From ATI to AMD back to ATI? A Journey in Futility @ [H]

[NKD]

They paid it in 2009. Its just the appeal. Your article says this as well.




Nobody is going to keep AMD alive. They serve no purpose in that regard. There is plenty of competition from ARM alone if you absolutely need it as other companies.

And good luck with Zen.

You know, we haven't had cheaper CPUs the last 10 years after AMD became irrelevant. Consider that for a moment.

Remember the semiconductor industry, unlike most others, depends on vast amounts of cash flows to stay running. Competition as such is entirely pointless in this segment because its self regulating. No innovation or too high prices both leads to the bankrupt of the producing company. Welcome to dynamic demand.

they did not pay that fine. They paid a fine to AMD in the US. This was EU fining intel on their own. They still have not paid it to EU, they appealed it in 2014 and got denied and they still are appealing it lol..

The AMD vs Intel was settled for 1.25 billin in the U.S. EU had their own fine against intel later, which they refused to pay to EU until this day.

 

[razor1]

They paid that fine, it was something like 1 and odd billion Euros. They have been appealing it since.

Here ya go

Intel required to pay $1.4 billion fine over anticompetitive tactics against AMD

 

[NKD]

They paid that fine, it was something like 1 and odd billion Euros. They have been appealing it since.

Here ya go

Intel required to pay $1.4 billion fine over anticompetitive tactics against AMD

Well some sites have been saying that they haven't' paid it. O well at this point I really don't know lol. I guess they if they did why appeal something that you already paid for? Its like serving a sentence and then appealing it. No way EU withdraws 1.45 billion and gives it back, at that point don't know what they are fighting.

 

[razor1]

They had to pay it, once a court rules they have to pay they have a set a time to pay, either in installments or flat out amount by a certain time doesn't matter if they are appealing the decision or not.

During the appeals process judgement of a case is still upheld.

That's why if they sentence someone to prison doesn't matter if they are appealing, ya still go to prison in that time lol.

*this is not a law suit btw, if that is what you are thinking, this is a fine, law suits can possible have extensions on payments based on certain criteria one of them being an appeal, fines don't have that kind of contingencies like placing the money in an escrow while the appeal is in progress.

 

[Shintai]

Well some sites have been saying that they haven't' paid it. O well at this point I really don't know lol. I guess they if they did why appeal something that you already paid for? Its like serving a sentence and then appealing it. No way EU withdraws 1.45 billion and gives it back, at that point don't know what they are fighting.

Yes, tech "journalism" is a town in outer Siberia and clickbaits sell.

The fine is paid long ago. You can find it in Intels financials result too from the time.

 

[Ed DeLoach]

I have got to say, RTG would be a huge increase in performance for Intel over the crap they are putting out now, so I think Kyles point about their mistake to take on RTG at this time is a mistake.

 

[FrgMstr]

The licensing deal between AMD and Intel is signed and done for putting AMD GPU tech into Intel's iGPU.

 

[razor1]

just licensing

 

[Digital Viper-X-]

just licensing

I guess good for AMD, if they made this deal right.

 

[FrgMstr]

Wait, so is Intel buying RTG? or just licensing some tech for their iGPU?

Licensing. Edited to make clear.

 

[FrgMstr]

does this mean dogs will be sleeping with cats?

maybe we get the phantom console too...

Intel in no way wants this to be public.

 

[NKD]

licensing, makes sense. I guess AMD could use some extra revenue coming in from this. Intel did have some agreement with Nvidia in 2011 to pay 1.5 billion over 5 years in cross licensing agreement. Looks like that expired and that little extra cash will go to AMD. Good for them. Hope that in return will help their R&D a little lol. Now to zen.

 

[Brackle]

This needs to be on the Front page! Let Hardocp be the website to leak the info!!!

 

[Brackle]

So I'm guessing this is more to do with licensing GPU technologies and not the actual GPU itself. Hopefully this partner helps AMD out in making better GPU's as AMD is doing enough to hurt themselves. Regardless they have nothing to gain to keep it secret other than to prevent Nvidia from flipping their lids.

TBH I think Intel doesn't give a Rats Arse about what Nvidia thinks lol.

 

[Trimlock]

TBH I think Intel doesn't give a Rats Arse about what Nvidia thinks lol.

I'm sure any corporation has the toolset to make business decisions like this a pain in the ass.

For instance if Nvidia has the capability to take this license to court, that would cost Intel money, while keeping it secret won't make any noise.

 

[Brackle]

I'm sure any corporation has the toolset to make business decisions like this a pain in the ass.

For instance if Nvidia has the capability to take this license to court, that would cost Intel money, while keeping it secret won't make any noise.

Well Nvidia tried this with Samsung and lost. So I do not see them doing the same thing here. This is a licensing agreement. Intel did not buy AMD. This is like Intel using AMD's X64 tech, and AMD using Intel SSE instruction set. I am sure AMD will get something in return to letting Intel use its GPU tech.

 

[NKD]

This actually makes sense. win win for both sides. AMD tech in Intel CPU so even if

I'm sure any corporation has the toolset to make business decisions like this a pain in the ass.

For instance if Nvidia has the capability to take this license to court, that would cost Intel money, while keeping it secret won't make any noise.

no they wont. Intel paid nvidia 1.5 billion over 5 years starting in 2011. Guess what its 2016 and its good riddance. Intel never really wanted that anyways I think it was more like a legal issue that made them both kiss each other. So now we are 5 years in and this is being done.

Oh and I am starting to think Kyle's source is Koduri. ROFL

There were already rumors of this early this year in march when a few sites reported it. So looks like its finally a done deal. Intel's agreement with nvidia expires march 2017. So probably will be officially announced closer to that if ever.

 

[DrLobotomy]

Wow. My head hurts thinking of Intel APU's. I wonder if NVidia will get a lump in their throat.

 

[lolfail9001]

Guys, you are blowing the deal out of proportion. Especially those that think it will make Intel iGPUs any less rubbish.

 

[SighTurtle]

So I'm a little behind, AMD and Intel have concluded a licensing agreement for AMD tech to be used on Intel igpus?

Now why would Nvidia be pissed about that? This 2011 agreement was along the same lines of nvidia licensing tech to intel?

Also I remember a rumor? That Intel was cutting down on its graphics department some time ago, that isn't true right?

 

[NKD]

So I'm a little behind, AMD and Intel have concluded a licensing agreement for AMD tech to be used on Intel igpus?

Now why would Nvidia be pissed about that? This 2011 agreement was along the same lines of nvidia licensing tech to intel?

Also I remember a rumor? That Intel was cutting down on its graphics department some time ago, that isn't true right?

The licensing agreement I think was more from legal shit they were going through. From what I read Intel never really used any of the nvidia tech. It was more like shut the fuck up nvidia price I think lol.

 

[SighTurtle]

The licensing agreement I think was more from legal shit they were going through. From what I read Intel never really used any of the nvidia tech. It was more like shut the fuck up nvidia price I think lol.

So I found this article on the matter.

 

[NKD]

So I found this article on the matter.

Yep confirms what I was sayiing, thanks. I didn't research much this time. Looks like intel didn't really want nvidia making boards for their chips. Now I am not going to lie, I had nothing but fucking shit load of problems with nvidia chipsets. Good riddance!!

 

[Deleted member 93354]

Holy crap...That's the death nail.

 

[Shintai]

Intel already license Nvidia IP. To add AMD IP is trivial and gives the team more things to work with.

 

[Deleted member 93354]

I'm not sure I get this. iGPU is horrible no matter how you cut it. AMD's solutions were only mildly faster than Intels. Limited resources, limited power, limited memory bandwidth. How exactly is this to be beneficial to each?

And while APU's weren't a big seller they were a niche market where AMD had a slight lead. You would think they would need every sale they could get! Those sales will go to Intel now.

 

[Brackle]

I'm not sure I get this. iGPU is horrible no matter how you cut it. AMD's solutions were only mildly faster than Intels. Limited resources, limited power, limited memory bandwidth. How exactly is this to be beneficial to each?

Easy. HBM......If Intel is able to make an APU like Vega with HBM it would be 1 monster gaming chip. TBH AMD usually fails in doing something well. Now with Intel having the licenses, lets see what a real Tech company can do.

This is good news for the future.

The real question is, what did AMD get in return? Money? Intel cross licensing?

 

[Shintai]

Easy. HBM......If Intel is able to make an APU like Vega with HBM it would be 1 monster gaming chip. TBH AMD usually fails in doing something well. Now with Intel having the licenses, lets see what a real Tech company can do.

This is good news for the future.

The real question is, what did AMD get in return? Money? Intel cross licensing?

HBM isn't the issue. Think IP. And Intel is already far ahead than AMD on this area. See Xeon Phi.

You are very limited in what you can do graphics wise without the IP from Nvidia and AMD. Specially since Imagination Technologies went downhill.

AMD will get a little bit of cash from it I expect, just as Nvidia. Nothing big but easy steady money. Perhaps 50M$ per quarter.

 

[Shintai]

licensing, makes sense. I guess AMD could use some extra revenue coming in from this. Intel did have some agreement with Nvidia in 2011 to pay 1.5 billion over 5 years in cross licensing agreement. Looks like that expired and that little extra cash will go to AMD. Good for them. Hope that in return will help their R&D a little lol. Now to zen.

It expires in march 2017. But its obviously up for renewal. Any IP changes or such can take years to implement. However they will simply license from both from the looks of it.

 

[Factum]

Easy. HBM......If Intel is able to make an APU like Vega with HBM it would be 1 monster gaming chip. TBH AMD usually fails in doing something well. Now with Intel having the licenses, lets see what a real Tech company can do.

This is good news for the future.

The real question is, what did AMD get in return? Money? Intel cross licensing?

HBM is not the answer.

And CPU with an IGP is an economic trade-off.
HBM is expensive.

So you will not see normal desktop CPU's with HBM anytime soon.
And with HBM...you limit the amount of RAM...you cannot expand the amount, you are stuck with what ever the SKU was born with.

I am so tied of hearing "HBM" being touted as the solution to anything...by people ignoring those facts.

 

[Shintai]

HBM is not the answer.

And CPU with an IGP is an economic trade-off.
HBM is expensive.

So you will not see normal desktop CPU's with HBM anytime soon.
And with HBM...you limit the amount of RAM...you cannot expand the amount, you are stuck with what ever the SKU was born with.

I am so tied of hearing "HBM" being touted as the solution to anything...by people ignoring those facts.

Yep. Even AMD said so and why its restricted to the top.

Its quite easy to see products that gets this tech.
Fiji/Vega type cards. HBM
GP100. HBM
KNL. HMC
Various FPGAs. HBM/HMC

Common denominator=very expensive.

 

[mesyn191]

HBM isn't the issue. Think IP. And Intel is already far ahead than AMD on this area. See Xeon Phi.

Xeon Phi is shit for a GPU. Perf/watt and die size efficiency is terrible for that work load. Xeon Phi is HPC number crunching not graphics.

 

[Shintai]

Xeon Phi is shit for a GPU. Perf/watt and die size efficiency is terrible for that work load. Xeon Phi is HPC number crunching not graphics.

It was in regard to memory. But even then, the most feature complete GPU so far sits in Skylake.

 

[mesyn191]

HBM is not the answer.

Short term this is correct. Long term (ie. 1-3yr) is probably a different story. If they don't or can't use HBM to fix the iGPU bandwidth issue they'll have to do on package DRAM of some sort or quad channel DDR4. Either of those options are also expensive but unlike HBM they don't scale to well. HBM is the most likely thing that'll get used eventually when you think about it.

Food for thought: AMD Fury's are currently going for $259 on sale right now. $359 is more typical. Probably no or little profit at that lower price but still. HBM is probably closer to affordable mass manufacture that you might believe.

 

[Shintai]

Short term this is correct. Long term (ie. 1-3yr) is probably a different story. If they don't or can't use HBM to fix the iGPU bandwidth issue they'll have to do on package DRAM of some sort or quad channel DDR4. Either of those options are also expensive but unlike HBM they don't scale to well. HBM is the most likely thing that'll get used eventually when you think about it.

Food for thought: AMD Fury's are currently going for $259 on sale right now. $359 is more typical. Probably no or little profit at that lower price but still. HBM is probably closer to affordable mass manufacture that you might believe.

In terms of your Fury cards, I bet you those are sold with a direct loss. And even then they essentially dont sell. Fiji have been nothing but a loss for AMD.

Now, what is the supposed HBM/HMC CPU going to cost? It serves very little to no benefit on the CPU side. So it needs to offer something EDRAM for example doesn't, and then add enough value to pay for HBM/HMC. So what does it offer that's so great its worth 100$ or more and possible limit you to 8GB?

The problem with IGP graphics is there is always a better dGPU option in the perf/$ area. And that the IGP cant handle the TDP issues with the faster memory. Look at AMDs APUs, its throttle monsters beyond hell and you want to increase the GPU load?

HBM/HMC also uses a lot more power than DRAM in terms of density. So you are directly increasing the TDP as well.

 

[mesyn191]

It was in regard to memory. But even then, the most feature complete GPU so far sits in Skylake.

None of that matters to the previous point you were trying to make though. A bunch of simple x86 cores aren't going to be able to compete with a properly designed GPU. The fixed function hardware that is used alone pretty much guarantees it. Sure you can slap all kinds of fixed function hardware on die with a bunch of simple x86 cores too but the die size + power efficiency problem doesn't go away. Even with Intel's processes and fabs it won't work.

 

[JustReason]

In terms of your Fury cards, I bet you those are sold with a direct loss. And even then they essentially dont sell. Fiji have been nothing but a loss for AMD.

Now, what is the supposed HBM/HMC CPU going to cost? It serves very little to no benefit on the CPU side. So it needs to offer something EDRAM for example doesn't, and then add enough value to pay for HBM/HMC. So what does it offer that's so great its worth 100$ or more and possible limit you to 8GB?

The problem with IGP graphics is there is always a better dGPU option in the perf/$ area. And that the IGP cant handle the TDP issues with the faster memory. Look at AMDs APUs, its throttle monsters beyond hell and you want to increase the GPU load?

Stop being obtuse and read "long term". Stating facts for todays cost say ABSOLUTELY nothing of tomorrow. HBM1 was likely somewhat expensive, going forward those cost do diminish.

 

[Shintai]

None of that matters to the previous point you were trying to make though. A bunch of simple x86 cores aren't going to be able to compete with a properly designed GPU. The fixed function hardware that is used alone pretty much guarantees it. Sure you can slap all kinds of fixed function hardware on die with a bunch of simple x86 cores too but the die size + power efficiency problem doesn't go away. Even with Intel's processes and fabs it won't work.

Yet Xeon Phi sells like hotcakes. Maybe you should look on what HPC loads there are and when what is used. The GPU isn't some kind of universal fix.

 

[Shintai]

Stop being obtuse and read "long term". Stating facts for todays cost say ABSOLUTELY nothing of tomorrow. HBM1 was likely somewhat expensive, going forward those cost do diminish.

So what's the time line? And why would it be this tech and not something else?

Maybe you missed the info about HBM, but cost haven't come down. And now they struggle to make some cheaper feature and performance cut version that may reduce the cost a little in the far future. Its just barely on the drawing board.

I am quite aware that some people want HBM/HMC because omg its "new" and then forget/reject anything else related about it.

 

[Space_Ranger]

I wonder if this is an in for Intel to get their APU into the console market??