Intel gets Fined 1.45B $
- Thread starter sniperviper21
- Start date
PokerDegenerate
Daemon Poster
- Messages
- 1,465
Prodigy146
Fully Optimized
- Messages
- 1,751
remixedcat
Banned
- Messages
- 647
Good this was good news for me today since intel is bad. they lock out the x86 stuff, then they ramp up prices so amd has to as well, and then they cost $$$$$$$$$$$ and also intel uses dirty tactics in all marketing levels.
remixedcat
Banned
- Messages
- 647
also amd can make thier own architecture and then the OS makers can support that! Cut out the middle man!
The x86-64 specification was designed by Advanced Micro Devices (AMD), who have since renamed it AMD64. The first family of processors to support the architecture was the AMD K8 family of processors. This was the first time any company other than Intel made significant additions to the x86 architecture. Intel was forced to follow suit, introducing modified NetBurst family processors, initially referred to as "IA-32e" or "EM64T" and now called Intel 64 and almost identical to AMD64. x86-64 is backwards compatible with 32-bit code without any performance loss. For example, The Developers Manuals available from Intel on the IA-32 architecture refer to IA-32 and IA-32e in tandem.[1] AMD licensed its x86-64 design to Intel, where it is marketed under the name Intel 64 (formerly EM64T). AMD's design replaced earlier attempts by Intel to design its own x86-64 extensions which had been referred to as IA-32e. As Intel licenses AMD the right to use the original x86 architecture (upon which AMD's x86-64 is based), these rival companies now rely on each other for 64-bit processor development. This has led to a case of mutually assured destruction should either company revoke its respective license.[2] Should such a scenario take place, AMD would no longer be authorized to produce any x86 processors, and Intel would no longer be authorized to produce x86-64 processors, forcing them back to the now-obsolete 32-bit x86 architecture. The last processors Intel manufactured which did not use AMD's x86-64 design were early versions of the desktop Pentium 4 "Prescott", introduced in February 2004, and mobile Intel Core introduced in January 2006.
VIA Technologies, another producer of x86 processors, have also included x86-64 instructions in their VIA Isaiah architecture used in VIA Nano. The terms x86-64 and x64 are often used as vendor-neutral terms to collectively refer to x86-64 processors from any company.
The x86-64 specification is distinct from the Intel Itanium (formerly IA-64) architecture, which is not compatible on the native instruction set level with either the x86 or x86-64 architectures.
The x86-64 specification was designed by Advanced Micro Devices (AMD), who have since renamed it AMD64. The first family of processors to support the architecture was the AMD K8 family of processors. This was the first time any company other than Intel made significant additions to the x86 architecture. Intel was forced to follow suit, introducing modified NetBurst family processors, initially referred to as "IA-32e" or "EM64T" and now called Intel 64 and almost identical to AMD64. x86-64 is backwards compatible with 32-bit code without any performance loss. For example, The Developers Manuals available from Intel on the IA-32 architecture refer to IA-32 and IA-32e in tandem.[1] AMD licensed its x86-64 design to Intel, where it is marketed under the name Intel 64 (formerly EM64T). AMD's design replaced earlier attempts by Intel to design its own x86-64 extensions which had been referred to as IA-32e. As Intel licenses AMD the right to use the original x86 architecture (upon which AMD's x86-64 is based), these rival companies now rely on each other for 64-bit processor development. This has led to a case of mutually assured destruction should either company revoke its respective license.[2] Should such a scenario take place, AMD would no longer be authorized to produce any x86 processors, and Intel would no longer be authorized to produce x86-64 processors, forcing them back to the now-obsolete 32-bit x86 architecture. The last processors Intel manufactured which did not use AMD's x86-64 design were early versions of the desktop Pentium 4 "Prescott", introduced in February 2004, and mobile Intel Core introduced in January 2006.
VIA Technologies, another producer of x86 processors, have also included x86-64 instructions in their VIA Isaiah architecture used in VIA Nano. The terms x86-64 and x64 are often used as vendor-neutral terms to collectively refer to x86-64 processors from any company.
The x86-64 specification is distinct from the Intel Itanium (formerly IA-64) architecture, which is not compatible on the native instruction set level with either the x86 or x86-64 architectures.
NetBook362
BSOD
- Messages
- 22
AMD is much more stable/cpu than a Intel!
Good for Gameing
AMD FOR LIFE!!!
Good for Gameing
AMD FOR LIFE!!!
And now the AMD fanboys come crawling out of the woodwork.
Companies have been playing hardball for years and years. After the media attention dies down it's going to be back to business as usual. Nothing's going to change. 1.44 billion is chump change to either company.
Companies have been playing hardball for years and years. After the media attention dies down it's going to be back to business as usual. Nothing's going to change. 1.44 billion is chump change to either company.
alvino
Golden Master
- Messages
- 19,967
Seriously...
Although I doubt 1.45 billion is exactly chump change for AMD. They've been steadily losing money and market share ever since the Intel Core 2 Duo debuted. Now that Core 2 Quad and Core i7 are out, AMD is losing even more ground.
Similar threads
