Print 15 comment(s) - last by Lakku.. on Jun 15 at 10:08 PM

Raza Microelectronics will acquire the Alchemy product lineup, hints at future AMD products

AMD and Raza Microelectronics have announced a new strategic partnership. The new strategic partnership will transfer AMD’s Alchemy processor product line to Raza Microelectronics, or RMI. Alchemy processors are MIPS processors typically used for embedded products such as the Jack PC and various handheld devices. Raza Microelectronics is a fab-less semiconductor company (FLSC) that produces a line of MIPS processors. With the new partnership Raza Microelectronics will take over the complete product lineup while AMD becomes an investor in Raza Microelectronics.

After the transfer is complete AMD’s processor lineup will consist of all x86 compatible processors (Geode, Athlon, Opteron, Sempron, Turion) while Raza Microelectronics will expand its MIPS processor lineup with the new Alchemy acquisition.

Atiq Raza, Raza Microelectronics chairman, added "RMI endorses AMD64 as the innovation platform for the industry, and fully embraces the Torrenza ecosystem development initiative.”  How Raza Microelectronics will embrace Torrenza technology was not mentioned.  AMD has mentioned that the company will offer embedded processors for its K8L architecture, and by using HTX and HT-3 interconnects from its K8L processors.  The push to consolidate all of AMD's interests into a MIPs-only corporation is perhaps the largest moved by AMD thus far to prove its commitment to the co-processor model.

Both companies are working on a seamless transition process to ease the transition processor for AMD Alchemy customers. There’s no word on whether Raza Microelectronics will continue to market under the Alchemy name or use its own product naming.

Comments     Threshold

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

By Kryptonite on 6/14/2006 3:46:34 AM , Rating: 2

hope that means a competitor to Ageia.

By Master Kenobi on 6/14/2006 8:49:36 AM , Rating: 2
Nah Ageia is sticking to physics processing, and right now nobody else is really trying to compete with that, except ATI and nVidia. We'll have to wait and see if Ageia is really on the right path here, but it might be more beneficial to integrate a physics processor chip onto graphics cards, and do it that way, but who knows, its still a relatively unproven idea.

By PT2006 on 6/14/2006 8:53:23 AM , Rating: 2
Nah Ageia is sticking to physics processing, and right now nobody else is really trying to compete with that

There's a reason for that. Aside from the whole concept being pointless and all.

By Regs on 6/14/2006 1:39:07 PM , Rating: 2
And a pity that is. Since all the software vendors want is cost efficient technology -- for them. Like the 7950XTX GTX X1900XTX GT SLI CROSSFIRE.

By Regs on 6/14/2006 1:45:40 PM , Rating: 2
And of course the FX 60 & p4EE

By Cincybeck on 6/14/2006 3:09:02 PM , Rating: 2
Would be nice if Ageia would create a drop-in for the K8L socket whether it uses S-F or not to use with the HT interconnects. I really don't see how adding physics onto a gfx card is better. It's just going to take away bandwidth and add extra latency on that 16x PCI-E lane.

By darkfoon on 6/15/2006 3:29:03 AM , Rating: 2
I'd love to see Ageia come out with a card (in the future, of course) that has an HTX connector.
From what I've heard, there's a bit of a lag in really physics intensive moments in games right now with the PCI interface.
This way, the CPU can quickly offload its physics processing to the ageia card, faster than sending it to the PCI bus.

By Lakku on 6/15/2006 10:08:17 PM , Rating: 2
While it's hard to say whether the lag during 'intensive moments' is not due to the PCI bus, it should be noted that GRAW, the game you speak of, is a software physics driven game with Ageia slapped onto it. Hence, it was not intended to use a PPU and actually used Havoc as its software physics. It's a poor example I believe, and though I am not here to defend Ageia, CellFactor without a PPU, at least the new one with cloth effects etc., performs poorly. So, in that showcase, the PPU makes a difference on performence, though everyone still seems to always use GRAW without looking underneath the surface to look for what may be causing the issue. Essentially, it's probably a case of adding extra effects on top of the software solution, meaning there is going to be overhead as both systems, instead of just one, are working on the same scene. Is this the case? I can't say for sure, but the PPU makes a difference in CF and no matter the case, I would much rather have a dedicated PPU as opposed to using an old or second graphics card, or using 'spare' graphics power to do physics. Either way, I'd like to see a PCI-e version of the PPU before any other conclusions are made.

"So, I think the same thing of the music industry. They can't say that they're losing money, you know what I'm saying. They just probably don't have the same surplus that they had." -- Wu-Tang Clan founder RZA
Related Articles

Copyright 2016 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki