&T as your only telecomm choice. And numerous other examples.

How that is good for the end user if a company gets greater return by suing then it does in building a better chip?

I dunno. How good is it for the end user if a company gets greater return by blackmailing retailers than it does in building a better chip? That's exactly what AMD is saying wrt Intel. And it's exactly what Japan has already found to be true.

It's pretty hard to claim that AMD hasn't been building the better chip. In fact, the only place that Intel has been beating AMD in benchmarks is with respect to SSE/SSE2/SSE3 optimizations which are all generated exclusively using Intel's own compiler. And that very same code doesn't work as well on AMD chips with the same instructions. Of course, there's an allegation in the lawsuit specifically regarding this. In Intel's defense, even if AMD is following the specs, Intel could easily have some proprietary on-die optimizations that the compiler is taking advantage of. And AMD could build their own compiler team to address the issue as well. It's not hard to load different code paths depending on what CPU is detected.

 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
66. Re: . Jun 28, 2005, 21:57 Enahs
 
You just saved me from reading 60+ posts of penis envy.

Some of us have been discussing more important things, like cookies!


"When I say your dumb name please stand up briefly, but then quickly drop to your knees and forsake all others before me."-Ignignokt

This comment was edited on Jun 28, 21:57.
 
Avatar 15513
 
I am free of all prejudice. I hate everyone equally.
- W. C. Fields
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
65. Re: No subject Jun 28, 2005, 21:52 Yosemite Sam
 
Yes you are right, at the time AMD didnt even have a bus that fast (been awile). So my decision was either intel or intel. When I bought my chip the athlon64 was just out and my chip beat it, at a lower cost. I will agree that 'now' AMD is on top becuase of their early jump into the 64bit realm and they have some sweet cpu's out there, no longer at a cheap price too. $1000 heh they were never that expensive, $500 at launch.

BTW
Pentium 4 3.12ghz 800 FSB HT

hypocrite

EDIT Semprons and Athlon XP's are better then a 3.0c, in your dreams (semprons are celerons, I wouldnt thouch either with a ten foot pole), intels hyperthreading chip is better then the first gen 64's too. But as I said, now the new 64's wail on everything, but back then intel ruled.

This comment was edited on Jun 28, 22:22.
 
Avatar 21539
 
PSN id PR345, PST - D3, GTA5, Borderlands 2, Grid 2, GTA4, BoS, RDR, GT5, COD WaW, KZ2, RAGE, Dirt2, MC LA, Skate2, LBP, Dead Nation - Wanna jam? Hit me up on PSN, Mention Blues News.

CIV4 MOD http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=326525
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
64. Re: . Jun 28, 2005, 21:39 Tigger
 
Once again another blues post that can be entirely summed up with:

"My penis is bigger!"
"No MY penis is bigger!"
"No, MINE is!"
"Doody head!"

Etc.

You just saved me from reading 60+ posts of penis envy.

Thanks and well said.

--
Tigger
"It's not the years, it's the mileage" ~Indiana Jones
 
Avatar 7252
 
--
Tigger
Vic Fontaine for President
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
63. Re: Yawn. Jun 28, 2005, 21:16 Beamer
 
AMD processors are superior to Intels and have been for a while. They Run cooler and are more efficient per MHZ


Running cooler is nice, but does not make a better processor.
More efficient per MHZ is nice, but if that were the true basis of computing power we'd all be using Apple.


What matters is raw power. I could care less if my desktop is hot, so long as it can be cooled. I could care less if my desktop is running at 5 Ghz so long as it's powerful as hell.

As mentioned, AMD has the edge right now. I'm using a P4, I'm enjoying it quite a bit, but it's because I found a deal with Dell that gave me a powerhouse cheaper than I could build. As I only need it two years, I went with it and have no regrets.

Like I said, though, those Dual Athlons are calling me.

 
-------------
Music for the discerning:
http://www.deathwishinc.com
http://www.hydrahead.com
http://www.painkillerrecords.com
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
62. Poor AMD. Jun 28, 2005, 20:52 StylezXP
 
They wait this long to file an anti-trust suit? I'm reminded of an old Counter-strike saying...


Somone call the Waaaaahmbulance!


 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
61. Re: No subject Jun 28, 2005, 19:55 Hellbinder
 
Hmm well I researched before I did my last upgrade and frankly AMD couldnt touch the intel 3.0c hyper threading chip, so I dunno what you are all talking about. Understand this is at the time I bought it, the 3.0c 800 FSB was the fastest thing around, best AMD could do was 533 FSB. Also AMD has had alot more f'd chips then intel.

That is totally and completely inacurate. You have to be a biased blind fanboy. AMD has never even had a 533mhz FSB that was INTEL. Intel had the fastest processor for about 3 months total time when they first came out with the HT processor. But you had to spend 1000$ on the chip alone at the time to get that level of performance.

For Gaming and basic applications Semprons, later generation Athlon XP's and especially Athlon 64's Just wail all over the Intel Lineup. Plus for the last couple years Amd's Processors have run much cooler and used less power.



Pentium 4 3.12ghz 800 FSB HT
Abit IC7-G MAXX2
1G Corsair DDR-400
40GB Raptor 10,000RPM SATA
120GB 7,000RPM SATA
[b]Radeon 9800XT 425/382 (CAT3.8/DX9) [color=red]3Dmark03 7074[/color][/b]
[color=blueompare [url]http://service.futuremark.com/compar
This comment was edited on Jun 28, 19:58.
 
The Whales name is Bob.
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
60. Re: Yawn. Jun 28, 2005, 19:46 Hellbinder
 
AMD has 16% of the market Share. That is hardly significant as some here are suggesting.

AMD processors are superior to Intels and have been for a while. They Run cooler and are more efficient per MHZ. There is simply no reason for them to not have 40% of the Market or Higher other than Intel are outright Cheating.

Its Time for Intel to take it on the Chin and get some new Business practices.

Pentium 4 3.12ghz 800 FSB HT
Abit IC7-G MAXX2
1G Corsair DDR-400
40GB Raptor 10,000RPM SATA
120GB 7,000RPM SATA
[b]Radeon 9800XT 425/382 (CAT3.8/DX9) [color=red]3Dmark03 7074[/color][/b]
[color=blueompare [url]http://service.futuremark.com/compar
 
The Whales name is Bob.
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
59. Re: . Jun 28, 2005, 19:31 SquirrelZero
 
Once again another blues post that can be entirely summed up with:

"My penis is bigger!"
"No MY penis is bigger!"
"No, MINE is!"
"Doody head!"

Etc.

 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
58. . Jun 28, 2005, 19:23 Com
 
Well Beamer, Intel was up not long ago when AMD's xp line came up against Northwood, but ever since amd64 Intel has been far behind in gaming performance. This gap just keeps widening and it really IS a slaughter today, but I can see your point that it hasn't always been like this. AMD had already lost an opportunity to break out with their first Athlon, but they didn't, and now they need something desparately to do it with the amd64.

 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
77 Replies. 4 pages. Viewing page 1.
< Newer [ 1 2 3 4 ] Older >


footer

.. .. ..

Blue's News logo