In February 2002, AMD acquired Alchemy Semiconductor and continued its line of processor in MIPS architecture processors, targets the hand-held and Portable media player markets. On 13 June 2006, AMD officially announced that the Alchemy processor line was transferred to Raza Microelectronics Inc.[20]
In August 2003, AMD also purchased the Geode business which was originally the Cyrix MediaGX from National Semiconductor to augment its existing line of embedded x86 processor products. During the second quarter of 2004, it launched new low-power Geode NX processors based on the K7 Thoroughbred architecture with speeds of fanless processors 667 MHz and 1 GHz, and 1.4 GHz processor with fan, of TDP 25 W. This technology is used in a variety of embedded systems (Casino slot machines and customer kiosks for instance), several UMPC designs in Asia markets, as well as the OLPC XO-1 computer, an inexpensive laptop computer intended to be distributed to children in developing countries around the world.
For the past couple of years AMD has been introducing 64-bit processors into its embedded product line starting with the AMD Opteron processor. Leveraging the high throughput enabled through HyperTransport and the Direct Connect Architecture these server class processors have been targeted at high end telecom and storage applications. In 2006 AMD added the AMD Athlon, AMD Turion and Mobile AMD Sempron processors to its embedded product line. Leveraging the same 64-bit instruction set and Direct Connect Architecture as the AMD Opteron but at lower power levels and in smaller footprint packages[citation needed], these processors were well suited to a variety of traditional embedded applications. Throughout 2007 and into 2008 AMD has continued to add both single-core Mobile AMD Sempron and AMD Athlon processors and dual-core AMD Athlon X2 and AMD Turion processors to its embedded product line and now offers embedded 64-bit solutions starting with 8W TDP Mobile AMD Sempron and AMD Athlon processors for fan-less designs up to multi-processor systems leveraging multi-core AMD Opteron processors all supporting longer than standard availability.
In April 2007, AMD announced the release of the M690T integrated graphics chipset for embedded designs. This enabled AMD to offer complete processor and chipset solutions targeted at embedded applications requiring high performance 3D and video such as emerging digital signage, kiosk and Point of Sale applications. The M690T was followed by the M690E specifically for embedded applications which removed the TV output, which required Macrovision licensing for OEMs, and enabled native support for dual TMDS outputs, enabling dual independent DVI interfaces.
Saturday, January 3, 2009
Commercial platform
The first AMD server/workstation platform after ATI acquisition is scheduled to be released on 2009 timeframe. Codenamed Piranha, the server platform consists of AMD 870S/890S + SB700S server chipsets, supporting Socket G3 processors starting from 45 nm processors codenamed Montreal, with the implementation of G3MX memory buffering technology.
AMD's virtualization extension to the 64-bit x86 architecture is named AMD Virtualization, also known by the abbreviation AMD-V, and is sometimes referred to by the code name "Pacifica". AMD processors using Socket AM2, Socket S1, and Socket F include AMD Virtualization support. AMD Virtualization is also supported by release two (8200, 2200 and 1200 series) of the Opteron processors. The third generation (8300 and 2300 series) of Opteron processors will see an update in virtualization technology, specifically the Rapid Virtualization Indexing (also known by the development name Nested Page Tables), alongside the Tagged TLB and Device Exclusion Vector (DEV).
AMD also promotes the "AMD I/O Virtualization Technology" (also known as IOMMU) for I/O virtualization.[14] The AMD IOMMU specification has been updated to version 1.2.[15] The specification describes the use of a HyperTransport architecture.
AMD's commercial initiatives include the following:
• AMD Trinity, provides support for virtualization, security and management. Key features include AMD-V technology, codenamed Presidio trusted computing platform technology, I/O Virtualization and Open Management Partition.[16]
• AMD Raiden, future clients similar to the Jack PC[17] to be connected through network to a blade server for central management, to reduce client form factor sizes with AMD Trinity features.
• Torrenza, coprocessors support through interconnects such as HyperTransport as PCI Express (though more focus was at HyperTransport enabled coprocessors), also opening processor socket architecture to other manufacturers, Sun and IBM are among the supporting consortium, with rumoured POWER7 processors would be socket-compatible to future Opteron processors. The move made rival Intel responded with the open of Front Side Bus (FSB) architecture as well as Geneseo,[18] a collaboration project with IBM for coprocessors connected through PCI Express. Note that AMD positioned Torrenza for commercial segment, whilst Intel positioned Geneseo for all segments including consumer desktop segments[citation needed].
• Various certified systems programs and platforms: AMD Commercial Stable Image Platform (CSIP), together with AMD Validated Server program, AMD True Server Solutions, AMD Thermally Tested Barebones Platforms and AMD Validated Server Program, providing certified systems for business from AMD.
Desktop platforms
Starting in 2007, AMD, following Intel, began using codenames for its desktop platforms. The platforms, unlike Intel's approach, will refresh every year, putting focus on platform specialization. The platform includes components as AMD processors, chipsets, ATI graphics and other features, but continued to the open platform approach, and welcome components from other vendors such as VIA, SiS, and Nvidia, as well as wireless product vendors.
Updates to the platform includes the implemtation of IOMMU I/O Virtualization with 45 nm generation of processors, and the AMD 800 chipset series in 2009.[19]
AMD's virtualization extension to the 64-bit x86 architecture is named AMD Virtualization, also known by the abbreviation AMD-V, and is sometimes referred to by the code name "Pacifica". AMD processors using Socket AM2, Socket S1, and Socket F include AMD Virtualization support. AMD Virtualization is also supported by release two (8200, 2200 and 1200 series) of the Opteron processors. The third generation (8300 and 2300 series) of Opteron processors will see an update in virtualization technology, specifically the Rapid Virtualization Indexing (also known by the development name Nested Page Tables), alongside the Tagged TLB and Device Exclusion Vector (DEV).
AMD also promotes the "AMD I/O Virtualization Technology" (also known as IOMMU) for I/O virtualization.[14] The AMD IOMMU specification has been updated to version 1.2.[15] The specification describes the use of a HyperTransport architecture.
AMD's commercial initiatives include the following:
• AMD Trinity, provides support for virtualization, security and management. Key features include AMD-V technology, codenamed Presidio trusted computing platform technology, I/O Virtualization and Open Management Partition.[16]
• AMD Raiden, future clients similar to the Jack PC[17] to be connected through network to a blade server for central management, to reduce client form factor sizes with AMD Trinity features.
• Torrenza, coprocessors support through interconnects such as HyperTransport as PCI Express (though more focus was at HyperTransport enabled coprocessors), also opening processor socket architecture to other manufacturers, Sun and IBM are among the supporting consortium, with rumoured POWER7 processors would be socket-compatible to future Opteron processors. The move made rival Intel responded with the open of Front Side Bus (FSB) architecture as well as Geneseo,[18] a collaboration project with IBM for coprocessors connected through PCI Express. Note that AMD positioned Torrenza for commercial segment, whilst Intel positioned Geneseo for all segments including consumer desktop segments[citation needed].
• Various certified systems programs and platforms: AMD Commercial Stable Image Platform (CSIP), together with AMD Validated Server program, AMD True Server Solutions, AMD Thermally Tested Barebones Platforms and AMD Validated Server Program, providing certified systems for business from AMD.
Desktop platforms
Starting in 2007, AMD, following Intel, began using codenames for its desktop platforms. The platforms, unlike Intel's approach, will refresh every year, putting focus on platform specialization. The platform includes components as AMD processors, chipsets, ATI graphics and other features, but continued to the open platform approach, and welcome components from other vendors such as VIA, SiS, and Nvidia, as well as wireless product vendors.
Updates to the platform includes the implemtation of IOMMU I/O Virtualization with 45 nm generation of processors, and the AMD 800 chipset series in 2009.[19]
Other platforms and technologies
AMD chipsets
Before the launch of Athlon 64 processors in 2003, AMD designed chipsets for their processors spanning the K6 and K7 processor generations. The chipsets include the AMD-640, AMD-751 and the AMD-761 chipsets. The situation changed in 2003 with the release of Athlon 64 processors, and AMD chose not to further design its own chipsets for its desktop processors while opening the desktop platform to allow other firms to design chipsets. This is the "Open Platform Initiative". The initiative was proven to be a success, with many firms such as Nvidia, ATI, VIA and SiS developing their own chipset for Athlon 64 processors and later Athlon 64 X2 and Athlon 64 FX processors, including the Quad FX platform chipset from Nvidia.
The initiative went further with the release of Opteron server processors as AMD stopped the design of server chipsets in 2004 after releasing the AMD-8111 chipset, and again opened the server platform for firms to develop chipsets for Opteron processors. As of today, Nvidia and Broadcom are the sole designing firms of server chipsets for Opteron processors.
As the company completed the acquisition of ATI Technologies in 2006, the firm gained the ATI design team for chipsets which previously designed the Radeon Xpress 200 and the Radeon Xpress 3200 chipsets. AMD then renamed the chipsets for AMD processors under AMD branding (for instance, the CrossFire Xpress 3200 chipset was renamed as AMD 580X CrossFire chipset). In February 2007, AMD announced the first AMD-branded chipset since 2004 with the release of the AMD 690G chipset (previously under the development codename RS690), targeted at mainstream IGP computing. It was the industry's first to implement a HDMI 1.2 port on motherboards, shipping for more than a million units. While ATI had aimed at releasing an Intel IGP chipset, the plan was scrapped and the inventories of Radeon Xpress 1250 (codenamed RS600, sold under ATI brand) was sold to two OEMs, Abit and AsRock. Although AMD states the firm will still produce Intel chipsets, Intel had not granted the license of 1333 MHz FSB to ATI. Considering the rivalry between AMD and Intel, AMD is less likely to release more Intel chipset designs in the foreseeable future.
On November 15, 2007, AMD has announced a new chipset series portfolio, the AMD 7-Series chipsets, covering from enthusiast multi-graphics segment to value IGP segment, to replace the AMD 480/570/580 chipsets and AMD 690 series chipsets. Marking AMD's first enthusiast multi-graphics chipset. Discrete graphics chipsets were launched on November 15, 2007 as part of the codenamed Spider desktop platform, and IGP chipsets were launched at a later time in Spring 2008 as part of the codenamed Cartwheel platform.
AMD will also return to the server chipsets market with the next-generation AMD 800S series server chipsets, scheduled to be released in 2009 timeframe.
AMD Live!
AMD LIVE! is a platform marketing initiative focusing the consumer electronics segment, with a recently announced Active TV initiative for streaming Internet videos from web video services such as YouTube, into AMD Live! PC as well as connected digital TVs, together with a scheme for an ecosystem of certified peripherals for the ease of customers to identify peripherals for AMD Live! systems for digital home experience, called "AMD Live! Ready".[12]
AMD Quad FX platform
The AMD Quad FX platform, being an extreme enthusiast platform, allows two processors to connect through HyperTransport, which is a similar setup to dual-processor (2P) servers, excluding the use of buffered memory/registered memory DIMM modules, and a server motherboard, the current setup includes two Athlon 64 FX FX-70 series processors and a special motherboard. AMD pushed the platform for the surging demands for what AMD calls "megatasking" for true enthusiasts,[13] the ability to do more tasks on one single system. The platform refreshes with the introduction of Phenom FX processors and the next-generation RD790 chipset, codenamed "FASN8".
Before the launch of Athlon 64 processors in 2003, AMD designed chipsets for their processors spanning the K6 and K7 processor generations. The chipsets include the AMD-640, AMD-751 and the AMD-761 chipsets. The situation changed in 2003 with the release of Athlon 64 processors, and AMD chose not to further design its own chipsets for its desktop processors while opening the desktop platform to allow other firms to design chipsets. This is the "Open Platform Initiative". The initiative was proven to be a success, with many firms such as Nvidia, ATI, VIA and SiS developing their own chipset for Athlon 64 processors and later Athlon 64 X2 and Athlon 64 FX processors, including the Quad FX platform chipset from Nvidia.
The initiative went further with the release of Opteron server processors as AMD stopped the design of server chipsets in 2004 after releasing the AMD-8111 chipset, and again opened the server platform for firms to develop chipsets for Opteron processors. As of today, Nvidia and Broadcom are the sole designing firms of server chipsets for Opteron processors.
As the company completed the acquisition of ATI Technologies in 2006, the firm gained the ATI design team for chipsets which previously designed the Radeon Xpress 200 and the Radeon Xpress 3200 chipsets. AMD then renamed the chipsets for AMD processors under AMD branding (for instance, the CrossFire Xpress 3200 chipset was renamed as AMD 580X CrossFire chipset). In February 2007, AMD announced the first AMD-branded chipset since 2004 with the release of the AMD 690G chipset (previously under the development codename RS690), targeted at mainstream IGP computing. It was the industry's first to implement a HDMI 1.2 port on motherboards, shipping for more than a million units. While ATI had aimed at releasing an Intel IGP chipset, the plan was scrapped and the inventories of Radeon Xpress 1250 (codenamed RS600, sold under ATI brand) was sold to two OEMs, Abit and AsRock. Although AMD states the firm will still produce Intel chipsets, Intel had not granted the license of 1333 MHz FSB to ATI. Considering the rivalry between AMD and Intel, AMD is less likely to release more Intel chipset designs in the foreseeable future.
On November 15, 2007, AMD has announced a new chipset series portfolio, the AMD 7-Series chipsets, covering from enthusiast multi-graphics segment to value IGP segment, to replace the AMD 480/570/580 chipsets and AMD 690 series chipsets. Marking AMD's first enthusiast multi-graphics chipset. Discrete graphics chipsets were launched on November 15, 2007 as part of the codenamed Spider desktop platform, and IGP chipsets were launched at a later time in Spring 2008 as part of the codenamed Cartwheel platform.
AMD will also return to the server chipsets market with the next-generation AMD 800S series server chipsets, scheduled to be released in 2009 timeframe.
AMD Live!
AMD LIVE! is a platform marketing initiative focusing the consumer electronics segment, with a recently announced Active TV initiative for streaming Internet videos from web video services such as YouTube, into AMD Live! PC as well as connected digital TVs, together with a scheme for an ecosystem of certified peripherals for the ease of customers to identify peripherals for AMD Live! systems for digital home experience, called "AMD Live! Ready".[12]
AMD Quad FX platform
The AMD Quad FX platform, being an extreme enthusiast platform, allows two processors to connect through HyperTransport, which is a similar setup to dual-processor (2P) servers, excluding the use of buffered memory/registered memory DIMM modules, and a server motherboard, the current setup includes two Athlon 64 FX FX-70 series processors and a special motherboard. AMD pushed the platform for the surging demands for what AMD calls "megatasking" for true enthusiasts,[13] the ability to do more tasks on one single system. The platform refreshes with the introduction of Phenom FX processors and the next-generation RD790 chipset, codenamed "FASN8".
Processor market history
IBM PC and the x86 architecture
In February 1982, AMD signed a contract with Intel, becoming a licensed second-source manufacturer of 8086 and 8088 processors. IBM wanted to use the Intel 8088 in its IBM PC, but IBM's policy at the time was to require at least two sources for its chips. AMD later produced the Am286 under the same arrangement, but Intel canceled the agreement in 1986 and refused to convey technical details of the i386 part. AMD challenged Intel's decision to cancel the agreement and won in arbitration, but Intel disputed this decision. A long legal dispute followed, ending in 1994 when the Supreme Court of California sided with AMD. Subsequent legal disputes centered on whether AMD had legal rights to use derivatives of Intel's microcode. In the face of uncertainty, AMD was forced to develop "clean room" versions of Intel code.
In 1991, AMD released the Am386, its clone of the Intel 386 processor. It took less than a year for the company to sell a million units. Later, the Am486 was used by a number of large original equipment manufacturers, including Compaq, and proved popular. Another Am486-based product, the Am5x86, continued AMD's success as a low-price alternative. However, as product cycles shortened in the PC industry, the process of reverse engineering Intel's products became an ever less viable strategy for AMD.
K5, K6 and Athlon
AMD's first completely in-house x86 processor was the K5 which was launched in 1996.[4] The "K" was a reference to "Kryptonite", which from comic book lore, was the only substance that could harm Superman, with a clear reference to Intel, which dominated in the market at the time, as "Superman".[5]
In 1996, AMD purchased NexGen specifically for the rights to their Nx series of x86-compatible processors. AMD gave the NexGen design team their own building, left them alone, and gave them time and money to rework the Nx686. The result was the K6 processor, introduced in 1997.
The K7 was AMD's seventh generation x86 processor, making its debut on June 23, 1999, under the brand name Athlon. On October 9, 2001 the Athlon XP was released, followed by the Athlon XP with 512KB L2 Cache on February 10, 2003.[6]
Athlon 64, Opteron and Phenom
The K8 was a major revision of the K7 architecture, with the most notable features being the addition of a 64-bit extension to the x86 instruction set (officially called AMD64), the incorporation of an on-chip memory controller, and the implementation of an extremely high performance point-to-point interconnect called HyperTransport, as part of the Direct Connect Architecture. The technology was initially launched as the Opteron server-oriented processor.[7] Shortly thereafter it was incorporated into a product for desktop PCs, branded Athlon 64.[8]
AMD released the first dual core Opteron, an x86-based server CPU, on April 21, 2005.[9] The first desktop-based dual core processor family — the Athlon 64 X2 — came a month later.[10] In early May 2007, AMD had abandoned the string "64" in its dual-core desktop product branding, becoming Athlon X2, downplaying the significance of 64-bit computing in its processors while upcoming updates involves some of the improvements to the microarchitecture, and a shift of target market from mainstream desktop systems to value dual-core desktop systems. AMD has also started to release dual-core Sempron processors in early 2008 exclusively in China, branded as Sempron 2000 series, with lower HyperTransport speed and smaller L2 cache, thus the firm completes its dual-core product portfolio for each market segment.
The latest AMD microprocessor architecture, known as K10, became the successor to the K8 microarchitecture. The first processors released on this architecture were introduced on September 10, 2007 consisting of nine quad-core Third Generation Opteron processors. This was followed by the Phenom processor for desktop. K10 processors will come in dual, triple-core,[11] and quad-core versions with all cores on one single die.
Fusion
After the merger between AMD and ATI, an initiative codenamed Fusion was announced that merges a CPU and GPU on one chip, including a minimum 16 lane PCI Express link to accommodate external PCI Express peripherals, thereby eliminating the requirement of a northbridge chip completely from the motherboard. AMD will move to a modular design methodology named "M-SPACE", where two new processor cores, codenamed "Bulldozer" and "Bobcat" will be released in the 2009 timeframe.
While very little preliminary information exists even in AMD's Technology Analyst Day 2007, both cores are to be built from the ground up. The Bulldozer core focused on 10 watt to 100 watt products, with optimizations for performance-per-watt ratios and HPC applications and includes newly announced SSE5 instructions, while the Bobcat core will focus on 1 watt to 10 watt products, given that the core is a simplified x86 core to reduce power draw. Both of the cores will be able to incorporate full DirectX compatible GPU core(s) under the Fusion label, or as standalone products as a general purpose CPU.
In February 1982, AMD signed a contract with Intel, becoming a licensed second-source manufacturer of 8086 and 8088 processors. IBM wanted to use the Intel 8088 in its IBM PC, but IBM's policy at the time was to require at least two sources for its chips. AMD later produced the Am286 under the same arrangement, but Intel canceled the agreement in 1986 and refused to convey technical details of the i386 part. AMD challenged Intel's decision to cancel the agreement and won in arbitration, but Intel disputed this decision. A long legal dispute followed, ending in 1994 when the Supreme Court of California sided with AMD. Subsequent legal disputes centered on whether AMD had legal rights to use derivatives of Intel's microcode. In the face of uncertainty, AMD was forced to develop "clean room" versions of Intel code.
In 1991, AMD released the Am386, its clone of the Intel 386 processor. It took less than a year for the company to sell a million units. Later, the Am486 was used by a number of large original equipment manufacturers, including Compaq, and proved popular. Another Am486-based product, the Am5x86, continued AMD's success as a low-price alternative. However, as product cycles shortened in the PC industry, the process of reverse engineering Intel's products became an ever less viable strategy for AMD.
K5, K6 and Athlon
AMD's first completely in-house x86 processor was the K5 which was launched in 1996.[4] The "K" was a reference to "Kryptonite", which from comic book lore, was the only substance that could harm Superman, with a clear reference to Intel, which dominated in the market at the time, as "Superman".[5]
In 1996, AMD purchased NexGen specifically for the rights to their Nx series of x86-compatible processors. AMD gave the NexGen design team their own building, left them alone, and gave them time and money to rework the Nx686. The result was the K6 processor, introduced in 1997.
The K7 was AMD's seventh generation x86 processor, making its debut on June 23, 1999, under the brand name Athlon. On October 9, 2001 the Athlon XP was released, followed by the Athlon XP with 512KB L2 Cache on February 10, 2003.[6]
Athlon 64, Opteron and Phenom
The K8 was a major revision of the K7 architecture, with the most notable features being the addition of a 64-bit extension to the x86 instruction set (officially called AMD64), the incorporation of an on-chip memory controller, and the implementation of an extremely high performance point-to-point interconnect called HyperTransport, as part of the Direct Connect Architecture. The technology was initially launched as the Opteron server-oriented processor.[7] Shortly thereafter it was incorporated into a product for desktop PCs, branded Athlon 64.[8]
AMD released the first dual core Opteron, an x86-based server CPU, on April 21, 2005.[9] The first desktop-based dual core processor family — the Athlon 64 X2 — came a month later.[10] In early May 2007, AMD had abandoned the string "64" in its dual-core desktop product branding, becoming Athlon X2, downplaying the significance of 64-bit computing in its processors while upcoming updates involves some of the improvements to the microarchitecture, and a shift of target market from mainstream desktop systems to value dual-core desktop systems. AMD has also started to release dual-core Sempron processors in early 2008 exclusively in China, branded as Sempron 2000 series, with lower HyperTransport speed and smaller L2 cache, thus the firm completes its dual-core product portfolio for each market segment.
The latest AMD microprocessor architecture, known as K10, became the successor to the K8 microarchitecture. The first processors released on this architecture were introduced on September 10, 2007 consisting of nine quad-core Third Generation Opteron processors. This was followed by the Phenom processor for desktop. K10 processors will come in dual, triple-core,[11] and quad-core versions with all cores on one single die.
Fusion
After the merger between AMD and ATI, an initiative codenamed Fusion was announced that merges a CPU and GPU on one chip, including a minimum 16 lane PCI Express link to accommodate external PCI Express peripherals, thereby eliminating the requirement of a northbridge chip completely from the motherboard. AMD will move to a modular design methodology named "M-SPACE", where two new processor cores, codenamed "Bulldozer" and "Bobcat" will be released in the 2009 timeframe.
While very little preliminary information exists even in AMD's Technology Analyst Day 2007, both cores are to be built from the ground up. The Bulldozer core focused on 10 watt to 100 watt products, with optimizations for performance-per-watt ratios and HPC applications and includes newly announced SSE5 instructions, while the Bobcat core will focus on 1 watt to 10 watt products, given that the core is a simplified x86 core to reduce power draw. Both of the cores will be able to incorporate full DirectX compatible GPU core(s) under the Fusion label, or as standalone products as a general purpose CPU.
Corporate history
Advanced Micro Devices was founded on May 1, 1969, by a group of former executives from Fairchild Semiconductor, including Jerry Sanders, III, Ed Turney, John Carey, Sven Simonsen, Jack Gifford and three members from Gifford's team, Frank Botte, Jim Giles, and Larry Stenger. The company began as a producer of logic chips, then entered the RAM chip business in 1975. That same year, it introduced a reverse-engineered clone of the Intel 8080 microprocessor. During this period, AMD also designed and produced a series of bit-slice processor elements (Am2900, Am29116, Am293xx) which were used in various minicomputer designs.
During this time, AMD attempted to embrace the perceived shift towards RISC with their own AMD 29K processor, and they attempted to diversify into graphics and audio devices as well as EPROM memory. It had some success in the mid-80s with the AMD7910 and AMD7911 "World Chip" FSK modem, one of the first multistandard devices that covered both Bell and CCITT tones at up to 1200 baud half duplex or 300/300 full duplex. While the AMD 29K survived as an embedded processor and AMD spinoff Spansion continues to make industry leading flash memory, AMD was not as successful with its other endeavors. AMD decided to switch gears and concentrate solely on Intel-compatible microprocessors and flash memory. This put them in direct competition with Intel for x86 compatible processors and their flash memory secondary markets.
It has been reported in December 2006 that AMD along with its main rival in the graphics industry nVidia, received subpoenas from the Justice Department regarding possible antitrust violations in the graphics card industry, including the act of fixing prices.[2]
AMD announced a merger with ATI Technologies on July 24, 2006. AMD paid $4.3 billion in cash and 58 million shares of its stock for a total of US$5.4 billion. The merger completed on October 25, 2006[3] and ATI is now part of AMD.
During this time, AMD attempted to embrace the perceived shift towards RISC with their own AMD 29K processor, and they attempted to diversify into graphics and audio devices as well as EPROM memory. It had some success in the mid-80s with the AMD7910 and AMD7911 "World Chip" FSK modem, one of the first multistandard devices that covered both Bell and CCITT tones at up to 1200 baud half duplex or 300/300 full duplex. While the AMD 29K survived as an embedded processor and AMD spinoff Spansion continues to make industry leading flash memory, AMD was not as successful with its other endeavors. AMD decided to switch gears and concentrate solely on Intel-compatible microprocessors and flash memory. This put them in direct competition with Intel for x86 compatible processors and their flash memory secondary markets.
It has been reported in December 2006 that AMD along with its main rival in the graphics industry nVidia, received subpoenas from the Justice Department regarding possible antitrust violations in the graphics card industry, including the act of fixing prices.[2]
AMD announced a merger with ATI Technologies on July 24, 2006. AMD paid $4.3 billion in cash and 58 million shares of its stock for a total of US$5.4 billion. The merger completed on October 25, 2006[3] and ATI is now part of AMD.
Advanced Micro Devices (AMD) vs. Intel Corporation Executive Summary of AMD Complaint
On June 27, 2005, AMD filed an antitrust lawsuit against Intel in the United States
District Court in Wilmington, Delaware. The complaint details how Intel has unlawfully
maintained its monopoly power in the market for x86 microprocessors by, among other things,:
• forcing major customers such as Dell, Sony, Toshiba, Gateway, and Hitachi into
Intel-exclusive deals in return for outright cash payments, discriminatory pricing or
marketing subsidies conditioned on the exclusion of AMD;
• forcing other major customers such as NEC, Acer, and Fujitsu into partial
exclusivity agreements by conditioning rebates, allowances and market development
funds (MDF) on customers’ agreement to severely limit or forego entirely purchases from
AMD;
• establishing a system of discriminatory, retroactive, first-dollar rebates triggered
by purchases at such high levels as to have the intended effect of denying customers the
freedom to purchase any significant volume of processors from AMD;
• threatening retaliation aga inst customers for introducing AMD computer
platforms, particularly in strategic market segments such as commercial desktop;
• establishing and enforcing quotas among key retailers such as Best Buy and
Circuit City, effectively requiring them to stock overwhelmingly or exclusively, Intel
computers, artificially limiting consumer choice;
• forcing PC makers and tech partners to boycott AMD product launches or
promotions;
• and abusing its market power by forcing on the industry technical standards and
products which have as their main purpose the handicapping of AMD in the marketplace.
Intel’s economic coercion is pervasive and extends to customers at all levels of the x86
ecosystem – from large computer or original equipment manufacturers (“OEMs”) like Hewlett-
Packard, to small system-builders, to wholesale distributors, to retailers such as Circuit City. All
face the same choice: accept conditions that exclude AMD or suffer discriminatory pricing and
competitively crippling treatment. The Japanese Government recognized these competitive
harms on March 8, 2005, when its Federal Trade Commission (JFTC) recommended that Intel be
sanctioned for its exclusionary misconduct directed at AMD. Intel chose not to contest the
charges.
Through its exclusionary conduct, Intel has avoided competition on the merits and
deprived AMD of the opportunity to stake its prices and quality against Intel’s for potential
microprocessor sales. The absence of competition in this important industrycomes at a high cost:
artificial constraints on innovation, higher prices and the loss of the consumer’s right to choose
the products that best suit his or her needs. As such, Intel’s conduct violates the antimonopolization
provisions of Section 2 of the federal Sherman Antitrust Act, as well as
California’s state law prohibitions against secret rebates and tortious interference with
prospective economic advantage. Accordingly, AMD seeks: 1) an injunction to stop Intel’s
anticompetitive conduct; 2) treble damages as provided for under the Sherman Act; and 3)
punitive damages as provided for under California law.
In 2003, AMD began to pull away from Intel technologically and now AMD’s
microprocessors are widely hailed as superior to Intel’s. AMD’s breakthrough came when it
introduced Opteron; the industry’s first x86 backward compatible 64-bit chip. The computing
industry hailed AMD’s introduction of backwards compatible 64-bit computing as an
engineering triumph. In April 2005, AMD was named “Processor Company of 2005” at an Intelsponsored
industry awards show. Bested in a technology duel over which it long claimed
leadership, Intel increased exploitation of its market power to pressure customers to refrain from
migrating to AMD’s superior, lower-cost microprocessors.
SUMMARY OF INTEL MISCONDUCT
The following describes only a sampling of Intel misconduct.
a. Exclusive and Near-Exclusive Deals with OEMs
Dell. Dell has never purchased an AMD microprocessor despite acknowledging Intel’s
shortcomings and its own customers’ clamor for AMD solutions. According to industry reports,
Intel has bought Dell’s exclusivity with outright payments and favorable discriminatory pricing
and service. Dell executives have conceded that they must financially account for Intel
retribution if they decide to launch even one AMD product.
Japan. In 1999, AMD began to make notable inroads into Intel’s sales to major Japanese OEMs,
which export PCs internationally including into the U.S. In 2002, Intel paid Sony, Toshiba and
Hitachi multimillion dollar sums, disguised as discounts and promotional support, in exchange
for worldwide exclusivity. Intel also paid multimillion dollar sums to NEC and Fujitsu to cap
AMD’s share of their business.
b. Product-Line, Channel or Geographic Restrictions
Intel has also bought more limited exclusivity from OEMs as a means of excluding AMD
from the most profitable lines or from channels of distribution best tailored to take advantage of
AMD’s price/performance advantage over Intel. For example, Intel has sabotaged AMD’s
attempts to create a successful commercial desktop product at both HP and IBM.
c. Exclusionary Rebates, Predatory Pricing
Intel has also imposed on OEMs a system of first-dollar rebates that create exclusivity or
near-exclusivity and artificially foreclose AMD from competing meaningfully. While in many
industries, a seller might offer “volume discounts,” Intel’s rebate schemes are quite different and
substantially more odious to competition. Intel’s “penetration” or “loyalty” rebates are not based
on efficiencies or cost savings, but instead are designed to avoid head-to-head price competition
with AMD and leverage Intel’s market position. Intel intentionally sets a customer rebate at a
level of purchases it knows to constitute a dominant percentage of a customer’s needs. Intel’s
retroactive discounts then operate to price additional microprocessors at or below cost so that
AMD cannot compete for this business.
d. Threats of Retaliation
Intel has also resorted to old- fashioned threats, intimidation and “k nee-capping” to deter
OEMs from dealing with AMD. For instance, in late 2000, Compaq’s CEO, Michael Capellas,
disclosed that because of the volume of business he had given to AMD, Intel withheld delivery
of server chips that Compaq desperately needed. Reporting that “he had a gun to his head,”
Capellas informed an AMD executive that he had to stop buying AMD processors. NEC’s
European subsidiary, NEC-CI, which operates NEC’s European and non-Japanese Asian
divisions, reported that Intel executives said they would “destroy” NEC-CI for engaging with
AMD in the commercial desktop segment. Intel told NEC-CI’s retailers that the company’s
AMD dealings could impair NEC-CI’s ability to supply products to its customers. When NECCI
resisted the pressure, Intel imposed a discriminatory price increase.
e. Interference with AMD Product Launches
A successful and impressive product launch is essential to generating confidence among
computer professionals, who will be the potential audience for a new microprocessor, and is key
to gaining market acceptance. Aware of the importance of product launches, Intel has done its
utmost to undermine AMD’s. For instance, in 2003, Intel’s CEO Craig Barrett went so far as to
travel to Taiwan to personally threaten Acer’s Chairman, President and CEO with “severe
consequences” for publicly supporting AMD’s product rollout of Athlon64. The Barrett visit
coincided with an unexplained delay by Intel in providing $15-20 million in market development
funds owed to Acer. As a result, Acer withdrew from the launch in the U.S. and Taiwan, pulled
its promotional materials, banned AMD’s use of a video Acer had prepared, and delayed the
announcement of its Athlon64-powered computers.
f. Exclusionary Practices Directed At Retailers
In Germany, AMD has been entirely shut out from Media Markt, which operates retail
stores throughout Europe and accounts for 35% of Germany’s retail sales. Intel provides Media
Markt between $15-20 million of MDF annually, and since 1997 Media Markt has carried Intel
computers exclusively. Similarly, in the U.S., Intel provides full MDF payments to retailers,
such as Best Buy and Circuit City, only if they agree to limit to 20%, not just the shelf space
devoted to AMD-based products, but also the share of revenues they generate from selling AMD
platforms. If AMD’s share exceeds 20%, the offending retailer’s marketing support from Intel is
cut by 33% across all products.
EFFECTS OF INTEL’S MISCONDUCT
Despite its technological leadership, AMD’s market share remains artificially stunted by
Intel’s exclusionary actions. Since 1999, AMD’s worldwide volume share has hovered at 15%,
while Intel has captured at least 80% of x86 microprocessor unit sales in seven of the last eight
years. By capping AMD’s market share, Intel has prevented AMD from expanding to reach the
size necessary to become a predominant supplier to major customers. As a result, those in the
microprocessor industry continue to be beholden to Intel, which requires them to pay monopoly
prices, to be exposed to Intel’s coercive tactics, and to submit to artificial limits on purchases
from AMD. Consumers ultimately foot the bill for Intel’s conduct, in the form of inflated PCprices and the loss of choice in computer products. Finally, society as a whole is worse off for
the lack of innovation that only a truly competitive market can drive.
District Court in Wilmington, Delaware. The complaint details how Intel has unlawfully
maintained its monopoly power in the market for x86 microprocessors by, among other things,:
• forcing major customers such as Dell, Sony, Toshiba, Gateway, and Hitachi into
Intel-exclusive deals in return for outright cash payments, discriminatory pricing or
marketing subsidies conditioned on the exclusion of AMD;
• forcing other major customers such as NEC, Acer, and Fujitsu into partial
exclusivity agreements by conditioning rebates, allowances and market development
funds (MDF) on customers’ agreement to severely limit or forego entirely purchases from
AMD;
• establishing a system of discriminatory, retroactive, first-dollar rebates triggered
by purchases at such high levels as to have the intended effect of denying customers the
freedom to purchase any significant volume of processors from AMD;
• threatening retaliation aga inst customers for introducing AMD computer
platforms, particularly in strategic market segments such as commercial desktop;
• establishing and enforcing quotas among key retailers such as Best Buy and
Circuit City, effectively requiring them to stock overwhelmingly or exclusively, Intel
computers, artificially limiting consumer choice;
• forcing PC makers and tech partners to boycott AMD product launches or
promotions;
• and abusing its market power by forcing on the industry technical standards and
products which have as their main purpose the handicapping of AMD in the marketplace.
Intel’s economic coercion is pervasive and extends to customers at all levels of the x86
ecosystem – from large computer or original equipment manufacturers (“OEMs”) like Hewlett-
Packard, to small system-builders, to wholesale distributors, to retailers such as Circuit City. All
face the same choice: accept conditions that exclude AMD or suffer discriminatory pricing and
competitively crippling treatment. The Japanese Government recognized these competitive
harms on March 8, 2005, when its Federal Trade Commission (JFTC) recommended that Intel be
sanctioned for its exclusionary misconduct directed at AMD. Intel chose not to contest the
charges.
Through its exclusionary conduct, Intel has avoided competition on the merits and
deprived AMD of the opportunity to stake its prices and quality against Intel’s for potential
microprocessor sales. The absence of competition in this important industrycomes at a high cost:
artificial constraints on innovation, higher prices and the loss of the consumer’s right to choose
the products that best suit his or her needs. As such, Intel’s conduct violates the antimonopolization
provisions of Section 2 of the federal Sherman Antitrust Act, as well as
California’s state law prohibitions against secret rebates and tortious interference with
prospective economic advantage. Accordingly, AMD seeks: 1) an injunction to stop Intel’s
anticompetitive conduct; 2) treble damages as provided for under the Sherman Act; and 3)
punitive damages as provided for under California law.
In 2003, AMD began to pull away from Intel technologically and now AMD’s
microprocessors are widely hailed as superior to Intel’s. AMD’s breakthrough came when it
introduced Opteron; the industry’s first x86 backward compatible 64-bit chip. The computing
industry hailed AMD’s introduction of backwards compatible 64-bit computing as an
engineering triumph. In April 2005, AMD was named “Processor Company of 2005” at an Intelsponsored
industry awards show. Bested in a technology duel over which it long claimed
leadership, Intel increased exploitation of its market power to pressure customers to refrain from
migrating to AMD’s superior, lower-cost microprocessors.
SUMMARY OF INTEL MISCONDUCT
The following describes only a sampling of Intel misconduct.
a. Exclusive and Near-Exclusive Deals with OEMs
Dell. Dell has never purchased an AMD microprocessor despite acknowledging Intel’s
shortcomings and its own customers’ clamor for AMD solutions. According to industry reports,
Intel has bought Dell’s exclusivity with outright payments and favorable discriminatory pricing
and service. Dell executives have conceded that they must financially account for Intel
retribution if they decide to launch even one AMD product.
Japan. In 1999, AMD began to make notable inroads into Intel’s sales to major Japanese OEMs,
which export PCs internationally including into the U.S. In 2002, Intel paid Sony, Toshiba and
Hitachi multimillion dollar sums, disguised as discounts and promotional support, in exchange
for worldwide exclusivity. Intel also paid multimillion dollar sums to NEC and Fujitsu to cap
AMD’s share of their business.
b. Product-Line, Channel or Geographic Restrictions
Intel has also bought more limited exclusivity from OEMs as a means of excluding AMD
from the most profitable lines or from channels of distribution best tailored to take advantage of
AMD’s price/performance advantage over Intel. For example, Intel has sabotaged AMD’s
attempts to create a successful commercial desktop product at both HP and IBM.
c. Exclusionary Rebates, Predatory Pricing
Intel has also imposed on OEMs a system of first-dollar rebates that create exclusivity or
near-exclusivity and artificially foreclose AMD from competing meaningfully. While in many
industries, a seller might offer “volume discounts,” Intel’s rebate schemes are quite different and
substantially more odious to competition. Intel’s “penetration” or “loyalty” rebates are not based
on efficiencies or cost savings, but instead are designed to avoid head-to-head price competition
with AMD and leverage Intel’s market position. Intel intentionally sets a customer rebate at a
level of purchases it knows to constitute a dominant percentage of a customer’s needs. Intel’s
retroactive discounts then operate to price additional microprocessors at or below cost so that
AMD cannot compete for this business.
d. Threats of Retaliation
Intel has also resorted to old- fashioned threats, intimidation and “k nee-capping” to deter
OEMs from dealing with AMD. For instance, in late 2000, Compaq’s CEO, Michael Capellas,
disclosed that because of the volume of business he had given to AMD, Intel withheld delivery
of server chips that Compaq desperately needed. Reporting that “he had a gun to his head,”
Capellas informed an AMD executive that he had to stop buying AMD processors. NEC’s
European subsidiary, NEC-CI, which operates NEC’s European and non-Japanese Asian
divisions, reported that Intel executives said they would “destroy” NEC-CI for engaging with
AMD in the commercial desktop segment. Intel told NEC-CI’s retailers that the company’s
AMD dealings could impair NEC-CI’s ability to supply products to its customers. When NECCI
resisted the pressure, Intel imposed a discriminatory price increase.
e. Interference with AMD Product Launches
A successful and impressive product launch is essential to generating confidence among
computer professionals, who will be the potential audience for a new microprocessor, and is key
to gaining market acceptance. Aware of the importance of product launches, Intel has done its
utmost to undermine AMD’s. For instance, in 2003, Intel’s CEO Craig Barrett went so far as to
travel to Taiwan to personally threaten Acer’s Chairman, President and CEO with “severe
consequences” for publicly supporting AMD’s product rollout of Athlon64. The Barrett visit
coincided with an unexplained delay by Intel in providing $15-20 million in market development
funds owed to Acer. As a result, Acer withdrew from the launch in the U.S. and Taiwan, pulled
its promotional materials, banned AMD’s use of a video Acer had prepared, and delayed the
announcement of its Athlon64-powered computers.
f. Exclusionary Practices Directed At Retailers
In Germany, AMD has been entirely shut out from Media Markt, which operates retail
stores throughout Europe and accounts for 35% of Germany’s retail sales. Intel provides Media
Markt between $15-20 million of MDF annually, and since 1997 Media Markt has carried Intel
computers exclusively. Similarly, in the U.S., Intel provides full MDF payments to retailers,
such as Best Buy and Circuit City, only if they agree to limit to 20%, not just the shelf space
devoted to AMD-based products, but also the share of revenues they generate from selling AMD
platforms. If AMD’s share exceeds 20%, the offending retailer’s marketing support from Intel is
cut by 33% across all products.
EFFECTS OF INTEL’S MISCONDUCT
Despite its technological leadership, AMD’s market share remains artificially stunted by
Intel’s exclusionary actions. Since 1999, AMD’s worldwide volume share has hovered at 15%,
while Intel has captured at least 80% of x86 microprocessor unit sales in seven of the last eight
years. By capping AMD’s market share, Intel has prevented AMD from expanding to reach the
size necessary to become a predominant supplier to major customers. As a result, those in the
microprocessor industry continue to be beholden to Intel, which requires them to pay monopoly
prices, to be exposed to Intel’s coercive tactics, and to submit to artificial limits on purchases
from AMD. Consumers ultimately foot the bill for Intel’s conduct, in the form of inflated PCprices and the loss of choice in computer products. Finally, society as a whole is worse off for
the lack of innovation that only a truly competitive market can drive.
Step 3: Navigating Between DDR and DDR-2
Here's a little secret, on the whole DDR-2 RAM has been a bit of bust. Touted as the memory of the future, able to leap small buildings in a single bound for everything from videocards to motherboards.
It promised a lot and delivered little in the real world. Yet since the entire computer industry is shifting towards DDR-2 RAM, we're all resigned to the fact that it's here to stay until FB-DIMM and DDR-3 RAM break out in 2007/2008.
Of course DDR-2 memory isn't all bad, it offers a greater level of bandwidth between memory and processor, and that's a good thing. It's just that single-core Intel systems (the current largest segment consuming DDR-2 RAM) aren't very inspiring, and the wonderfully low timings associated with DDR memory have been cast aside for a pointless frequency game. There's a difference between PC2-6400 with high lanencies, and PC2-6400 with low latencies when it comes the benchmarks, and so far the latter has been sadly overlooked for far too long.
By the end of May, AMD's Socket AM2 Athlon64 processor will be running along on DDR-2. The socket AM2 Athlon64 isn't expected to demand a ton of bandwidth from the get-go, but rather benefit more from DDR-2 memory with tighter CAS latency timings. Unfortunately at the moment these types of parts are missing from the DDR2 memory equation so it's hard to offer commentary on where this will all be headed.
It's very likely that initial Socket AM2 Athlon64's will perform no better, or no worse than equivalently paced Socket 939 counterparts. Between now and then, perhaps AMD will have tweaked the memory controller to utilize more memory bandwidth, or DDR-2 memory latencies will have dropped somewhat. Like you, I'm still waiting to see.
The saga isn't yet written, and pre-release glimpses of Socket AM2 performance by way of Engineering Sample CPUs are only telling half the story. It will be interesting to see what happens, but certainly the prevalence of DDR-2 RAM is unrelenting.
It promised a lot and delivered little in the real world. Yet since the entire computer industry is shifting towards DDR-2 RAM, we're all resigned to the fact that it's here to stay until FB-DIMM and DDR-3 RAM break out in 2007/2008.
Of course DDR-2 memory isn't all bad, it offers a greater level of bandwidth between memory and processor, and that's a good thing. It's just that single-core Intel systems (the current largest segment consuming DDR-2 RAM) aren't very inspiring, and the wonderfully low timings associated with DDR memory have been cast aside for a pointless frequency game. There's a difference between PC2-6400 with high lanencies, and PC2-6400 with low latencies when it comes the benchmarks, and so far the latter has been sadly overlooked for far too long.
By the end of May, AMD's Socket AM2 Athlon64 processor will be running along on DDR-2. The socket AM2 Athlon64 isn't expected to demand a ton of bandwidth from the get-go, but rather benefit more from DDR-2 memory with tighter CAS latency timings. Unfortunately at the moment these types of parts are missing from the DDR2 memory equation so it's hard to offer commentary on where this will all be headed.
It's very likely that initial Socket AM2 Athlon64's will perform no better, or no worse than equivalently paced Socket 939 counterparts. Between now and then, perhaps AMD will have tweaked the memory controller to utilize more memory bandwidth, or DDR-2 memory latencies will have dropped somewhat. Like you, I'm still waiting to see.
The saga isn't yet written, and pre-release glimpses of Socket AM2 performance by way of Engineering Sample CPUs are only telling half the story. It will be interesting to see what happens, but certainly the prevalence of DDR-2 RAM is unrelenting.
Step 2: Heat and Reliability
Cooling has always been the one major area where Intel processors were always considered to be far superior to AMD's offerings... remember the days of AthlonXP's going up in smoke? While the Socket 775 Pentium 4 heatsink architecture offers more room to grow, allows for larger heatsinks to be installed, and a bit more scalable in the long run, AMD's not totally out of step either. AMD has dramatically improved the shape, size and quality of heatsinks that it uses to keep Athlon64 processors running cool and quietly. With the de-emphasis of OEM processors, the company has better control over the retail heatsinks that come bundled with its Athlon64 processors, and hence the end user experience. So far, this generation of 'K8' heatsinks have been quiet running, and well designed so temperatures remain at acceptable levels.
To make things easier for the end user, heatsinks can be installed in any direction without damaging the processor. Back in the days of the socket A Athlon and AthlonXP CPU, if the heatsink was installed in the wrong direction you'd end up with a dead chip in under 4 seconds. In the unlikely event that the heatsink fan fails nowadays, that little tiny Athlon64 processor below will not cook itself to death. All current AMD processors employ thermal throttling which lowers the speed of the processor automatically should the CPU temperature rise too high.
On the whole, AMD and Intel are pretty even in thermal loads this year. From the consumers point of view it makes no difference if one processor or the other is used as both will operate reliably and quietly.
To make things easier for the end user, heatsinks can be installed in any direction without damaging the processor. Back in the days of the socket A Athlon and AthlonXP CPU, if the heatsink was installed in the wrong direction you'd end up with a dead chip in under 4 seconds. In the unlikely event that the heatsink fan fails nowadays, that little tiny Athlon64 processor below will not cook itself to death. All current AMD processors employ thermal throttling which lowers the speed of the processor automatically should the CPU temperature rise too high.
On the whole, AMD and Intel are pretty even in thermal loads this year. From the consumers point of view it makes no difference if one processor or the other is used as both will operate reliably and quietly.
Step 1: It's the Performance, Stupid!
There's little doubt that AMD's K8 Athlon64 processor is currently the fastest architecture available. The Athlon64 architecture is superior to Intel's Netburst (the architecture that drives the Pentium 4) in every which way, and Intel's band-aid fixes have not been enough to keep up with the perpetual underdog from Austin. It's true that Intel does have a real winner with its Pentium M and Pentium III pedigreed Core Duo, but these are primarily mobile CPUs, and consequently beyond the scope of what I'll be speaking on.
What was it that happened to so dramatically shift the position between Intel and AMD's processors?Why is Intel faltering on the desktop front and AMD winning the hearts and minds of geeks world wide? It certainly isn't for lack of advertising, but that's another story.
The real reason for all of this upheaval and change is Intel's Netburst architecture. It was supposed to last for 10 years when it was introduced in 2000, however that lifespan was cut short in 2003 when Intel struggled so publicly with the Prescott core. The initial product was full of kinks, its performance was lousy, it suffered from voltage leakage, and it was pretty obvious that many of its faults were due to the way Intel "improved" its processors from one speed generation to the next. The days of the good old die shrink and ramp up are certainly dead now.
After some initial questions to the necessity of a 64-bit processor in a 32-bit world, AMD's Athlon64 processor was well on its way to becoming the sweetheart of computer geeks. It's efficient core architecture allows the Athlon64 to handle more work per clock cycle than the Pentium 4/D (which was also the case with AMD's previous generation), so more gets done with less so to speak.
Intel's wildcard has always been its special CPU SSE series instructions, but that advantage has also dwindled away. While AMD's parts often do not support the latest Intel instructions at the time of introduction, the company does tend to integrate them in time to coincide with the release of software that uses these new features. In fact, if you look at the enhanced instruction sets in the latest AMD Athlon64 processors, you'll notice that it supports more instructions than an equivalent Intel Pentium 4 processor!
Perhaps Intel's one saving grace is that the Pentium 4/D can still overclock quite well, with a little inventive cooling it will achieve frequencies that AMD users can only reach with extreme cooling. Realistically though as nice as the round numbers are, these are empty goals. An Athlon64 may be clocked a whole gigahertz slower than a Pentium 4, but it still performs much better in benchmarks; the correlation between frequency and performance is pretty much dead.
On the horizon, Intel's upcoming 'Conroe' core is starting to look like it might give AMD a run for its money, but it's not available yet so comparing it with current technology is not appropriate.
What was it that happened to so dramatically shift the position between Intel and AMD's processors?Why is Intel faltering on the desktop front and AMD winning the hearts and minds of geeks world wide? It certainly isn't for lack of advertising, but that's another story.
The real reason for all of this upheaval and change is Intel's Netburst architecture. It was supposed to last for 10 years when it was introduced in 2000, however that lifespan was cut short in 2003 when Intel struggled so publicly with the Prescott core. The initial product was full of kinks, its performance was lousy, it suffered from voltage leakage, and it was pretty obvious that many of its faults were due to the way Intel "improved" its processors from one speed generation to the next. The days of the good old die shrink and ramp up are certainly dead now.
After some initial questions to the necessity of a 64-bit processor in a 32-bit world, AMD's Athlon64 processor was well on its way to becoming the sweetheart of computer geeks. It's efficient core architecture allows the Athlon64 to handle more work per clock cycle than the Pentium 4/D (which was also the case with AMD's previous generation), so more gets done with less so to speak.
Intel's wildcard has always been its special CPU SSE series instructions, but that advantage has also dwindled away. While AMD's parts often do not support the latest Intel instructions at the time of introduction, the company does tend to integrate them in time to coincide with the release of software that uses these new features. In fact, if you look at the enhanced instruction sets in the latest AMD Athlon64 processors, you'll notice that it supports more instructions than an equivalent Intel Pentium 4 processor!
Perhaps Intel's one saving grace is that the Pentium 4/D can still overclock quite well, with a little inventive cooling it will achieve frequencies that AMD users can only reach with extreme cooling. Realistically though as nice as the round numbers are, these are empty goals. An Athlon64 may be clocked a whole gigahertz slower than a Pentium 4, but it still performs much better in benchmarks; the correlation between frequency and performance is pretty much dead.
On the horizon, Intel's upcoming 'Conroe' core is starting to look like it might give AMD a run for its money, but it's not available yet so comparing it with current technology is not appropriate.
AMD VS INTEL
Once again it's time to get into the boxing ring for another battle of AMD vs. Intel! And despite the strong opinions this editorial is likely to stir up, I always appreciate hearing back from you. I'm sure plenty of people will disagree with my take on the processor industry, but hey that's why I'm the tech analyst!
With that in mind, it's time for some up to the minute commentary on the state of the computer world. The AMD vs. Intel battlefront has changed dramatically over the last three years, and like you, I have gone the path that most enthusiasts have. I want the best performance for my hard earned cash, so I choose the fastest available hardware without really considering who manufacturers the parts... after all, does it really matter who makes the fastest CPU?
Age has mellowed my thirst for speed, and my upgrade schedule has slowed to a yearly pace, but that doesn't mean I'm settling for any less. To fit into this leisurely schedule I've had to focus a bit more on evolving technologies, and do my best to avoid the lemons (hello RDRAM!?) and technological evolutionary branches which aren't going anywhere... say for example ATI's Crossfire.
Here's how it all plays out in five easy steps.
With that in mind, it's time for some up to the minute commentary on the state of the computer world. The AMD vs. Intel battlefront has changed dramatically over the last three years, and like you, I have gone the path that most enthusiasts have. I want the best performance for my hard earned cash, so I choose the fastest available hardware without really considering who manufacturers the parts... after all, does it really matter who makes the fastest CPU?
Age has mellowed my thirst for speed, and my upgrade schedule has slowed to a yearly pace, but that doesn't mean I'm settling for any less. To fit into this leisurely schedule I've had to focus a bit more on evolving technologies, and do my best to avoid the lemons (hello RDRAM!?) and technological evolutionary branches which aren't going anywhere... say for example ATI's Crossfire.
Here's how it all plays out in five easy steps.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)