Why only Intel or AMD.....??

[asheesh1_2000]

There are other companies too which produces processors like VIA and Microchip then why do we always hear Intel and AMD only when it comes to buying processors?

 

[Shaun o]

Intel and Amd have a large sector of the Cpu market saturated.
So it makes it hard for a company like Via to sell there chips/ CPU`s.
That is why they are on the low scale of the Cpu market.

Now if Via Invented a kick ass Cpu with low thermal output, something daft like 12 multitasking cores.
Or say a 8GHz Cpu at a cheap price, then things would change.
Sadly i suspect they dont have enough volume, and production fabs.
You need to put alot of money into a Fab unit to produce silicone CPU dies.

 

[N.Broekhuijsen]

Because they are the two biggest manufacturers. VIA chips and Microchip almost never come in consumer desktop systems.

I have often used and seen onboard audio chips from VIA, and I hear they are doing some nice things with efficient CPU's for netbooks or something, but that's about it. They are not really part of the performance dekstop chips market.

As for Microchip, excuse me, I have never heard of them.

 

[kimyeang88]

Only AMD and Intel atm have x86 license . read this
http://www.tomshardware.com/news/amd-intel-x86-cpu,7285.html

Intel is like the boss. They got x86 license, so only Intel can make processor for our computer and AMD. Intel almost destroy AMD(close the company) but due to court rule in US, there must be at least 2 companies manufacture those( the court doesn't want Intel to rule the market).

There are still alot of companies make processor but not for x86 architecture (our computer), most companies only make for server processor and other digital product. IBM make cell processor for XBOX and PS3, however they can not make processor for laptop and desktop because Intel doesn't allow them or sell license to them. So, only Intel and AMD can make.

why do we always hear Intel and AMD only when it comes to buying processors? because only two companies got x86 license +VIA( VIA is almost gone)

PS+++++ my English is bad, hope you understand.

 

[deadjon]

Because they are the only ones making Desktop grade processors at the moment. They own the entire market share.
Nobody can hope to rival them unless they have something AMAZING up their sleeve like a random launch of an entire range of processors all better than the upcoming Bulldozer and Sandy Bridge cores.

VIA are much more in the handheld / netbook market.

Qualcomm are the same.

 

[deadjon]

In theory, couldnt intel cut AMDs liscence? or are they making a mass of money off it?

 

[N.Broekhuijsen]

Yes, intel may be boss, but it is kind of a seesaw between the two companies. AMD kicked intel's ass with the Athlon 64 vs P4 war, however, intel caught on again with the C2D series...

its always gonna be a seesaw, one company lags behind, they throw their R&D into overdrive for a good while and whop they are ahead for a little while, then other company throws bucketloads into R&D.

I hate intel for their business strategy though, they have some very dirty tricks, especially with the x86 license. They just make it impossible for anyone else to enter the market and kill of anyone who does. Furthermore all the deals they make with various shops to only sell intel based systems... convinced my boss to let it go, and wow, he thanked me we started making a bit more revenue.

People always tend to underestimate AMD, and that really does quite piss me off.

Personally I boycot intel for their anticompetetive practices. Sure they have nice stuff, but to me AMD has much better value, and pretty dam good performance as well, and don't play these dirty monopolistic games.

And now with intel making it impossible to use your old mobo's for the new Sandy bridge. those who bought nice pricy 1156 and 13** boards are basically limited to the chips that are on the market, whilst AMD is really friendly with upgradeability. Would not surprise me if they made bulldozer work in AM3, and would not surprise me all that much if they let it work in AM2+ aswell, although that probably won't happen

They are basically like apple just don't have as much media attention so a lot of people don't know much about how f***ing dirty intel is.

Now go ahead, call me an AMD fanboy, tis a bit true to an extent but I still make my decisions realistically. For me I want to get a lot of value out of my money, and if I were to get better pay I'd probably be more likely to buy Intel CPU's. In the end my decisions will be based on the content of my wallet, but company image does affect my decisions, if you get what im trying to say.

Anyways competition is always good, and the more people buy AMD now, the more overall prices are gonna fall.

 

[reccy]

^Your theories doesn't make any difference.Bottomline is that intel kicks amd's ass in every department right now.Amd phenom architecture is so dated.Amd only knows how to sell bad underperforming quad core cpus with locked core so that greedy amd fanboys buy them and to add more core to a weak architecture.Thats why a six core phenom cannot beat an quad core iseries.I hate them as much as anything. If intel reduces price of their cpus then amd will become extinct.

- Wrong!

Not all people buy into the market at no cost. Value for money is the key term here. Saying someone is a "fanboy" for buying into something is comical. Again, this debate has been tried and tested some many times is unbelieveable...

Intel provide some decent CPU's so do AMD. Whose better than who? Only the person buying is capible of answering that question, so instead of pushing your own self egotistical view on something only yourself finds relevent, offer some good factual advise instead fanboy..

I personally believe AMD is better in the current market at providing the best bang for buck CPU, this doesnt mean there better.. Intel do have the performance market agreed, but AMD seem to provide more of main stream CPU.. This is only my opinion of course and bears no acceptance for anyone

 

[MechaNintendoMaster]

- Wrong!


I personally believe AMD is better in the current market at providing the best bang for buck CPU, this doesnt mean there better.. Intel do have the performance market agreed, but AMD seem to provide more of main stream CPU.. This is only my opinion of course and bears no acceptance for anyone

Exactly. That why AMD survives even though intel is way better. If people didn't like bang for their buck 700$ budget gaming pc's wouldn't exist. Not every one can spend 1000$ on a 6 core cpu the same way not every one can put 3000$ into a gaming pc.

 

[N.Broekhuijsen]

Exactly, Bang for the buck is quite key, not just pure raw performance. Not everyone is looking for the best of the best, without financial restrictions.

90% of people either do not want to spend or do not care about the best of the best, this is one of the reasons that I sold more AMD systems when working in a store than I sold Intel systems. I think I sold about 80% AMD, just by giving people a short 30 second speech about value for money. I let the customer decide always, and it appears to me that value is really key!

 

[randomizer]

In theory, couldnt intel cut AMDs liscence? or are they making a mass of money off it?

Intel an AMD have a complex cross-licence agreement whereby AMD licences Intel's x86 architecture and Intel licences AMD's x86-64 extensions. It's a mutually beneficial agreement and neither company would do well by pulling out (although AMD would be worse off). Without x86-64, Intel would need to develop another implementation that doesn't infringe on AMD's patents. They tried that with Itanium but because it lacked the same level of backwards compatibility it was a failure. In the interim we'd have to go back to using 32-bit processors.

 

[Emperus]

I guess Intel is currently allowing AMD to survive.. Like Dipankar pointed out, if Intel decides to cut down prices on even their LGA 775 processors, AMD will get cornered.. AMD did a great act though by acquiring ATI.. Now if only they could bring the same level of competition on the CPU front.. All the best AMD..

 

[harna]

....don't worry about the bucks..there's plenty of bang in the Phenom's believe me.......I own two of them and they are great....

Q.....why does the world run on Winows 7.0?

A..... Aero plus Intel graphics.

 

[N.Broekhuijsen]

....don't worry about the bucks..there's plenty of bang in the Phenom's believe me.......I own two of them and they are great....

Got one here, love it. Overclocks like a beast as well....

 

[deadjon]

EVERYBODY LOVES INTEL vs AMD FLAME WARS.

LETS GET CAPS LOCK ON THE GO...

 

[sportsfanboy]

Intel had to license a competitor the x86 rights, or they what have been operating as a monopoly, and to some degree still are.

 

[reccy]

I love being right...

 

[reccy]

Amd survives becoz intel allows them to survive.If intel want they can kill amd within a year.They can easily reduce there cpu price (c2d,c2q).Intel enjoys a huge consumer base.Even if they reduce prices they can still make big profit.

Donot think that amd sells cpu at a low price becoz they love consumer.Truth is that amd is obliged to sell their crappy cpus(as compared to superior intel offering) at a low price becoz there cpus doesn't deserve high price tag.

AMD IS ALIVE BECOZ INTEL ALLOWS THEM TO STAY ALIVE.

Please provide proof of this statement..

Opinions dont count as facts im afriad.. No offense but you may have completely missed the point..

 

[reccy]

What kind of proof you want?
1.Proof of how intel cpus thrash amd cpus in games.
2.Or proof of Amd surviving becoz intel want them to survive.

For the first one go check out reviews.

For the second one no one needs proof.Even a child can understand my point.Intel cpus are superior.If intel reduce prices even budget gamers will start buying them.Thus killing amd.

1 - Some do yes, but not everything is down to games, what about video encoding? etc.. Look outside of the box, Not every single Intel Chip "thrashs" AMD..

2 - Yes, you prove to me that Intel are holding AMD's hand in the market, and if they let go, AMD would go under.. To be honest, i dont see it.

The thing is, im not a child, and a child wouldnt be buying either chip, im an Adult and "your" judgement or view onto something doesnt make it right.. Even if it was, explain/provide proof of why they would kill AMD..

You saying they would has no factual evidence to provide a good case.. More of a case of arguments to be fair.. Along the line of that blue car is faster than the red one..

 

[enzo matrix]

Only AMD and Intel atm have x86 license . read this
http://www.tomshardware.com/news/amd-intel-x86-cpu,7285.html

Intel is like the boss. They got x86 license, so only Intel can make processor for our computer and AMD. Intel almost destroy AMD(close the company) but due to court rule in US, there must be at least 2 companies manufacture those( the court doesn't want Intel to rule the market).

There are still alot of companies make processor but not for x86 architecture (our computer), most companies only make for server processor and other digital product. IBM make cell processor for XBOX and PS3, however they can not make processor for laptop and desktop because Intel doesn't allow them or sell license to them. So, only Intel and AMD can make.

why do we always hear Intel and AMD only when it comes to buying processors? because only two companies got x86 license +VIA( VIA is almost gone)

PS+++++ my English is bad, hope you understand.

What do you mean VIA is almost gone?

 

[Guest]

Cyrix made PC processors in the 90's, but they didn't last. The "PC" or long name _IBM PC Compatibles_ uses Intel based chips to begin with, so Intel holds all the cards.

In the old days we had many different types of "home computers" with different processors, and the IBM PC just happened to be one of many.

Even Apple Macs are nothing more than Apple brand PC's (IBM PC Compatibles).

Before AMD vs Intel, In the old days we had Apple vs Commodore64 flame wars, with Atari poking their head in from time to time.

 

[enzo matrix]

Amd survives becoz intel allows them to survive.If intel want they can kill amd within a year.They can easily reduce there cpu price (c2d,c2q).Intel enjoys a huge consumer base.Even if they reduce prices they can still make big profit.

Donot think that amd sells cpu at a low price becoz they love consumer.Truth is that amd is obliged to sell their crappy cpus(as compared to superior intel offering) at a low price becoz there cpus doesn't deserve high price tag.

AMD IS ALIVE BECOZ INTEL ALLOWS THEM TO STAY ALIVE.

AMD survives because people buy their CPUs. The government has laws against monopolies and because if intel somehow got past that and caused AMD to leave the market, they would HAVE to buy AMD in order to keep producing x86-64 processors. Cross licencing agreement.
I'm probably going to be called an AMD fanboy or some such ***** by you for saying that. So I'm not going to say anything more to you.
You are as arrogant as that person on TV I saw once who said Canada exists because the USA "lets them live there."
By the way, honest question, why do you always try to start flame wars?

But forget that. What was this thread about again? Oh yeah, why is only intel and AMD the only CPU manufacturer's considered? They are the only ones with competitive processors on the market. People get the processing power they want at the prices they can afford. However, this is only in regards to x86 CPUs. If My explanation puts VIA out of the picture but with them out of the picture, there is no one else who can produce x86 processors anyway due to licensing. There used to be a lot more x86 manufacturer's but they have all gone bankrupt or moved on to other things. Or been bought out like Cyrix by AMD (I think. I know they bought someone.). And like we've said, the two companies will continue to exist because of laws against monopolies and due to their cross-licensing agreements.

VIA's processors are only viable in the low end market that cares about power consumption.

Microship? They make PIC controllers, not mainstream CPUs. These are for specific tasks to be controlled by, well, the PIC. Look up PIC on wikipedia if you want to know more.

 

[reccy]

^Answer this question.Which one you will buy if a phenom x6 and i7 950 are priced same?If you still say x6 then i would say my pet dog is smarter than you.

But there not in the real world, thats like saying.. Would you buy a Aston Martin DB9 or a Nissan Micra if they were priced the same...

Realisticly Intel has better performaing CPU's but at a higher cost, again as myself and others have stated, not everyone is in the market for the best of the best.

My personaly view on this is AMD is the main stream market holder, whilst Intel has the better performing CPU's...

 

[reccy]

That is exactly my point if intel reduces prices amd will become extinct.Intel can afford to reduce prices becoz of there huge consumer base.I think i proved my point.

You obviously dont, like speaking to a deaf monkey..

Intel have about 70% of the market at the moment, according to google.. But that doesnt mean if they reduce their prices AMD will go bust.. AMD have more main stream CPU's out there at cheaper prices..

Intel seem more based on performing CPU's at higher prices, i still know alot of customers who would choice AMD over Intel.. Intel havent got the power to reduce their prices otherwise they would of to increase their customer base.. The fact is i know there are laws out their to prevent 1 company monopolising (Spelling) a certain area of a market, but im sure if they could make there main competitor work to the limit they would have, and i dont see Intel doing that..

You have no proof that Intel are holding AMD's hand and that they are holding back on reducing their prices on their chips..

Your word on this matter is complete fictional and a matter of opinion, please provide me proof that Intel could lower there prices to see there main/only competitor go under...

 

[Houndsteeth]

Intel is the best...blah blah blah...AMD is the best value for the buck...blah blah blah...

You kids keep nattering with each other on and on. Fanbois of the world unite!!!

As for me, I will buy what makes sense at the time I need to buy. If I need an Intel processor, then that is what I will buy. If and AMD processor makes more sense, then that is what I will buy. Did I find a good sale for an Nvidia graphics card? Schweet! Wait, that was for an AMD card...still schweet!

The minute you start branding yourself to one company or the other, you have closed off the possibility of finding great deals, not just because you have stopped looking at the other guy's product, but because you are contributing to the forces of monopolization.

The more your purchases are directed to one company without a good amount of research, the less that company has to work to win your trust. Soon, the other guy goes out of business and you end up paying 2 to 3 times more for the same product the next time you go shopping.

Buy what makes sense, but stop all this senseless BS going back and forth arguing whose kit is better. The best kit is the one you chose, and leave it at that. And the next time you g out there to buy something, do your homework and compare your budget to what is available. You might surprise yourself.

Keep competition alive! Without it, we wouldn't be able to afford half the stuff we see on TG.