Intel/AMD cross-licensing

[darkstar782]

From what I understand, when IBM built the first PC they demanded at least 2 suppliers for CPUs, in case one went out of business etc. Intel therefore allowed AMD to build clones of its CPUs.

Intel much later sued AMD for patent infringement, and an undisclosed sum was transferred between the two companies along with an agreement that they are both able to copy each others technologies.

This is why AMD are able to keep adding the new versions of SSE to their CPUs with no royalties, and why Intel was able to add EMT64 with no royalties.

Now, as far as I am aware, AMD, if they wanted to, could reverse engineer C2D and start selling them as AMD C2Ds. This is what they did with the Am486. I dont see them as likely do do this however, as they want thier own design and they would get slated in the press for it.

Conversely however, with ATi now part of AMD, what is to stop Intel making an Intel R600 chip once AMD release it?

Even if the agreement only covers CPUs (and the line between these is blurring with GPGPU applications anyway), then as soon as AMD start putting ATi based GPUs on the CPU die with Fusion and similar, Intel are able to copy them, no?

Can any new Gfx developments by AMD/ATi now be integrated into Intels GMA series with no royalties?

Just speculating

 

[qcmadness]

From what I understand, when IBM built the first PC they demanded at least 2 suppliers for CPUs, in case one went out of business etc. Intel therefore allowed AMD to build clones of its CPUs.

Intel much later sued AMD for patent infringement, and an undisclosed sum was transferred between the two companies along with an agreement that they are both able to copy each others technologies.

This is why AMD are able to keep adding the new versions of SSE to their CPUs with no royalties, and why Intel was able to add EMT64 with no royalties.

Now, as far as I am aware, AMD, if they wanted to, could reverse engineer C2D and start selling them as AMD C2Ds. This is what they did with the Am486. I dont see them as likely do do this however, as they want thier own design and they would get slated in the press for it.

Conversely however, with ATi now part of AMD, what is to stop Intel making an Intel R600 chip once AMD release it?

Even if the agreement only covers CPUs (and the line between these is blurring with GPGPU applications anyway), then as soon as AMD start putting ATi based GPUs on the CPU die with Fusion and similar, Intel are able to copy them, no?

Can any new Gfx developments by AMD/ATi now be integrated into Intels GMA series with no royalties?

Just speculating

I think the license is for x86 processor only. Also AMD have to pay an undisclosed amount of money to Intel for "buying" the x86 CPU license.

http://news.com.com/2100-1040-257059.html

In contrast, CPU<=>northbridge bus is licensed separately.
There's why AMD cannot use the bus of Pentium 3 or Pentium 4.

 

[papi4baby]

Yeah that's what i figure. They cannot have an axact CPU like intels. Also i dont think is as easy as just copying it, and making it.

 

[mesarectifier]

First of all I'm absolutely certain that Intel's lawyers thought of this many years past when they drew up those contracts.

Secondly, AMD can't build @ 65nm at capacity.

Third, there's a big difference between a shared set of multimedia specifications and copying an entire CPU platform.

 

[darkstar782]

First of all I'm absolutely certain that Intel's lawyers thought of this many years past when they drew up those contracts.

Secondly, AMD can't build @ 65nm at capacity.

Third, there's a big difference between a shared set of multimedia specifications and copying an entire CPU platform.

Having read the earlier posters, (specifically This) it seems that while they COULD have reverse enginnered a CPU this time last year, they cannot do it under the new 10 year deal.

Still, it would have been kinda interesting to see a 90nm SOI C2D with 1MB shared cache and HT (and maybe IMC?) compete with Intels offering