A better question is whether this is the best INTC can do? I don't doubt that INTC could come up with an on processor MC, but to do so would mean giving up some control of the chipset. Given the low-latency advantages of having the MC on the processor it means that INTC has chosen higher profits from chipset sales over creating a more competitive processor.
In this case it's not another one of those laws of unintended consequences things, but a calculated plan that maintains control over proprietary chipset standards. It's interesting that INTC hasn't yet learned that this sort of thinking is at the root of its' problems.
You know it was only a couple of years ago that chipset makers wouldn't make AMD chipsets out of the fear of INTC retaliation. Now we have virtually all the chipset companies falling all over themselves to produce AMD chipsets. One might ask oneself just why that is so despite the "INTC inside" program? Could it be that INTC is forcing them into AMD's arms through its’ use of licensing fees and processors that underwhelm?
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
AI
