Print 75 comment(s) - last by KrisFujiZ.. on Aug 15 at 5:58 PM

AMD launches a new website to educate the consumer on the evils of Intel

AMD is enjoying the fact the European Commission charged Intel for anticompetitive measures. The company enjoys the fact so much it has launched a new pseudo-advertising campaign website providing updates on the case. The new AMD website,, provides all the information you would ever need to know on the allegations. Additionally, the site provides information on antitrust, competition and procurement.

Of course, since it is an AMD site the information is going to favor AMD. There is no mention of the official response from Intel regarding the subject matter. All the industry quotes cited by AMD reflect negatively on Intel. Not that I am trying to defend Intel or anything, but only the European Commission has charged Intel. Nothing has been proven and until there is an official ruling on the issue, I reserve my opinion on Intel’s tactics.

At the end of the day, a corporation’s primary goals are to make money. I highly doubt AMD intends to educate buyers about a competitive marketplace. However, since it is the only direct Intel competitor, it wants a bigger slice of pie. The company enjoyed major growth with the launch of Opteron and Athlon 64. The company also struck a major deal with Dell – a once Intel only house.

Sadly, like every other company, with growth and a performance-leading product, they get arrogant. The once great Intel lost the battle to 1.0 GHz to AMD’s Athlon and moved towards the clock-happy Netburst architecture. While the Netburst architecture, in its later days, had no troubles beating out the Athlon XP, the Athlon 64 and Opteron was a tougher sell.

AMD was in the lead for quite a bit, through the end of Northwood and the lifetime of Prescott, Smithfield and Presler. This is where the arrogance sets in. AMD’s fabrication processes, processors and competition was a bit lackluster. The K8 architecture remains around, after launching over three years ago. AMD is barely pushing out 65nm products and continues to hock new 90nm products. Not much has really changed from the AMD lineup except the move to dual-core.

Intel saw the mistakes of its clock-happy era and arrogance and released Conroe. The company is also on a fast track plan of shrinking fabrication processes every other year and launching completely new architectures in-between. AMD could learn a thing or two from Intel’s stringent roadmap.

I will give AMD the benefit of the doubt though. They might have a killer next-generation product, but from the early testing I have performed on Barcelona, there is no light at the end of the tunnel -- with the K10 generation at least. However, AMD isn’t planning to issue DVT samples of Barcelona to partners until later this month. Who knows, maybe they somehow gained an extra 10% in clock-for-clock performance since then.

There is still light at the end of the tunnel in the long-run. AMD’s recent Technology Analyst day revealed interesting details of the company’s modular Fusion architecture. Maybe Fusion is just what AMD needs to swing the pendulum back into its favor. Either way, AMD has a tough road ahead.

The late launch of its quad-core processors, nearly a year after Intel, and the new Phenom branding will keep the marketing team busy. There’s a lot the company needs to do, but “breaking free” is the least of its problems.

Comments     Threshold

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

RE: wow
By Anh Huynh on 8/10/2007 3:58:34 PM , Rating: 1
The OEM business market is a big business, and as masher said, no one ever got fired for buying Intel. If a company has purchased Intel in the past, had good luck and no real quibbles with Intel hardware, what would compel them to just switch to AMD? Business buyers rarely stray away from familiarity.

Also Intel was able to offer a solid platform with its processors. AMD, for the most part, relied on third party chipsets. Even the early AMD chipsets were a bit shoddy, then there was VIA, SIS and such. I'm sorry, if I was a business buyer, I'd buy Intel, simply because they were able to supply a solid platform and processor.

Hopefully AMD's acquisition of ATI will allow them to deliver a single branded platform solution. But, as masher pointed out above, it may be years before a business buyer would even consider it.

RE: wow
By omnicronx on 8/10/2007 4:28:03 PM , Rating: 2
I fully understand what you both are saying. And i know intel will be chosen because of familiarity. I think platform has a lot less to do with it though. People put far far too much faith into thinkig Intel platforms are more stable.

One fact i will agree upon is that intel making their own chipset and boards does give people the illusion Intel products have better compatability among hardware(and its probably true to some degree, but its not day and night).

You keep mentioning it will take years for AMD to get the 'trust' of buyers, well this is exactly what intel is slowing down with their strongarm techiques. As i said AMD has been around since the beginning, so there is no reason to believe it should take 30-40 years for them to penetrate the market as a 'trusted' cpu maker. Your example of Toyota and GM makes sense, but even toyota only started to have quality cars in the early 90's, that means it only took toyota 30 years max to go from nothing to taking over marketshare from GM, (which happened to be over 50% in 1980)

Dont you find that weird? if you can give me another example of this AMD/INTEL scenario happening i would be glad to hear it.

RE: wow
By masher2 on 8/10/2007 5:55:22 PM , Rating: 2
> "As i said AMD has been around since the beginning"

AMD's first competitive product was the K7, released in 1999 . It was cheaper than Intel, but ran hotter and early chipsets were unreliable. It wasn't until around the Palomino days that AMD had a product clearly superior on all fronts. And within a year or two of that time, AMD was gaining market share hand over fist. What's suspicious about that?

> even toyota only started to have quality cars in the early 90's, that means it only took toyota 30 years max to go from nothing "

Eh? Toyota was gaining market share in the late 1970s and early 80s, competing on cost and fuel efficiency only. Starting as far back as at least the mid-1980s, it was often outscoring GM and Ford on quality surveys. Yet it didn't become #1 just recently.

RE: wow
By omnicronx on 8/11/2007 3:08:17 PM , Rating: 2
The k62 was their first competitive product, heres a quote from an article i happen to have from 1998
In the rapidly growing market for sub-$1,500 systems, PCs powered by AMD-K6 family processors captured a 54 percent market share -- the highest penetration we have achieved to date.
Keep in mind this was only for sub 1500$ pc's but in 1998 that happened to be 80% of all pc's sold and it was only for a quarter i think, but you get the point. They started to put pressure on Intel 10 years ago yet intel still has the business market cornered off, when budget pc's are what business's should be shopping for, just doesnt make sense to me.

Toyota may have been gaining market share, but not like they did in the 90's. Toyota had a grand total of one quality car before the 90's (camry) and even that could be disputed. Furthermore GM layed back pretending like they would be king forever, and they sure as hell were not as aggressive as Intel has been.

RE: wow
By masher2 on 8/11/2007 3:31:18 PM , Rating: 2
> "The k62 was their first competitive product...PCs powered by AMD-K6 family processors captured a 54 percent market share"

So, according to you, AMD's very first competitive product wound up outselling Intel in its target market? And this is "evidence of a Intel perpetually holding AMD back"? You might want to rethink your conclusion there.

> "Toyota may have been gaining market share, but not like they did in the 90's."

Toyota had a market share of 8% in 1990, and 9% in 2000. They didn't gain madly during the 1990s. The two periods they gained the fastest were 1975-1985 (doubling their share in this period) and 2000-2005 (a 50% gain in this period).

> "Toyota had a grand total of one quality car before the 90's (camry)"

You mean, beside the Corolla (3 times highest ranked subcompact before 1990), and the SR5...the vehicle that, in the late 70s, pretty much created the compact truck market. That one vehicle alone tripled Toyota's share of the light truck market in just 4 years.

RE: wow
By omnicronx on 8/12/2007 2:37:48 AM , Rating: 2
obviously i am misinformed about toyota, i always thought they're big jump was in the 90's, obviously i was wrong. But this aside,
So, according to you, AMD's very first competitive product wound up outselling Intel in its target market? And this is "evidence of a Intel perpetually holding AMD back"?
seems like you are putting words in my mouth here. All i am trying to show here, is that AMD has had a comparable chip since 1998, in which they gained significant market share, all to have it taken away by an inferior product each cpu refresh.(until now of course where for the first time in years, intel chips are superior on all fronts)
I am just trying to put it out there, thats all.

RE: wow
By omnicronx on 8/12/2007 2:41:01 AM , Rating: 2
and don't even get me started about industry supported standards like SSE.

RE: wow
By Lightning III on 8/10/2007 4:32:44 PM , Rating: 2


AND THE ONLY REASON Dell suddenly started carring AMD was overseas legal issues.

and I still rember the Intel Rep at Dell telling me how the P4 will scale to 6 ghz

anyway their ethics suck and it took a bunch of chip designers in Haifa Israel to pull their fat out of the fire

I hope AMD gets the 6 billion in intel profit's they deserve

RE: wow
By Treckin on 8/12/2007 6:03:39 PM , Rating: 5
My god Anh, you're an idiot.

This law suite has NOTHING to do with Intel's current tactics... AMD alleges that Intel had used shady handshake's and threats of price increases to lock AMD's products out of 90% of the OEM market. The suit states that between 1997 and 2004 (i believe) that Intel convinced the major OEM's, through loyalty pledges, to remain Intel Inside exclusively... That would be illegal...

SO PLEASE STOP SPOUTING MISINFORMED BS, its really quite unbecoming. AMD charges that their current poor performance is due to the fact that they are forced to compete with an illegitimately formed monopoly, and their lack of financial resources is due in large part to lost capitol as a result of Intel's anti-competitive behavior.

"Folks that want porn can buy an Android phone." -- Steve Jobs
Related Articles

Latest By Anh Tuan Huynh
More NVIDIA SLI Chipsets Around the Corner
September 25, 2007, 7:40 AM
NVIDIA Prepares New AMD IGPs
September 25, 2007, 7:39 AM
NVIDIA Launches Intel IGP
September 25, 2007, 7:25 AM
Intel Shows Off 32nm Test Shuttle
September 18, 2007, 4:34 PM
Intel Sets Official "Penryn" Launch Date
September 18, 2007, 1:17 PM
VIA Launches EPIA SN With 1.8 GHz Processor
September 17, 2007, 4:00 PM
Freescale Licenses AMD Technologies
September 17, 2007, 3:43 PM
AMD Adds Triple-Core Processors to Roadmap
September 17, 2007, 2:45 PM
Lenovo Announces Solar Power Capable Desktop
September 13, 2007, 2:00 PM

Most Popular ArticlesAre you ready for this ? HyperDrive Aircraft
September 24, 2016, 9:29 AM
Leaked – Samsung S8 is a Dream and a Dream 2
September 25, 2016, 8:00 AM
Yahoo Hacked - Change Your Passwords and Security Info ASAP!
September 23, 2016, 5:45 AM
A is for Apples
September 23, 2016, 5:32 AM
Walmart may get "Robot Shopping Carts?"
September 17, 2016, 6:01 AM

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