backtop


Print 91 comment(s) - last by misbfa1.. on Nov 17 at 1:36 PM


  (Source: softsailor.com)
Intel, AMD kiss and make up

Intel and AMD have been involved in long-standing dispute over intellectual property and antitrust issues. Intel was fined $1.45B by the EU for its anticompetitive practices and last week, New York Attorney General Andrew Cuomo filed an antitrust lawsuit against Intel.

Cuomo had rather harsh words for Intel, stating, “Rather than compete fairly, Intel used bribery and coercion to maintain a stranglehold on the market. Intel’s actions not only unfairly restricted potential competitors, but also hurt average consumers who were robbed of better products and lower prices.”

However, Intel and AMD now appear to be making amends. The pair issued a joint statement today which reads, “While the relationship between the two companies has been difficult in the past, this agreement ends the legal disputes and enables the companies to focus all of our efforts on product innovation and development.”

As a part of the settlement, Intel will pay AMD $1.25 billion, AMD will drop all of its pending lawsuits against Intel, and the pair will enter into a new 5-year cross license agreement. In addition, Intel will "abide by a set of business practice provisions" in the future.

AMD CEO Dirk Meyer today championed the agreement, stating, "Today, I am pleased to announce the last major component of that transformation – in the form of a transparent and public agreement with Intel to create a level playing field in the x86 processor industry – taking us one big step closer to achieving our bold vision."

Meyer continued, adding, "Today marks the beginning of a new era... one that confirms that the game has changed for AMD. It is an important milestone for us, for our customers, our partners, and most important – for consumers and businesses worldwide. In addition, it represents the culmination many years of litigation and regulatory engagement."

Following the announcement, AMD shares are up 25 percent to $6.61 while Intel is up almost a percentage point to $20.05 as of 10:00 AM EST.



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

What will be AMD's excuse in the future be then?
By Superguy on 11/12/2009 10:46:10 AM , Rating: 0
What will be AMD's excuse in the future be then? For the last several years, they've blamed Intel for their woes. While some of it did have to do with Intel, AMD shot themselves in the foot repeatedly by resting on its laurels in the initial Hammer days when it had Intel on the ropes.

AMD proved it could be profitable when it offered people products people wanted to buy and were better than the competition.

Now that Intel has better products, and the playing field will be level with respect to business practices, if AMD can't turn their business around, what will their excuse be? Will they admit that their products just aren't that compelling compared to Intel offerings and work to fix it? Or will there be another scapegoat?




By weskurtz0081 on 11/12/2009 11:23:45 AM , Rating: 2
Who the hell knows that AMD might do IF certain things happens, wait and find out with the rest of us.


By just4U on 11/12/2009 11:34:48 AM , Rating: 3
They really don't have to supply any excuse.. as they are dealing with Chipzilla and no one expects them to be on par with Intel. It's just one less hurdle they have to overcome is all.


By fatedtodie on 11/12/2009 11:54:39 AM , Rating: 5
Not really in tune with what Intel did are you? It wasn't just Intel squeezing and bribing and all that. That cost revenue, which in turn stunted product AND R&D. So it is not an excuse, it was a REASON (please learn the difference). I would use a car analogy but people on this site automatically rate down for that.

Basically they were being smothered. Now they have potentially a chance to breathe. If Intel gives nvidia the same courtesy maybe we might have true competition again. Competition is good for all of us (even if you hate AMD) as it drives everyone to make better products.

And while Intel is leading the way it is with ALOT of AMD ideas. It wasn't until the i7 that Intel used a cache/core idea rather than a pooled cache, which ALL AMD multi-core chips do. AMD developed the more compatible x64 standard...

Intel does lead... for now, but hopefully they will lose market share to AMD and need to stay innovating and cost effective. AMD has always been better at the Ghz/price wars.


By Reclaimer77 on 11/13/2009 3:07:33 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
Not really in tune with what Intel did are you?


What they were ACCUSED of doing, not what they did. Correction.


By psychobriggsy on 11/12/2009 12:02:34 PM , Rating: 3
"when it had Intel on the ropes."

Technology-wise, yes.

But Intel was busy paying the OEMs to not use it, however good it was. AMD offered an OEM 1 million free CPUs, but because that would have meant the OEM wouldn't get their Intel payback cheque it wasn't accepted.

That's why Intel was to blame for all AMDs woes. They didn't get the returns to invest in their own future designs, and thus they fell behind.


RE: What will be AMD's excuse in the future be then?
By Mint on 11/12/2009 12:12:32 PM , Rating: 2
There is no excuse. In the past, we were all baffled why AMD couldn't break 20% market share when Intel's crappy P4 was getting trounced in all metrics. That's mostly what these lawsuits were about - the past.

Now Intel actually has the best processors, so they deserve their success. All AMD can do is hope their engineers can figure out the same things Intel's have in boosting IPC, and that Global Foundaries doesn't keep falling further behind Intel's fabs.

Either that, or hope that Intel decides to revel in huge margins rather than continue to force AMD into the red. This is quite possible, as CPUs are getting too cheap for Intel's liking anyway. NVidia did the same thing in the G7x days.


By weskurtz0081 on 11/12/2009 12:14:42 PM , Rating: 2
It's not just about the past, it's about how the past has hurt AMD's future.


By Master Kenobi (blog) on 11/12/2009 12:26:35 PM , Rating: 2
You do realize back when the Athlon was king, AMD was selling their processors as fast as they could make them. In the P4 era, AMD was simply not large enough to produce processors to meet demand. Intel kept their large market share because they could deliver on demand. I remember Dell forcing AMD to guarantee processor inventories prior to signing a deal with them. As soon as AMD started to supply Dell, channel chips dried up rapidly as AMD was unable to keep up demand.

I expect AMD to not pass 20% until they can get the new fab in New York online.


By William Gaatjes on 11/12/2009 12:39:44 PM , Rating: 1
You forget the little cross license agreement details that prevented AMD from using external chip foundries like for exampl TSMC. AMD was to only make x86 cpu's at their own foundries. THat was the reason AMD could not make more. AMD did not had enough production capacity and AMD was not allowed to go to other foundries. If my memory services me right, that is.


By weskurtz0081 on 11/12/2009 1:38:24 PM , Rating: 1
Basically, Intel was trying to make it prohibitively expensive for other companies to rival them in the X86 market.


RE: What will be AMD's excuse in the future be then?
By molgenit on 11/13/2009 8:14:45 AM , Rating: 3
Your right, however that is NOT illegal nor has that changed. That would also have been a sticking point in any trial, basically AMD had to present the case that Intel forced them to sell at a lower price, and thus they lost profits, not that Intel stopped them from selling more since they simply could not. That (and of course the immediate need for cash)is probably the reason for the settlement.


By weskurtz0081 on 11/13/2009 11:36:00 AM , Rating: 1
The cross license agreement actually HAS changed. Now, AMD will be able to use external foundries to make chips.


By William Gaatjes on 11/13/2009 12:26:54 PM , Rating: 1
Indeed.

http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?...

quote:
Out of this settlement come four major things for AMD:

1. $1.25 billion in cold, hard cash.
2. Intel will stop doing things that they and AMD agree they shouldn’t be doing.
3. The right to not have to produce x86 CPUs in-house.
AMD can go fabless.


4. The right to have their x86 processors fabricated anywhere of AMD’s choosing .


By William Gaatjes on 11/14/2009 3:02:09 AM , Rating: 2
We got rated down. Somebody does not like the truth even if it is partial. :)

But i remember that it was not an all or nothing case. It was percentage wise. AMD was able to outsource but on a severe limited amount. As far as i can remember it was 20 percent and that was being done at Chartered semiconductor based in Singapore.


By bruce24 on 11/13/2009 1:54:35 PM , Rating: 2
re: we were all baffled why AMD couldn't break 20% market share

But they did from Q4 of 2005 through Q1 of 2008, except for Q1 2007 where it dropped un der 20%. The high was 25.3% in Q4 of 2006.


RE: What will be AMD's excuse in the future be then?
By niaaa on 11/12/2009 12:16:34 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Now that Intel has better products


This has to be proven, the I7 does not represent the whole market, and also is way overpriced.

In mid to low range AMD has the best products.


By Master Kenobi (blog) on 11/12/2009 12:27:12 PM , Rating: 1
Since the introduction of the Core 2 Duo, Intel has held the price/performance crown.


By niaaa on 11/12/2009 12:30:58 PM , Rating: 2
Phenom II X3 anyone ? Athlon II X4 ?

I'm sorry but when you look at benchmarks the latest AMD CPU's have more horsepower for the money.

Even my Phenom II X4 965 competes with intel CPUs that are 50 euros more expensive, and I don't count the motherboard


By niaaa on 11/12/2009 12:31:21 PM , Rating: 1
Phenom II X3 anyone ? Athlon II X4 ?

I'm sorry but when you look at benchmarks the latest AMD CPU's have more horsepower for the money.

Even my Phenom II X4 965 competes with intel CPUs that are 50 euros more expensive, and I don't count the motherboard


By nafhan on 11/12/2009 12:35:59 PM , Rating: 2
Intel has definitely held the performance crown. The price/performance winner is almost always in the low-midrange area (where AMD is very competitive). The winner there has been going back and forth between the two every time one of them comes out with a new chip/manufacturing process or lowers prices. I would say AMD has had the price/performance crown more often than not during that time, but it has been at the expense of profit margins.


By just4U on 11/12/2009 12:39:02 PM , Rating: 1
I'd have to say they hold the performance crown but price? MMM not so much. Since the Launch of the Phenom 2 I haven't bought any of Intel's lower end offerings. Amd's lineup was just to much of a good deal to pass up on at that price point.

Im sure you've had the oportunity to get on some of those Phenom2 setups Kenobi so you know what I am talking about.


By Reclaimer77 on 11/13/2009 3:16:36 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
This has to be proven, the I7 does not represent the whole market, and also is way overpriced.


Hello this is five months ago calling to remind you about the i5. Might wanna look it up.


"There's no chance that the iPhone is going to get any significant market share. No chance." -- Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer

Related Articles













botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki