Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Re: The concept of a direct memory controller has been around long before AMD coined hypertransport
Which has what to do with chip scale interconnect?
Hypertransport is an interconnect AMD and its partners use to deliver "glueless" multisocket servers and workstations.
It has nothing to do with on die memory controllers.
Re: I'm happy to see that Intel still has strong roadmaps here, even with "Tigerton" instead of Whitefield in 2007.
The problem for Intel is that 2006 is a pretty key year. While we all know that for both Intel and AMD schedules often get stretched out as unforeseen issues crop up, AMD presently plans to begin shipments from a second FAB in Q1, and a 3rd FAB in Q3. Both during 2006.
AMD presently supplies 20% of the market from a single 8" FAB, and the 2 additional FABs are 12" FABs. The new FABs will take some time to ramp, but between them AMD could double its capacity over the course of the year.
So Intel is facing the most serious challenge it's seen in a long time. It's not a good year for Intel to be pushing planned 2006 product features out to 2007 (by which time AMD could have become intrenched in a much larger share of the market).
Intel has a lot riding on market share, since Intel relies less upon partners than AMD. When Intel loses share in the PC market, they generally also lose revenue from chipset and motherboard sales. When a CPU sale goes from Intel to AMD, AMD gains (~current ASP) perhaps $90 and Intel loses perhaps $140 (~current ASP). While AMD doesn't gain the $75 chipset on motherboard sale that goes to gigabyte/asus/Nvidia/VIA/etc., Intel loses the $75.
So AMD market share gains disproportionately impact Intel's revenue. In this capital intensive business, most costs are fixed, so a very large fraction of revenue losses fall straight to the bottom line.
AMD has a massive capacity increase coming in 2006, so it's not a good year for Intel's 2006 roadmap to be in disarray. It'll be interesting to see if Intel's management can maintain profit levels under these circumstances. It will be tough.
Re: it is AMD that uses the dirtiest trick of all - a frivolous lawsuit
That's the ticket, attack the victim.
You must be really brutal when it comes to victims from the hurricane asking for some help.
Re: I'm thinking of shorting AMD.. it just looks sooooo good, what does anyone else think? I've never shorted before.
Go for it.
Put your money where your mouth is.
After the run up AMD just had, you might even catch a little pull back.
Just don't get too greedy - with that $10 Billion damages payment coming from Intel, any pull back should be temporary.
Re: What AMD should have done was respond to fair competition with fair competition.
They did and then Intel used extortion to block AMD's access to the market.
Please try to pay attention.
Re: Fry's ad today in the OC Register featured mostly Intel desktops and laptops.
Dust was getting pretty deep over in the Intel section.
Allergy hazard - had to do something about it.
Re: So perhaps you can explain again how evil Intel keeps AMD products unavailable for the END USER.
Take a whiff.
Smell the Dell.
Re: Athlon XP-M could not keep up in performance, could not keep up in battery life
We've been over this. We used YOUR links. The two chips/platforms were very similar. The biggest difference was the 5 times faster wireless in most Athlon XP-M notebooks.
The only thing Athlon XP-M couldn't keep up with was Intel's extortion campaign.
Re: Yonah and Merom have both been demonstrated,
You mean, like 3 socket RIMM boards and the MTH?
Re: What did you expect, Dan?
Given that the Banias cost about $500 more, I'd have expected the Athlon XP-M to have rapidly increased market share, not to have rapidly all but vanished from the market.
You've pretty much proved it for us all by presenting links that showed very similar performing products available at the the same time, but with the $500 more expensive Intel product gaining share - under those market circumstances.
Thanks.
Face it. Intel used extortion to limit consumer's choices to an otherwise nearly identical product that cost more than 3 times as much.
Two functionally very similar products (AMD's offered better wireless).
The new low-voltage mobile AMD Athlon XP-M processors 2000+ and 1900+ are priced at $134 and $123, respectively.
Add in the cost of a wireless chipset and you have about another $30 to $50 dollars. Call it $173 to $184.
Intel's alternative - costing $500 more (3 times as much!).
The pricing includes the Intel® 855GM Chipset, the Intel® PRO/Wireless 2100 Network Connection and the Intel® Pentium® M processor, at speeds of 1.70 GHz, the Low Voltage at 1.20 GHz and the Ultra Low at 1.0 GHz. In 1,000 units, they are priced at $725, $372 and $350 respectively.
Some guys from Intel are probably going to end up wearing Orange jumpsuits before all this is over....
Re: if Intel comes out with a more competitive product next year....
If, if, if.
It's all we hear from the Intel side these days.
Next year.
The year after next year.
What if AMD pulls even further ahead? SOI continues to be the big differentiator between the two processes and Intel can't seem to figure out how to make SOI work.
What if AMD's products pull even further ahead? During the next 12 months, when AMD is tripling its FAB capacity?
Re: AMD's premier complaint is that Intel has been able to coerce vendors into exclusivity deals, and the means by which they have done this is by offering appealing discounts.
No, the charge is that Intel did it with behavior extorting penalties. If a company bought 10% of its chips from AMD, Intel would charge that company 10% + X more per chip for the parts it did buy from Intel. So even if the company got 10% of its chips for FREE, that company's average CPU cost would be higher than if it denied market access to any company except for Intel.
Re: Turions ability to fit into "thin and light" which is about in my definition, 4 lbs.
4lbs. with 13.3" screen, DVD burner, wireless g, and battery.
Includes 64-bit security, compatibility, and performance.
Order yours here, today:
http://store.shopfujitsu.com/fpc/Ecommerce/buildseriesbean.do?series=S2
Re: Here are the actual links to the launch dates.
I was mistaken. I found only the link to the 1.7ghz Dothan launch.
Sorry for the error.
So, as you confirm, the Athlon XP-M 1.67ghz and the Banias 1.7ghz were available within about 3 weeks of each other.
Meaning that Athlon XP-M was very much a competitor for Pentium M / Centrino during that period in which Intel extortion caused Athlon XP-M to all but vanish from availability to consumers. And that was despite the fact that Athlon XP-M cost less than Centrino / Pentium M while offering nearly identical performance.
QED
Re: In the case of the JFTC recommendation, Intel did in fact deny the charges
Like pretty much all jailbirds, Intel accepted the guilty charge (pleading no contest to the charges) then ran around the yard saying "I didn't do it, those cops railroaded me."
So, while they say they didn't do it in U.S. press releases, when they were sworn in in court, they sang a rather different tune.
Re: Banias ran at up to 1.7GHz
Not in the time frame of that test, it didn't. And I posted a link for you too. AMD's 1.67 came out a few weeks after that review (of a 1.47 part). While Intel' 1.7 didn't come out for almost a year.
I posted links to the release dates.
Should I be shrilly screaming "Liar" at you?
Re: How do you think tomorrow's AMD would do if it had to get by on ASPs half those of today's AMD. We might find out next year.
So you expect Intel's thugs the extort the OEMs into paying 4 times as much for Intel CPUs (compared to AMD) instead of "only" twice as much, as they do now?
You could be right - Intel does have a well established record of successful extortion and thuggery.
Intel doesn't look so good when both chips run the same code. Intel would prefer to see Pentium compared to Athlon only if the Athlon has been handicapped by a crippled binary of SPEC for the tests.
http://www.digit-life.com/articles2/cpu/insidespeccpu2000-part-k.html
Re: Banias trounced AXP-M in every single benchmark.
Bull.
Go back and read the review you linked to. They compared a 1.4ghz Athlon to a 1.6ghz Banias, and the test results pretty much reflected that two similar CPUs were running at two different speeds..
Battery performance was 2:45 vs. 3:08 except for the rather inexplicable use of software playback on the Athlon vs. hardware playback on the Banias. Note that the chipset used in the Athlon supported hardware DVD.
It's documented here: While the Lifebook S2010 with the low-voltage Athlon XP M CPU runs for a good two and three-quarters of an hour, the Lifebook S6120 comes in at just under three hours (presentation).
In the DVD test, the Lifebook S2010 suddenly falls well behind. However, this is attributable not to poor power management by the CPU, but, above all, to the DVD player software used (Power DVD), which, at 40 percent, has a relatively high average processor load. With the Lifebook S6120, the average CPU load in DVD playback was just 25 percent. If the processor load remains consistent at almost 100 percent (game), the lights on both notebooks will go out after just over an hour.
Note again that they compared the fastest banias available to the slower of two then available AThlon XP-Ms, and note further that one month later AMD augmented the low voltage Athlon XP-M line with the 1900+ and the 2000+
All with the same 25w power envelope but now running at higher clock speeds than banias, rather than lower.
http://www.infohq.com/Computer/amd-athlon-xp-m.htm
Intel's faster models did not arrive until a year later:
http://www.crn.com/sections/breakingnews/breakingnews.jhtml?articleId=18842559
So, as you can see, AMD had very respectable competition for the Banias pretty much from the day Banias launched.
What AMD did not have was $300 million in cash incentives and a bold plan to use its monopoly on high end parts to selectively withold critical parts from vendors that tried to buy Banias alternatives from what would otherwise have been a free market.
Intel used those tactics and tools to bar AMD's otherwise very similar parts from the market. Leaving Intel to reap huge profits from what was basically a rather ordinary chip.
Let's put it this way, Intel's EM64T copy of AMD's server parts are far less competitive with Opteron than Athlon XP-M and its available chipsets were compared to the Pentium M/Centrino.
And AMD can easily make all the Opterons the market can absorb. Yet Xeon has not all but disappeard from the market the way Athlon XP-M low voltage did.
The courts will be asking why.
Intel had better come up with a good set of reasons.
AMD will have some explanations that Intel won't want other's to hear.
Re: And this is your impression after wandering the isles at the local retail outlet?
Why limit yourself to New Orleans?
A review of the aisles at local stores will teach you some more....
A review of the advertisments for Media Center PCs, notebooks, etc. will teach you even more than that.
Re: AMD has never been able to compete with Intel in terms of cost like the Taiwanese do, so they've resorted to competing in terms of performance (which has actually worked out well for them so far). I don't think AMD can survive on the margins of a high volume commodity processor.
Well, they managed on half the ASPs Intel was getting for many years.
How do you think Intel would do if it had to get by on ASPs half those of AMD?
Re: pointing out Dan and Keith as potential witnesses
Sounds good to me.
Let's just say that I'm pretty sure that they've already talked to the people from Appro, RackmountPro, and Verrari (Racksaver back then) and let you speculate on the details.
Re: those retailers could have carried the Turion at least three years before AMD produced it
Would have been a neat trick for a retailer to carry a part 3 years before it was produced....
Too may martinis?
Re: Intel has said publicly that they don't intend to alter their current business practices based on the lawsuit.
And yet, every indication is that they have.
HP, Acer, SuperMicro, CircuitCity, etc. are suddenly much more willing to present Notebooks in general, servers in other than HPTC, desktops in "corporate" lines instead of only "home" lines.
Intent is hard to prove, but a whole bunch of companies all "changed their minds" about allowing open market access to AMD in the time frame of the law suit's filing.
Re: me know when your wife comes to a conclusion based on reading a "reply brief" will you? I just can't wait
I will, just stay tuned.
Re: AMD is saying Intel got the business because they cheat.
Not quite correct. AMD is saying that Intel threatened and bribed AMD's customers to not offer AMD parts in computers. That's tortius third party interference.
It's the threats and bribes that are at issue, not necessarily the outcome.
If some creep hacks your system and gets personal information off of it and then demands that you pay him or he'll post your credit card numbers on the internet, he's guilty of a crime whether or not you pay the "ransome." The crime is in the blackmail, not the paying.
Re: You aren't an attorney, neither am I.
Yes, but I have full time support from an expert in corporate lititgation...
Re: 'CSI integration problems' ??
Yes, well Crime Scene Investigation is pretty much driving Intel these days. Apparently Whitefield is being delayed a few months while Intel staff are repurposed to shred documents....
Re: AMD (nyse: AMD - news - people ) will have to counter Intel's claims that bad business decisions are to blame for its current market position. Further, AMD also will have to convince PC companies to come forward and publicly bolster its claims of Intel's anticompetitive tactics.
A rather inane article, possibly fed to them by Intel PR.
Think about it - so what if there was or was not ever a bad business decision from AMD - what does that have to do with Intel's anticompetitive tactics?
"So what if we held them up at gunpoint and stole their money, they'd have just spent it, anyway" is not a good bedrock on which to base your defense.
It also begs the question of why Intel continued to mint money after the horrific business decsions relating to Rambus, NetBurst, etc - Intel seems to be determined to hoist itself on its own petard.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Petard
Re: Off course there's not going to be a settlement now. Intel will want to drag it on until Hell freezes over.
And AMD may be happy to let them. As long as the case is pending, Intel has to be very careful with the tactics they use, and AMD can continue to break out of the segmentation trap that Intel had extorted them into.
Re: That's not the only thing that makes an AMD fan.
That's it, keep the topic of conversation the people, rather than the merits of the company's chips.
Stear the conversation whatever way necessary to divert attention from the the companies, their practices, and their products.
Right now, AMD workstations and servers provide moderately superior performance while using about half the power of Intel's competing parts.
Right now, AMD offers 64-bit notebook chips for thin&lights while Intel can't produce 64-bit thin&light notebook parts because Intel's process uses too much power.
Admittedly, until very recently, AMD offered only 32-bit parts (like Intel's) that supported thin&lights, but AMD's more advanced power saving dual layer strained silicon on SOI process has let them move ahead.
In desktops, the relative performance is similar to the situation in servers, except that in desktops, power use is less critical.
Re: Still convinced Intel is manufacturing anthrax?
Tenchusatsu, I've never been convinced of any such thing, while you were convinced that AMD couldn't ship a dual processor capable chip and chipset.
So what if you off on that one and you were surprised by how well AMD did.
I was surprised by how long it took AMD to get production ramped up at FAB 30. I was right about how beneficial copper would be in terms of performance and power use, but I was wrong about how hard it would be to implement it in mass production.
It's a fascinating and challenging game to try to predict how the leading edge of the CPU industry will develop, but no one is able to accurately predict the future every time. Neither me, nor you, nor anyone else - even the various heads of Intel and AMD have been way off many times over the years.
Re: The big winner would be Via if they ever get their act together. And given enough time, they will.
I'm not saying commoditization is a bad thing overall, but I am saying that even AMD's most strident supporters probably wouldn't want to see that happen.
I agree.
Re: You may want to check your math
Looks OK to me. I should have specified Montvale, though, since there are several "next" chips.
Montvale, the 3.0GHz wonder child that was going to vault them over the top of Power? Well, that chip just lost 900MHz along with the previous 25nm of process width. The thing that will have to hold the line against Power 5, 5+ and possibly 6 will be a 2.1GHz Montvale, and that just won't cut it.
http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=25591
Re: And besides the same Office applications that ran fine ten years ago on Pentium class CPUs, the K7 was inadequate for today's CPU intensive programs
You're delusional. The Athlon XP is very competitive with Banias - particularly for web surfing, document editing, emailing, and playing DVDs. 100% of the the applications used by 90% of notebook users.
The XP-M notebooks that showed up around the time of Banias/Centrino's introduction were almost indistinguisable from Centrino notebooks - other than the Athlon XP-M's 5 times faster 802.11a wireless performance vs. Centrino's 5 times slower 802.11b - which is why Intel put such an aggressive extortion campaign into place to quash them before too many people found out about them.
Re: I'm sure you have access and can buy the AMD based PC of your choice from any of the hundreds of vendors offering them online
It's getting easier fast, since that law suit was filed.
But, prior to the suit, nope. It continues to be difficult, and prior to the lawsuit it was essentially impossible, to buy AMD based systems in many segments.
AMD based systems (until the law suit) were almost never available for purchase under the Federal, Corporate, and other categories from pretty much any company. And the rules under which almost all large oranizations' procurement/buying departments operate require buying from those categories.
The key is that people buying Federal or Corporate systems are spending "other people's money" and are far less price sensitive so those systems are generally far more profitable for sellers and the makers of the components sold in those systems. People who blanche at the thought of paying $599 instead of $549 for a notebook they pay for themselves for home use insist on getting the $3,499 model instead of the 10% slower $2,899 model when it's being paid for by their company. And Intel has strongarmed the OEMs into excluding AMD products from being offered in those markets.
This is the structure Intel has forced the market to segment into, and is the reason Intel's still been making quite a bit of money - they continue to lock AMD out of most of the "other people's money segments."
But, at long last, the law suit is changing that and life for Intel is going to be getting a lot more interesting.
Re: Do you know how MANY idiots have accosted me on this and other boards
Actually, I've not seen that. And so what.
Why can't the people from the Intel side of the argument ever answer discuss the actual issues? I suppose any distraction is a good one if you're trying to argue an invalid position.
Here's the relevant discussion:
=====================================================
Re: What brief? what reply brief? a complaint gets an "Answer". IT DOES NOT GET "BRIEFED" NOR IS THEIR A "REPLY BRIEF" to a Complaint.
It goes like this - Complaint, motion to dismiss or an answer, discovery, evidentiary motions with briefs.
It's possible, but unlikely, that it goes right to trial. The detailed evidence for someone unfamiliar with the way the industry has been run by Intel for the past 5 years is not in the Complaint or Answer. They're essentially two lists of allegations without evidenciary support.
It's possible there will be discovery not preceeded by motions to dismiss nor motions following discovery - it will just go straight to trial.
But this case certainly will, at minimum, have plenty of discovery disputes leading to motions to compel and the accompanying briefs could give you an idea of the legal theories they're focused on.
After discovery you will get evidence based motions, like a request for summary judgement (entry of judgement without trial). Incidently, motion practice involves a moving brief (request for relief plus grounds and support), an opposition brief from the other side, and the movant's reply brief commenting on the opposition brief. There could be additional briefing (sur-reply and response thereto, but that is somewhat unusual except maybe in a case this size). Until you get to those motions to dismiss (on some points) or for summary judgement, which goes to the merits, little of either side's evidence or theory of the facts and law are revealed. It's those motions and briefs that may let an outside attorney understand the progress of the case and gain a sense of the relative strengths of each side's case.
Re: did you bring your toothbrush?
LOL !!!
I gotcha on that one, eh? And all you could do is whine about toothbrushes.
You're probably a good trial lawyer, and know when to come up with a quick distracting joke or point out the window and shout "look, it's Haley's comet!" if your opponent is about to cement a good point.
My wife's entire practice is pretty much writing briefs, and she was half asleep when I dragged her over to fill out that answer.
Re: collusive agreements to eliminate AMD products and therefore increase harm to the consumer.
These are what I am furious about because they've directly impacted my work.
Re: I posted a quote from an article. People can check it out and draw their own conclusions.
I've posted quotes and had you and WBMW reply "LIAR" several times a week for months.