AMD files anti-trust suit vs. Intel

[Dr Mordrid]

Here we go.....

http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=580&e=2&u=/nm/20050628/bs_nm/tech_advancedmicro_suit_dc

In a semi-related story AMD announces the Athlon 64 FX-57;

http://www.techtree.com/techtree/jsp/article.jsp?article_id=4610&cat_id=581

Dr. Mordrid

[Jammrock]

I wonder what one of those large OEM's AMD is refering to? Could it be ... Dell? You'd think that after all the lawsuits that MS has faced that Intel would be smart enough not to do the same.

[Claymonkey]

I wonder if AMD decided it was time to play their cards because the Dresden FAB is getting close to being operational and they can start pumping out enough chips. Anyone know?

[Kooldino]

Dresden? Isn't that Fab30? That's been around for years, no?

[The PIT]

Well Dell haven't got any plans in the near future too use AMD so they could be one of the naughty boys.

[Elie]

No one is recommending AMD for video production either, check out Toms review regarding the stress test between the dual Core CPU's.

http://www.tomshardware.com/cpu/20050603/index.html

I think AMD is loosing ground to Intel, and this lawsuite is a desperate attempt to gain creditability.

AMD's gaming CPU are awesome, unfortunatly that alone cannot sustain the company for so long.

Regards,
Elie

[Claymonkey]

Dresden? Isn't that Fab30? That's been around for years, no?

There already is a FAB30 but they are building FAB36 as well. This one is based aroui nd 65nano tech.

[The PIT]

No one is recommending AMD for video production either, check out Toms review regarding the stress test between the dual Core CPU's.

http://www.tomshardware.com/cpu/20050603/index.html

I think AMD is loosing ground to Intel, and this lawsuite is a desperate attempt to gain creditability.

AMD's gaming CPU are awesome, unfortunatly that alone cannot sustain the company for so long.

Regards,
Elie

Tom's heavily biased so I wouldn't take too much notice of the reviews on that site.

[ALBPM]

WHAAAAA !!!!!! it's not fair

They did this 4 years ago and the FTC just dismissed it a couple years ago.

http://www.usatoday.com/money/industries/technology/2003-09-16-intel_x.htm

Sure they make good processors but they don't offer a platform. If AMD wants to play the game they should be making their own chipsets instead counting on others to do that.
OEMs want a stable, consistant platform to work with........ Easier/lower Cost to build - Easier/ lower Cost to support.

Shite!!! We're out of the VIA based mobos should we switch over to the SiS or the nVidia based boards now......I don't care...just use whatever!!!!...Customer Support will sort it all out later....

ROFLMAO!!!!!!!

[Elie]

well benchmarks don't lie unless he is fudging results...

While AMD is drastically ahead of Intel in the gaming arena, it's quite the opposite in areas like video/graphics production, which is a huge market right now.

So if you want a powerhouse workstation, the recommendation is alway Intel, it's got faster memory bandwidth and the architecture allows for faster rendering capabilites.

You should see my Dual XEONs render in after effects!!!
Actually the only AMD processor I liked from Sharky Extreme's review was the Athlon 64 X2 4800+ it rocked in almost every benchmark but probably worth over a grand.

http://www.sharkyextreme.com/hardware/cpu/article.php/3261_3515996__1

Cheers,
Elie

[Elie]

WHAAAAA !!!!!! it's not fair

Sure they make good processors but they don't offer a platform. If AMD wants to play the game they should be making their own chipsets instead counting on others to do that.
OEMs want a stable, consistant platform to work with........ Easier/lower Cost to build - Easier/ lower Cost to support.

ROFLMAO!!!!!!!

I totally agree with you on this, I don't want to purchase AMD based servers, with Nvidia or SIS or even VIA (yuck) chipsets for my corporation.
I want a solid platform and Intel is the only solution available, and of course it's not a bad solution at all intel based servers are running 80% of our servers here, the other 20% are Unix based.

Cheers,
Elie

[Dr Mordrid]

The FTC comparison in this case is faulty. This is a CIVIL action. As such the FTC has nothing to do with its progress. In fact a civil action is more likely to produce a finding in AMD's favor because of the different standard of evidence applied.

In a Fexeral case the standard is "beyond a shadow of doubt".

In a civil action it's "preponderance of the evidence".

The latter just means if you can convince a jury or some judge that you're 50.1% correct then you win.

Dr. Mordrid

[Technoid]

Sure they make good processors but they don't offer a platform. If AMD wants to play the game they should be making their own chipsets instead counting on others to do that.
OEMs want a stable, consistant platform to work with........ Easier/lower Cost to build - Easier/ lower Cost to support.

60% of the P3 based computers I ever saw was VIA chipped!
90% of the P4 ones I've seen to date has been SIS chipped! (dell stands for the Intel 10% )

OEMS want CHEAP, period (Dell isn’t an OEM, they are an IEM)

No one is recommending AMD for video production either, check out Toms review regarding the stress test between the dual Core CPU's.

http://www.tomshardware.com/cpu/20050603/index.html

I think AMD is loosing ground to Intel, and this lawsuite is a desperate attempt to gain creditability.

AMD's gaming CPU are awesome, unfortunatly that alone cannot sustain the company for so long.

Regards,
Elie

Tom is soo bought by Intel and Nvidia is sad, when Intel first launched the P4 he did a 180 turn from earlier being almost a AMD fanboy to go stark raving P4 Fanatic, anyone remember his "but honest, it runs Q3A great" articles?

And when it comes to which CPU architecture that is best to use with Video production I can only refer to Dr Mordrid's Sig: "AthlonXP 3000+"

[Elie]

Uh... soon you will see how obsolete the Athlon XP will become

Regards,
Elie

[Technoid]

yup, in the same way a P4 3ghz (single core, non 64bit) will soon be obsolete