Last message on previous page: Maybe I missed a post or misread the article, but I dont recall the suit being that Phenom sux because Intel is mean.
Intel is being sued because they broke the rules. Period. When you break the rules, someone is gonna blow a whistle. If it can be proved that Intel payed OEMs to use there procs, then Intel should have to hand some of that phat cash over to AMD. I dont care if Netburst outperformed A64 2:1, if Intel was paying people to use it, they were wrong.
I was sucking up the moderator, and I wish to have his babies.
You just want to marry anyone who proves a valid point with facts instead of theory.
As said before, all of it is theory. Hell what Turpit said does make sense. AMD doesn't have the capacity, or at least back then didn't, to fullfill massive orders for OEMs. I remember reading an article a while back where AMD did get some OEM machines started and then would cut out little OEMs that wanted their CPUs all to keep their processors in a well known name OEM.
None of us here can prove it. We just have to see what happens. But if Intel is innocent due to not enough evidence it should stop. No more of it. I just like how there are people who use other countries rulings as a valid point here. This is the US. We all have different laws. Hell I work for a Bank and we cannot do anything on a non US CitiBank account due to different laws and regulations. Whats legal here might not be there.
So to sum it up, until Intel is found guilty don't use it as if it were a fact. And I mean found guilty here in the US. Not in Japan or India or some other BFE place. I mean right here in the US of A.
Im sorry, but Im afraid I must disagree. This debate is one that resurfaces about every 4~6 months, usually re-ignited by the "look -what evil Intel did to AMD" fanboys. And the facts never change. AMDs current situation has nothing to do with any "dodgy dealings", alleged or otherwise, on the part of Intel. AMD put themselves where they are now, and they would be hard pressed to prove Barcelona and their process transition was compromised by lack of funds due to illegal actives on the part of Intel.
Yeah, that agrees with what I've read, here and elsewhere.
I've also read that Ruiz wanted to increase marketshare so much that he cut a lot of OEM deals including with Dell that were financially unsound - i.e., less profitable than would otherwise be expected given their relative product strength at the time. So some people now say Ruiz was not to blame for AMD's current troubles as he was not responsible for hands-on management of technology such as Barcy. Apparently neither was Hester, so why did he leave? Anyway, I think that if the above is true then Ruiz is just as guilty for the company's current downfall and should get canned by the board of directors. If not, the shareholders should can them.
AMD's product just really under power.a quad core amd beating a dual core intel.a tri core amd cant beat a dual core intel.so when dont they compare the performance of each processor from each company,and make a conclusion why people buy from one and not the other.its pretty clear and obvious!
well unless the "anti-winner and suck up to looser" people are so dumb that they choose the more garbage product then something which is clearly more powerful.
AMD's product just really under power.a quad core amd beating a dual core intel.a tri core amd cant beat a dual core intel.so when dont they compare the performance of each processor from each company,and make a conclusion why people buy from one and not the other.its pretty clear and obvious!
well unless the "anti-winner and suck up to looser" people are so dumb that they choose the more garbage product then something which is clearly more powerful.
Hmm, does the word 'Prescott' mean anything to you?
yeah of course.but thats thing at the past.Intel learn from mistake and improve.but amd just proud and lay back.thats how it got ended up like this.did intel do such thing as try to get money off competitor through court?
intel is clearly playing dirty,but i see it as unnecessary dont know why intel did it as there is no need.even if intel make so much "advertising" with so many retailer,but if the product isnt great we wont buy.simple!
i got a friend work in a online retailer.he told me(secretly-company info) that people buying intel processor is 5 time more then AMD's processor.so what does that say?people buy what is superior.
Guys/gals the website is a US based one (at least the host is US, same town as where I live. I actually know where the host is physically located btw). Here is proof for overclockers.com:
here are newegg results: so the utility works and the results are accurate.
Message edited by Shadow703793 on 04-18-2008 at 02:17:04 AM
yeah of course.but thats thing at the past.Intel learn from mistake and improve.but amd just proud and lay back.thats how it got ended up like this.did intel do such thing as try to get money off competitor through court?
intel is clearly playing dirty,but i see it as unnecessary dont know why intel did it as there is no need.even if intel make so much "advertising" with so many retailer,but if the product isnt great we wont buy.simple!
i got a friend work in a online retailer.he told me(secretly-company info) that people buying intel processor is 5 time more then AMD's processor.so what does that say?people buy what is superior.
It would seem that you dont understand the AMD vs Intel case, the suit is in regards to the period when AMD processors were better. Intel didnt try to take money from AMD at court, instead it spent money to make sure that PC manufacturers wouldnt buy AMD procs. Everyone seems to think that AMD is suing Intel because K10 didnt kick ass and take names, that is a separate issue. Just because two things happen at the same time doesnt mean there related.
Im not a fanboy, and Ill say this, reverse the names, I dont care. If Intel is found guilty, it wont matter what any of us think. If it were AMD, and they were found guilty, it still wouldnt matter what we think. AMD arrived late to the party with Barcy. It came in with less than hoped, and hyped. However, this isnt about Barcelona, but about a time when AMD was the king. All Im saying is, keeping it in context is what the judges will be demanding. Who knows how itll go
Or AMD could have not decided to spend [b]ALL of their money and a large loan on ATI and put that into Phenoms R&D[/b]. Obviously since they decided to purchase ATI, Barcenlona obviously was through with R&D. AMD is not so ignorant and stupid to put themselves in a large debt to purchase a company and let their R&D suffer while having a rival companies product dominate the market.
Phenom not performing is all AMD's responsability. Even if they had the extra $10B it wouldn't have changed that because no right minded company would even think of purchasing another company a risking their main product line. The fact is that Phenom/Barcy just wasn't what AMD was expecting it to be.
And Turpit, +1BILLION points for one of the best thought out, detailed and written replys on this thread.
Come on Jimmy, you're smarter than that. Reread Turpit's post where it says
Quote :
The purchase of ATI was a very wise move for AMD.
Quote :
Phenom not performing is all AMD's responsability. Even if they had the extra $10B it wouldn't have changed that
Barcelona is AMD's problem, and is irrelevent to the law suit. Just the same
having a few extra bucks in the old cookie jar may have allowed them to do a bit more testing, but since it's just not pertinent to the case, it just doesn't matter.
The law suit was filed because of what Intel had done (allegedly), not what they will may have been doing in the future.
As to the bit about in the U.S. , the Law of the land is what counts.
Go to Japan and rob a bank, you are a bankrobber, period.
This is an international forum. (It was actually started by a German in England). This thread alone has enties from 1/2 dozen countries. Are you saying that only U.S. posts count?
Im not a fanboy, and Ill say this, reverse the names, I dont care. If Intel is found guilty, it wont matter what any of us think. If it were AMD, and they were found guilty, it still wouldnt matter what we think. AMD arrived late to the party with Barcy. It came in with less than hoped, and hyped. However, this isnt about Barcelona, but about a time when AMD was the king. All Im saying is, keeping it in context is what the judges will be demanding. Who knows how itll go
Don't we think this Intel OEM bit is obsessive now...
I mean as Jaydeejohn says at this stage what does it matter if Intel are guilty or not...
AMD has taken on more than it can chew with the ATI Purchase.... If Intel have to pay out, and if AMD are around long enough for the payout, then things will look better for AMD. But I honestly dont think AMD will around that much to be able to benifit from it as its own identity...
There has been a trend with AMD, with many people saying its just what happends when running a business, if Intel didnt do this and Intel didnt do that but when the chief technical guy leaves AMD, and thats not a good indication..That means he or the company has does something wrong...
