Intel has ‘serious questions’ about AMD split

You guys think that a multi-national Corporation like AMD would leave something like a licence to chance ? They've been using this licence since they started making CPU's. Intel use AMD's 64-bit instruction set, so really Intel would be 'shooting themselves in the face' to stop AMD using their patent. As AMD would do the same in kind. Intel is blowing hot air, and for once, AMD may have them where they want them. AMD will use the foundry's for their own CPU's and make chips for other companies as well. Companies like IBM would be excellent customers for them as they have no need for an X86 licence, foregoing any claim Intel has on the architecture. I think this is good for AMD and Intel, AMD need the cash boost for R&D on their CPU's, and Intel needs the competition before they make the next Pentium 4. I like AMD, but all my computers run Intel as it's the superior architecture, AMD's graphics rock :)

Comment by Pinhead at 1:00pm 14th October 2008

You guys think that a multi-national Corporation like AMD would leave something like a licence to chance ? They've been using this licence since they started making CPU's. Intel use AMD's 64-bit instruction set, so really Intel would be 'shooting themselves in the face' to stop AMD using their patent. As AMD would do the same in kind. Intel is blowing hot air, and for once, AMD may have them where they want them. AMD will use the foundry's for their own CPU's and make chips for other companies as well. Companies like IBM would be excellent customers for them as they have no need for an X86 licence, foregoing any claim Intel has on the architecture. I think this is good for AMD and Intel, AMD need the cash boost for R&D on their CPU's, and Intel needs the competition before they make the next Pentium 4. I like AMD, but all my computers run Intel as it's the superior architecture, AMD's graphics rock :)

Comment by Pinhead at 12:58pm 14th October 2008

You guys think that a multi-national Corporation like AMD would leave something like a licence to chance ? They've been using this licence since they started making CPU's. Intel use AMD's 64-bit instruction set, so really Intel would be 'shooting themselves in the face' to stop AMD using their patent. As AMD would do the same in kind. Intel is blowing hot air, and for once, AMD may have them where they want them. AMD will use the foundry's for their own CPU's and make chips for other companies as well. Companies like IBM would be excellent customers for them as they have no need for an X86 licence, foregoing any claim Intel has on the architecture. I think this is good for AMD and Intel, AMD need the cash boost for R&D on their CPU's, and Intel needs the competition before they make the next Pentium 4. I like AMD, but all my computers run Intel as it's the superior architecture, AMD's graphics rock :)

Comment by Pinhead at 12:58pm 14th October 2008

I think intel is worried another bout of steady competition and lack of them coming up with new CPU archetechture putting them at the bottem of the pile! Like mentioned A64 was an idea od AMDs intel quicly used! With the named company though I cant realy see the x86 being troubled as IBM have their own power pc cpu, I think we could see a future Phenom x Ppc hybrid CPU. Then what can Intel do if IBM-AMD where to make their CPU into 1 bigger better idea

Comment by MoI3e74e179b9b6 at 10:15pm 11th October 2008

It isn't just huffing and puffing. AMD signed a contract for a x86 licence. We don't know yet but that licence probably didn't extend to allow a new company to use the licence either for AMD or any other interested party. By the sound of things AMD have pitched it that they will be able to produce x86 products for third parties through their licence with Intel. How can that be huffing or puffing? AMD appear to be going beyond their sign agreement with Intel. Intel have every right to withdraw their licence if this is the case. If it isn't the case then Intel have no right to do so. Until we get the facts, you can't assume anything.

Comment by crazyceo at 4:33pm 11th October 2008

Lol, I'm not the gambling type. I was using a metaphor as in, a bet they'd get to keep the license. Not as in I want to put money in the company. I don't know anything about how many customers they'd have, but it's certainly going to be more than what they'd have if they didn't have the spin off. It's still a good business decision imo. And intel, as I've said, are just huffying and puffing hot air for compition sakes. IMO of course.

Comment by weirchri at 6:51pm 10th October 2008

I would leave the money to the Arabs, they have enough oil money to burn. No one has come out and said AMD or "The Foundry Company" have customers lining up to use this new production company. Since AMD haven't made the best business decisions over the past 5 years, I would hold off putting your own cash in this company. Unless of course you have lots of it and won't miss it if it takes a nose dive. If that is the case, I have a three legged donkey running with the jockey facing backwards in the 3:30 at haydock.

Comment by crazyceo at 1:56pm 10th October 2008

Just say, on the off chance that Intel and AMD both terminate this contract. AMD wouldn't have the right to produce x86 chips, but then, wouldn't Intel have lost the right to 64x86 technology? or integrated memory controllers in it's future i7core CPUs? This would probably force them to leave the x86 architecture behind as it'd be outdated without supporting more than 4GB of RAM. AMD could cuddle up to IBM, and then that'd leave Apple and MS forced to pick a new archietecure to support. Wether it be Intel Itainium or something out of IBMs hat. To me, this is all just hot air as it would severly impact on both their businesses. AMD will keep it license and go through with its plans for the foundy company. I just wish I could put money on it.

Comment by weirchri at 11:17am 10th October 2008

But I'm sure you'll get what I'm trying to say.

Comment by weirchri at 11:04am 10th October 2008

But read the agreement! it doesn't metion a thing about restricting what you use your fabrication plants for. In my opinion, this is Intel blowing hot air just to unsettle the likes of me and you, the customers. A simple way to look at the agreement is basically Intel and AMD have licensed each other to use each others technologies. It doesn't mention anything about restricting fabriction of non x86 chips by AMD to only AMD. And Btw, my fanboy remarks were primerarly against crazyceo and TWeaKoR. There bringing a side to it that doesn't need to be here. I use AMD Graphics, I have an Intel CPU. I have an nVidia chipset. I use what is best bang for buck at the time for building. I'm hardly biased. This is good for compition, it's good for us, it's good for AMD and Intel in the long run. BTW, you could be that the EU or similar influencial body would fine Intel to the hilt if it never renewed it's license, due to anti-monopoly behaviour, just as they have twice to MS for anit-monopoly practices in the past!

Comment by weirchri at 10:54am 10th October 2008

...I did't read anything about AMD/Foundry producing x86 chips for anyone else, just chips! It read as if it's mor about producing low-power/high-yield silicon, not actual CPUs, but I'm sure the exact details will filter out over the next week or so :)

Comment by EdArch at 6:06am 10th October 2008

Arrr.. your all missing the point, this agreement sounds like it ties ownership of the license directly to manufacturing. If it does the courts would probably have to go against AMD because they will be breaking the agreement while Intel are only following the rules they agreed. Its not AMD shooting themselves in the foot, more like in the face. - Except unless AMD actually want to get out of the CPU or at least the x86 market. There's also the question of IBM who would dearly love to destroy or hurt Intel or wreck the x86 market (The Power PC architecture is the direct competitor with the x86). Its all snakes in the grass.

Comment by lucien86 at 3:53am 10th October 2008

You're kinding right? There's nothing AMD could do if Intel have proof they have breached their agreement. The only body that could stop or hold off any action is the courts, which will be the next step in this process anyway. There is no all powerful regulator here to govern the manufacturers of computer equipment. AMD can't pass their licence x86 to anyone else and Intel can't withdraw the licence just because they feel like it. Expect to hear that AMD never meant it to appear what has been said or this is just going to get messy. Look, no fannying around and that comment came from a true fanboy.

Comment by crazyceo at 8:54pm 9th October 2008

Man, fanboys sure know how to fanny around. Anyway, contrary to what many are saying, the spin of is for fabrication of any silicon chips, not just X86. Intel would have a say on who can and couldn't make X86 chips, AMD currently have a license, others such as IBM would need one themselves to use it, but it doesn't stop the foundry company being a advanced fabrication tool for other companies to use. It's a decent way for AMD to make a bit of money, and to get more use out of their plants. As someone pointed out, this is Intel just trying to curb a sensible move by their main competiter. Btw, just a side note, wouldn't Intel have to get a license from AMD for it's AMD64 (EMT-64) technology? I'm sure regulators would prevent intel from retracting their license anyway. which is a good thing, the greater the compitition the better!

Comment by weirchri at 7:54pm 9th October 2008

*waits for TWeaKoR to come in defending AMD again* I don't see anything needs defending for Intel. It isn't Intel changing anything, it's AMD trying it through the back door. A contract is a contract, it just depends on what they have both signed and agreed to that matters and no one here has any idea or proof of what has actually been signed. Personally, I have spent far too much money on AMD and ATi products some good but mostly bad that I can publicly bash them whenever I feel like. I intend to on a regular basis as well. Intel or Nvidia aren't saints here either but my personal experience with those companies hasn't been as bad. Still, I would welcome the Nvidia purchase of AMD in any format.

Comment by crazyceo at 4:53pm 9th October 2008

AMD (NVIDIA) CPU or the AMD (IBM) CPU or whatever company wants a CPU building. I'm sure that if they leave their name on it, Intel might not be able to do anything about it. However, if the thrid party want it named in their own company, then they just pay the licence to Intel first before production. I don't think it matters who makes it, just as long as it's licenced correctly. Of course, Intel may just want an extra piece of that production. One thing comes to mind here, is this the first step to actually selling the CPU side of the company? They now brand the GPU ATi side of the company as AMD now, With Nvidia stating they want to get their hands on an x86 licence and it sounding difficult to do that otherwise they would have just done it. Maybe we will see "The Foundry Company" getting picked up by Nvidia. That way it gets around the anti-monopoly on the GPU side as that part stays with AMD. Or am I just stretching it out too far?

Comment by crazyceo at 1:26pm 9th October 2008

No it sounds like intel have spent billions on developing holding and having x86 architecture. They have allowed, AMD to use this liscense but have not allowed AMD to allow others to piggy back on this allowance. If people want to use the x86 liscense they need to go through Intel, not AMD. Intel most likely want to make sure after the split this will be the case.

Comment by reashlin at 1:03pm 9th October 2008

its just intel getting scared that they might loose buisness over this, if there chips are that good they have nothing to worry about. tbh it sounds like they are trying to hide something....

Comment by lunarus at 11:54am 9th October 2008

As soon as Intel try to prevent anyone else making x86 chips they get hit full in the face by lawsuits to prevent them having a monopoly. I imagine all the 'Serious questions' are about is making sure only AMD can use the foundrys facilities to produce chips, not someone like, say, Nvidia.

Comment by NotFred at 11:22am 9th October 2008

As long as other companies don't make x86 chips at the plant, Intel doesn't have a leg to stand on.

Comment by l3v1ck at 10:36pm 8th October 2008

i think this is just intel trying to block amd from an economically smart move. the x86 license would stay w/ amd, the foudry company is just manufacturing unless i am mistaken. so as long as the designs that companies are giving the foundry company to manufacture in their facilities are not x86 based, there is no agreement violation. amd is not opening it's designs to public use, it is selling fabrication services to other designers. intel just likes to make use of it's x86 domination every time it can, they use it to try and controll the nature of PC hardware (think larabee, do they honestly believe x86 is the best structure for a GPU? if it were, companies would have been trying to get permission to make x86 based GPU's for a long time).

Comment by yougotkicked at 10:22pm 8th October 2008

i think intel are more upset about x86 being available willy nilly to all comers rather than trying to stop AMD's business plans. the whole point of the licence for AMD is that by extension intel have the last say on who can produce x86 architecture. it sounds strange, but after all the fuss nvidia have kicked up, intel may very well be wary about nvidia's plans concerning x86 chips, and this would be a potential way for nvidia to exploit x86 without intel having a say in the matter....

Comment by vulcanproject at 9:55pm 8th October 2008

if intel refuse to give "the foundry company" right to produce x86 chips then infact Intel i believe could be sued or have alligations put against them for or attempting monopolising the CPU industry... again!

Comment by Drake28 at 9:49pm 8th October 2008

Spent far too long between that post eating my tea, you beat me to it! :P

Comment by TWeaKoR at 9:04pm 8th October 2008

*waits for crazyceo to jump in defending Intel* :P It probably is Intel's right to do this, but I don't like it. Not because I don't like Intel, that's more of a love/hate relationship, but because it isn't good for competition. I think AMD are talking with their lawyers very quietly right now to try to find some loophole around this. It won't be as simple as The Foundry Company taking over AMD's license, as this was given to AMD, but maybe there is some way they can work it. Perhaps they could keep the AMD brand with the foundary company and leave the R&D with the existing company under a different name.

Comment by TWeaKoR at 9:04pm 8th October 2008

I knew AMD would mess up someway. This should be fun as all Intel need to do is refuse the foundry Company a licence as I'm sure what AMD are trying to do isn't allowed in their agreement. Let the comedy begin.

Comment by crazyceo at 8:29pm 8th October 2008

"AMD currently pays royalties to Intel for a patent cross-licensing agreement that allows it to produce x86 chips, and opening up its fabrication facilities to other companies violates this agreement." I assume this is the core of the problem for Intel? In which case the grounds are void as, technically, AMD wont be producing the chips anymore, the Foundry corporation will. Yes AMD own a very large stake in this company, but the majority belongs to the Arabs, so I assume it'd be a 3 way argument (Intel vs AMD and the Arabs)...

Comment by D_Cypher at 7:24pm 8th October 2008

So Intel is using it's patent portfolio to force a competitor to do what it wants? How does that help to foster innovation, (the purpose of patents)?

Comment by evanjdooner at 7:25pm 8th October 2008

• One top four motherboard maker will die, says MSI
• AMD plans supercomputer with 1,000 GPUs
• Nvidia announces GeForce GTX 285
• Creative takes wraps off Zii processor architecture
• Nvidia announces stereoscopic 3D glasses
• BFG unveils hand built Phobos gaming PCs
• UPDATED: LiveJournal announces mass layoffs
• Top 10 PC games chart
• Seagate Barracuda 7200.12 gets 500GB on single platter
• Creative reveals new Zii processor

These are the most popular news articles over the past seven days.

• Phenom II overclocked to 6GHz
• GeIL unveils Cyclone RAM cooler
• Rumour control: GeForce GTX 260 GX2 in January
• Nvidia cuts price of 216 SP GeForce GTX 260
• VIDEO: PC version of Mirror’s Edge features hardware PhysX
• Get Half-Life for less than a dollar on Steam
• IBM plans to build virtual human brain
• RivaTuner 2.20 adds SLI and CrossFire support
• VIDEO: ArmA II trailer released