So AMD is suing Intel. First, I'd suggest reading through the 48-page complaint filed by AMD. Given that Vinney is in law school, I've seen a few of these things, but this one is surprisingly legible even for us non-legal types :)
I've known about this sort of stuff for quite some time, in fact, I'd say that out of the 48 pages AMD's legal team put together there's a lot missing. AMD told me that they aren't putting all cards on the table, but here are a couple of other things that I've seen personally:
I can't even begin to count the number of times where motherboard manufacturers have told me that they could not:
1) Send an AMD motherboard for review
2) Promote an AMD motherboard
3) Let us take pictures of an AMD motherboard
Out of fear of Intel retaliation. Remember the original Athlon days when no motherboard manufacturer would dare make a board for the K7? All of the frightened manufacturers were afraid of them losing their Intel chipset allocation if they supported the K7.
The same sort of stuff happened during the i820 days. Intel's first RDRAM based chipset was a complete flop, yet they offered no real SDRAM alternative. VIA did however, and Intel punished those manufacturers who didn't promote their i820 platforms or who too eagerly embraced VIA's solutions.
The list goes on and on.
What's my take on it? I'm all for competition based on technology and technological merit. Whenever Intel was faster we'd recommend them, and whenever AMD was faster, we'd do the same for them. Luckily, you all get it: AMD's market share among our readership is around 50% because you all generally purchase based on technology, performance and a lot of you are building your own systems, so these issues don't directly affect you. Obviously the rest of the market doesn't work that way, and I'd be glad to see that change; it benefits the end user and that's all I care about.
Right now AMD builds the best desktop CPUs, Intel offers the best value on dual core desktop CPUs and Intel has the best mobile chips. It would be nice if the entire market purchased based on those purely technological comparisons.
What will come of AMD's lawsuit? AMD told me that they are in this for the long haul and they aren't expecting to even go to trial in the next 18 months. I'm not sure what the end result will be, but I do know that things aren't entirely balanced today; and I am a fan of anything that drives innovation and produces better overall products for the end users.
One thing is for sure: I would hate for just AMD or Intel to exist, we need both and we need balance. If this lawsuit results in more balance and better competition based on technology rather than marketing ability, then more power to AMD.
Your thoughts?
I've known about this sort of stuff for quite some time, in fact, I'd say that out of the 48 pages AMD's legal team put together there's a lot missing. AMD told me that they aren't putting all cards on the table, but here are a couple of other things that I've seen personally:
I can't even begin to count the number of times where motherboard manufacturers have told me that they could not:
1) Send an AMD motherboard for review
2) Promote an AMD motherboard
3) Let us take pictures of an AMD motherboard
Out of fear of Intel retaliation. Remember the original Athlon days when no motherboard manufacturer would dare make a board for the K7? All of the frightened manufacturers were afraid of them losing their Intel chipset allocation if they supported the K7.
The same sort of stuff happened during the i820 days. Intel's first RDRAM based chipset was a complete flop, yet they offered no real SDRAM alternative. VIA did however, and Intel punished those manufacturers who didn't promote their i820 platforms or who too eagerly embraced VIA's solutions.
The list goes on and on.
What's my take on it? I'm all for competition based on technology and technological merit. Whenever Intel was faster we'd recommend them, and whenever AMD was faster, we'd do the same for them. Luckily, you all get it: AMD's market share among our readership is around 50% because you all generally purchase based on technology, performance and a lot of you are building your own systems, so these issues don't directly affect you. Obviously the rest of the market doesn't work that way, and I'd be glad to see that change; it benefits the end user and that's all I care about.
Right now AMD builds the best desktop CPUs, Intel offers the best value on dual core desktop CPUs and Intel has the best mobile chips. It would be nice if the entire market purchased based on those purely technological comparisons.
What will come of AMD's lawsuit? AMD told me that they are in this for the long haul and they aren't expecting to even go to trial in the next 18 months. I'm not sure what the end result will be, but I do know that things aren't entirely balanced today; and I am a fan of anything that drives innovation and produces better overall products for the end users.
One thing is for sure: I would hate for just AMD or Intel to exist, we need both and we need balance. If this lawsuit results in more balance and better competition based on technology rather than marketing ability, then more power to AMD.
Your thoughts?
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
111 Comments
View All Comments
TheChefO - Wednesday, July 6, 2005 - link
Anyone notice Anand seems to be missing?????When was the last time you say an update/post/article from him??????
******Where is Anand?********
EdisonStarfire - Wednesday, July 6, 2005 - link
Nice comments Anand. I agree completely.Steve:
AthlonXP 3000 = $98
An Athlon64 3000 = $132
It's called an onboard memory controller. Research !! Anyone would be stupid to buy the XP over the 64 unless they were just broke or only internet surfing.
David Shumpis - Tuesday, July 5, 2005 - link
You decide, it makes sense, Intel is pressuring OEM's in my opinion. It seems strange that Gigabyte is not offer certain boards at the release of the Intel Royal series.From : David Shumpis [ hal3200@peoplepc.com ] Question - 235181
Sent : 2005/6/27 04:01
Question : I just purchased the gigabyte 7800GTX video card. I am concerned that this card being long will interfer with the sata connecters towards the end of the card. My question is will it over hang and prohibit the use of the sata connecters?
I have been looking without any success for your Gigabyte GA-K8NXP-9 motherboard. This board would pair up nicely. Can you tell me why no USA online vendor can get stock concerning this board? CAN YOU SELL ME ONE? or at the least stock the online vendors> zipzoomfly is the only vendor that list it on their site but as out of stock> what gives with the high cost as well?
Answer : Dear Customer,Answer - 235181
No need to worry, as longer PCI-E cards will not interfere with the SATA2 connectors on the GA-K8NXP-SLI. The SATA cable may make contact with the PCB of the PCI-E cards, but this is within specifications.
The GA-K8NXP-9 release is on hold. I currently have no ETA. The current available model is the GA-K8N Ultra-9. The main difference is that DPS is not supported, and a WiFi card is not included on the latter.
Thank you for choosing Gigabyte products
From : David Shumpis [ hal3200@peoplepc.com ] Question - 236460
Sent : 2005/6/29 20:00
Question : The whole reason behind buyying the Gigabyte 7800GTX was to pair it up with a motherboard hat fits the setup. The Gigabyte GA-K8NXP-9 fits this. I am one to pair up video cards with motherboards. Since you have no ETA, unfortunately the SLI version is shy one needed pci slot and my next choice is your competition, BFG BFGRNF4U. Its not my first choice. This is why I stopped buying Asus, MSI motherboards. They never had stock on motherboards they claimed availability on their website, as your company does on their website concerning the GA-K8NXP-9. This is indeed unfortunate for me. I apologize for taking your time.
Thank you.
Answer : Thank you for choosing Gigabyte products. Answer - 236460
From : David Shumpis [ hal3200@peoplepc.com ] Question - 237134
Sent : 2005/7/1 02:50
Question : Are you still going to produce the The Gigabyte GA-K8NXP-9 motherboard?
Answer : Dear Customer, Answer - 237134
This model is in limited production and only available in the UK and Austrailia.
Thank you for choosing Gigabyte products
From : David Shumpis [ HAL3200@PEOPLEPC.COM ] Question - 237681
Sent : 2005/7/2 11:44
Question : Do you mean that you are not going to sell this motherboard in the USA? You sell more products here in America than any other country. What kind of answer is the last 2 post to my questions. I ask again are you going to sell the GA-K8NXP-9 in the USA? If not just say so. I can not believe that a company as yours in stepping backwards and hurting potential sales by not having product. Do you believe that you will increase sales this way? Can you sell me direct this motherboard?
Answer : Dear Customer,Answer - 237681
The GA-K8NXP-9 is limited and will probably not be available in the US market.
Thank you for choosing Gigabyte products
From : David Shumpis [ hal3200@peoplepc.com ] Question - 239009
Sent : 2005/7/6 05:26
Question : will you offer a newer MB that is equivalent, one with the DPS feature and is not SLI?
From : David Shumpis [ hal3200@peoplepc.com ] Question - 239043
Sent : 2005/7/6 07:40
Question : June 28, 2005
AMD sues Intel - Tuesday, Jun 28, 2005 2:03 PM
So AMD is suing Intel. First, I'd suggest reading through the 48-page complaint filed by AMD. Given that Vinney is in law school, I've seen a few of these things, but this one is surprisingly legible even for us non-legal types :)
I've known about this sort of stuff for quite some time, in fact, I'd say that out of the 48 pages AMD's legal team put together there's a lot missing. AMD told me that they aren't putting all cards on the table, but here are a couple of other things that I've seen personally:
I can't even begin to count the number of times where motherboard manufacturers have told me that they could not:
1) Send an AMD motherboard for review
2) Promote an AMD motherboard
3) Let us take pictures of an AMD motherboard
Out of fear of Intel retaliation. Remember the original Athlon days when no motherboard manufacturer would dare make a board for the K7? All of the frightened manufacturers were afraid of them losing their Intel chipset allocation if they supported the K7.
The same sort of stuff happened during the i820 days. Intel's first RDRAM based chipset was a complete flop, yet they offered no real SDRAM alternative. VIA did however, and Intel punished those manufacturers who didn't promote their i820 platforms or who too eagerly embraced VIA's solutions.
The list goes on and on.
What's my take on it? I'm all for competition based on technology and technological merit. Whenever Intel was faster we'd recommend them, and whenever AMD was faster, we'd do the same for them. Luckily, you all get it: AMD's market share among our readership is around 50% because you all generally purchase based on technology, performance and a lot of you are building your own systems, so these issues don't directly affect you. Obviously the rest of the market doesn't work that way, and I'd be glad to see that change; it benefits the end user and that's all I care about.
Right now AMD builds the best desktop CPUs, Intel offers the best value on dual core desktop CPUs and Intel has the best mobile chips. It would be nice if the entire market purchased based on those purely technological comparisons.
What will come of AMD's lawsuit? AMD told me that they are in this for the long haul and they aren't expecting to even go to trial in the next 18 months. I'm not sure what the end result will be, but I do know that things aren't entirely balanced today; and I am a fan of anything that drives innovation and produces better overall products for the end users.
One thing is for sure: I would hate for just AMD or Intel to exist, we need both and we need balance. If this lawsuit results in more balance and better competition based on technology rather than marketing ability, then more power to AMD.
Your thoughts?
Does this come into play? Is this why there was only limited amount of the The Gigabyte GA-K8NXP-9 . With the new release of your intel royal board?
Question - 239009
From : David Shumpis [ hal3200@peoplepc.com ]
Sent : 2005/7/6 05:26
Question : will you offer a newer MB that is equivalent, one with the DPS feature and is not SLI?
Answer - 237681
Answer : Dear Customer,
The GA-K8NXP-9 is limited and will probably not be available in the US market.
Thank you for choosing Gigabyte products
Question - 237681
From : David Shumpis [ HAL3200@PEOPLEPC.COM ]
Sent : 2005/7/2 11:44
Question : Do you mean that you are not going to sell this motherboard in the USA? You sell more products here in America than any other country. What kind of answer is the last 2 post to my questions. I ask again are you going to sell the GA-K8NXP-9 in the USA? If not just say so. I can not believe that a company as yours in stepping backwards and hurting potential sales by not having product. Do you believe that you will increase sales this way? Can you sell me direct this motherboard?
Answer - 237134
Answer : Dear Customer,
This model is in limited production and only available in the UK and Austrailia.
Thank you for choosing Gigabyte products
Question - 237134
From : David Shumpis [ hal3200@peoplepc.com ]
Sent : 2005/7/1 02:50
Question : Are you still going to produce the The Gigabyte GA-K8NXP-9 motherboard?
g2cris - Tuesday, July 5, 2005 - link
one word. EQUILLIBRIUM. If the government has to get involved to attain this, so be it.Pete Jenkins - Tuesday, July 5, 2005 - link
Regarding the console article I am really disappointed in Anand for not blogging an explanation as to why the article was removed. It is very unlike him to not be transparent on such things and is a let down. The article was great but silencing the press when the article is already in the wild and on many sites is a waste. The source can't be protected because of this - what is the real reason?Husted Steve - Tuesday, July 5, 2005 - link
#75 - ... you stink! kekekekekeke!Steve Husted - Tuesday, July 5, 2005 - link
#73: Cut the conspiracy theory crap. MS didn't delay Win64 "to allow sluggish Intel to catch up." Do you also believe that Elvis is alive and the CIA killed JFK? Come on.Microsoft and Intel have a love-hate relationship, and neither is tied to the other. MS wants to sell software and commoditize hardware. Intel wants to sell hardware and commoditze software. Mutually exclusive goals make a conspiracy very unlikely.
Hey, kids, let's put on our thinking caps and put down the reefer!
Define "a lot slower," please. A lot hotter? Until recently, you had to use a third-party fan/heatsink for AMD where the one that comes with the Intel processor was fine. More expensive? Yes, on the outset. You're paying for a name in the same way that you pay for a Rolex or Lexus. Intel charges what people are willing to pay. YOU might not be willing, but 80% of the market is.
Hey, I think people are stupid for buying Britney Spears albums because I think her music is terrible, but she still sells a lot of records and (at the time) was downloaded from P2P extensively. "Better" doesn't always get the sales. Marketing does. I can't remember the last time I saw an AMD commercial on TV, but I see many Intel commercials daily and Centrino marketing is ubiquitous.
Please cite a link for the "incompetence" you claim.
I believe the branch predictor not the instruction queue was actually improved in Prescott to make up for the increased pipeline. As proof, performance between equal MHz Prescott and Northwood is about the same. Your inability to get your facts straight immediately discredits your arguments.
#74: Thanks for being an anonymous coward. So the AMD/Intel flame war has come down to insulting peoples' mothers? AMD zealots actually make AMD look BAD in the same way that Michael Moore makes Democrats look bad.
When you run out of facts, just start lobbing insults. Great. Just great. I see that this thread has devolved and its time to move on.
Regs - Tuesday, July 5, 2005 - link
Steve, no offense to you, but your mother sounds as ignorant as the general public who know nothing about AMD or Intel.Infernoz - Tuesday, July 5, 2005 - link
#68 - Windows 64 was deliberately delayed by Microsoft to allow sluggish Intel to catch up _after_ AMD64 support was in for months and to allow peripheral manufacturers to catch up too, so cut the BS!As for CPUs, Intel P4 family CPUs are a lot slower, a lot hotter, more power hubgry and generally more expensive than comparable AMD64 CPUs, the only hope Intel has is to push damn hard with a Pentium M like CPU and replace their current broken multi-core, multi-CPU architecture.
The P4 family has a seriously broken instruction queue system which could cause ridiculously large slow downs, especially for HT, this was only partially fixed in the Prescott family. That is incompetence not innovation, this was even acknowledged in their patents!!! e.g. its a bit like having miles of capilliary piping and valves between the fuel tank and the engine instead of a normal pipe and fuel pump.
Steve Husted - Tuesday, July 5, 2005 - link
#69: Again, don't talk about Intel's "negative business practices" because NONE OF US HERE really know what's going on. Maybe the OEMs Anand was hearing from have ulterior motives. Maybe they were full of crap. YOU DON'T KNOW and cannot, logically, assume that Intel is at fault.In the US you are innocent until proven guilty. Please don't convict Intel in the court of public opinion before hearing the facts from both sides.
How does Intel's CEO steal millions from his company? Please give me a reputable link with hard claims. I think in the days of Sarbanes Oxley it's a hard sell on that paranoid conspiracy.
Craig Barrett's salary was actually BELOW the median for Semiconductor CEOs (http://www.forbes.com/static/execpay2005/LIRTFXO.h...
His stock compensation, however, was higher because Intel has continuous record profit quarters.
Maybe AMD should focus on their business instead of trying to gain market share in court. I know at least 5 people that "will never buy AMD again" because of thermal issues. Maybe those days are over but my mom will never buy a Chrysler product again because of her experience from 1979!
You really come off sounding like a lunatic with wild, unsupported claims.
As for your technology points, you unwittingly prove my points - Intel took risks and moved on when they didn't pay off. Their marketing machine was successful even though some technologies were not. I said Intel is "smarter at how they go about selling processors" - and I stand by that.
Oh, and do you think that Intel didn't have 64 bit since the first P4 in 2000? Ha! The market wasn't ready, and the market proved Intel right when AMD had 64 bit for OVER 2 YEARS before you could do anything but a couple of versions of Linux in 64 bit.
Oh, and 64 bit on the desktop is not currently a smart move, anyway. When's the last time you needed >4GB threads? P4 has had 36bit extensions that allow up to 64GB of RAM, anyway, in 4GB chunks in the same fake way that "AMD64" does. I feel sorry for those chumps that bought AMD64 processors back in 2002.
Which brings me back to this: Intel ENABLES the market, it doesn't just come up with technologies. If AMD wants to succeed and/or dominate, it needs to learn this lesson.
Let's get this straight, kids: 64 bit on the desktop DOES NOT "DOUBLE" PERFORMANCE. All it does it break the 4GB barrier. That's it, end of story. Stop believing the crap about "twice the lanes" etc.
Take 64 bit Notepad. How many 64 bit ASCII characters will Notepad use? You got it! None! Unless you're doing high-end work (read: workstation graphics or Google-sized database work) 64 bit is pretty much a waste on the desktop.
I've read that AMD64 can add about 10% improvement over the 32 bit counterpart (that's being generous). On PriceWatch, I see an AthlonXP 3000 = $98. An Athlon64 3000 = $132. The way I see it, that's a 35% price jump for 10% perf jump. Why would you do that?
Please don't make rash claims that are easily dismissed.
Don't even get me started on Intel's vs. AMD's chipsets and motherboards...