Alby_da_Wolf said:
fatslob-:O said:
Alby_da_Wolf said:
You mentioned GPUs and you didn't notice it's just a field Intel never was able to compete in, but AMD, since it merged with ATI, was and still is. AMD financial troubles surely affects its possibilities, but don't disprove its talent, rather it tells us very bad things about its management. Like Sony, AMD would better be taken over by some rich and well managed giant.
And you keep on trusting Intel despite history should have taught you not to.
You're right about being pissed off with AMD for having wasted its past advantage, but don't let your disappointment blind you.
As for me, I'd like IBM to take AMD over, they already collaborated and they are in good relationships, maybe the only thing preventing it is that IBM surely wants to maintain good relationships with and keep on licensing its patents to every chip producer, including Intel.
|
Oh just you wait ... Intel won't be entering in the discrete GPU market but they have a GPGPU compute solution just for the HPC market that will outright shit on both AMD and Nvidia right there.
Don't disprove it's talents ? AMD's CPU team have no talents! How am I supposed to believe that a floundering division has talent when they don't even have the guys that made the Athlon 64's while getting humiliated for 8 whole years straight up!
Unlike AMD, Sony on the other hand has actual potential to be profitable and the amount of money they get off of the insurance division destroys what AMD get's from it's graphics divsion. AMD's management is alot worse than Sony's so there will be no spinning it.
Do you have a reason to not trust that Intel will deliver on their products compared to AMD ?
Tell me a reason to be not dissappointed ... They have squandered every god damn chance they can get their hands on. Intel sharing patents with AMD is a total loss. They have no money left to boot and they sold off their own god damned fabs only to have a second rate foundry replace their semiconductor manufacturing process. (Though I guess globalfoundries have done something useful for once like licensing samsung's 14nm technology but AMD will also screw up that chance too judging by their history.)
The real kicker here is if anyone purchases AMD they will lose all rights to it's x86 patents and that includes is AMD64 license whereas Intel gets to keep every x86 patents if it gets bought by a larger entity! All of AMD's x86 patents are not transferable compared to Intel.
|
Intel owns the original x86 patents and many 32-bit extensions, like MMX, etc, but AMD created and owns x86-64 extension. Intel already filed a lawsuit against AMD when it split research and development from manufacturing and they reached an agreement extending the cross-licensing terms.
BTW, AMD uses RISC cores with an instruction translation layer since the k5, this could be used in tribunal if AMD were taken over by a corporation able to challenge Intel more effectively.
About the money, or lack of, I agree with you, that's why I wish some company take AMD over.
|
RISC vs CISC is a non-issue these days.
Intel uses micro-op convertors to exploit the pipelining advantages of RISC.
Basically they take the complex instructions of CISC, break them down into RISC like sizes and executes them.
As far as I know, neither AMD or Intel have any patents regarding such an implementation, so who knows how it would stand up in court.
