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

Yeah, it's been half a year since this "sure thing" fresh shit was first aired, and I still see nothing but dried-up shit.

The only reason Intel licensed Nvidia's patents was part of case settlement payout, and I'm sure that settlement included no more suits from Nvidia (or they would have continued the license deal).

If Intel doesn't fear other GPU vendor's patent portfolios, then I don't see them wasting the money. Everyone assumes they're in for a "world of hurt," but how many GPU companies aside from Nvidia went on the patent warpath recently?
...Snip.
AMD did actually in February-March :)
http://www.anandtech.com/show/11101/amd-files-patent-complaint-against-mediatek-lg-vizio
http://www.itcblog.com/images/amdcomplaint.pdf
ITC is investigating.
Cheers
 
So is this is just a licensing agreement to avoid patent lawsuits or is Intel going to actually use AMD Radeon Graphics for their CPU integrated processor graphics?
 
No one knows for sure until one of the companies comments on it. Possible it's both. But Intel has no choice unless they want to build a GPU from scratch that infringes on no patents from any GPU company. Patents last a very long time and both Nvidia and AMD have proved they will go after people if they infringe. My guess is Intel will use AMD made GPU's as that allows Intel to just cut that whole division and save cash, would be a smart move and play with AMD's want to control more of the market share. Speculation is fun tho.
 
No one knows for sure until one of the companies comments on it. Possible it's both. But Intel has no choice unless they want to build a GPU from scratch that infringes on no patents from any GPU company. Patents last a very long time and both Nvidia and AMD have proved they will go after people if they infringe. My guess is Intel will use AMD made GPU's as that allows Intel to just cut that whole division and save cash, would be a smart move and play with AMD's want to control more of the market share. Speculation is fun tho.

Who is Apple getting patents from with their own custom GPU?
 
Actually Apple still has a agreement for 2 years and then they drop them. Imagination Tech is suing them over it tho, saying they still need the patents.
 
Right, WHETHER they actually need the patents is still up-in-the-air. As is the case with AMD's suits.

Still not seeing undying proof that building your own GPU is a legal minefield. The last successful case I can remember was Intel v Nvidia.
 
This is awesome news. I always thought that Intel and AMD should bury the hatchet and collaborate more. This is a very positive step in that direction. I always wondered what a handpicked team of Intel and AMD's best and brightest could design.
 
Right, WHETHER they actually need the patents is still up-in-the-air. As is the case with AMD's suits.

Still not seeing undying proof that building your own GPU is a legal minefield. The last successful case I can remember was Intel v Nvidia.

Build a GPU and sell it to the public and see how many lawyers come for you. Intel would be the closest you have to undying proof since they lost their case to Nvidia and went to a licensing agreement.
 
Haha, win: https://hardforum.com/threads/amd-q...epared-remarks.1931206/page-2#post-1042977852

A work friend says I should wait for a Vega hype bounce, then sell before the performance numbers are known. I think I'll hold until AMD can show some Ryzen profits though... I don't think Vega will be nearly as much of an impact maker on the stock. Anyways, thanks to the long squeeze a couple weeks ago, I got some cheap stock that's appreciated nearly 30% in two weeks. :) Entirely predictable in magnitude but not expecting it this quickly.
 
This is awesome news. I always thought that Intel and AMD should bury the hatchet and collaborate more. This is a very positive step in that direction. I always wondered what a handpicked team of Intel and AMD's best and brightest could design.

It is more or less which red head stepchild Intel picks rather then some form of affection for AMD. This time AMD got picked but there is no reason to see this in any other way as the Nvidia deal Intel had before.
 
More importantly, it's a much needed infusion of cash for AMD, they are still burning through it at a fast clip till Ryzen and Vega show some results
 
It's down 8% right now and trading below 12 again. Not sure how much bounce is left. Russia stuff is weighing on the market right now.


Haha, win: https://hardforum.com/threads/amd-q...epared-remarks.1931206/page-2#post-1042977852

A work friend says I should wait for a Vega hype bounce, then sell before the performance numbers are known. I think I'll hold until AMD can show some Ryzen profits though... I don't think Vega will be nearly as much of an impact maker on the stock. Anyways, thanks to the long squeeze a couple weeks ago, I got some cheap stock that's appreciated nearly 30% in two weeks. :) Entirely predictable in magnitude but not expecting it this quickly.
 
The longer this Russian thing goes, the more volatility we should expect in the stock market is how I see it.
 
The longer this Russian thing goes, the more volatility we should expect in the stock market is how I see it.
The same old tired, worn out muh russia bullshit is just to cover up the Seth Rich - Wikileaks Clinton hit + subsequent investigations that will continue to find information, encompassing all parts of the political sphere across 'party lines', exposing the criminal and disgusting acts and treason committed by many, including corruption and manipulation by a certain country or two, in order to parasitise USA. That will shake up the markets indeed.
 
If this was intended for a customer (and not Intel suddenly selling it as a Intel part), would it be fair to suggest that neither Intel nor AMD would be allowed to comment on such a matter before the customer wanted to?
 
It is, they didn't say it was dead, just standard denial until they are ready to say otherwise. Otherwise they would have said there will be no deal with AMD when they were asked. When you get a no comment for further details there is something there, just not ready to say what.
 
It is, they didn't say it was dead, just standard denial until they are ready to say otherwise. Otherwise they would have said there will be no deal with AMD when they were asked. When you get a no comment for further details there is something there, just not ready to say what.

This is the quote, "The recent rumors that Intel has licensed AMD's graphics technology are untrue." That sounds pretty dead to me. I don't get why you think Intel declining to say more would signal ambiguity. Regardless, I'm gonna stick with the notion Intel and AMD are sworn to silence by the party buying this.
 
This is the quote, "The recent rumors that Intel has licensed AMD's graphics technology are untrue." That sounds pretty dead to me. I don't get why you think Intel declining to say more would signal ambiguity. Regardless, I'm gonna stick with the notion Intel and AMD are sworn to silence by the party buying this.


This quote from the little article is why "I asked Intel if the company has any further detail on whether it has definitely decided not to license technology from AMD. The company said no further detail would be provided."
 
This quote from the little article is why "I asked Intel if the company has any further detail on whether it has definitely decided not to license technology from AMD. The company said no further detail would be provided."

What kinda further detail could Intel provide? A laundry list of pretty simple "AMD is our competitor" x10, we don't need it, etc, etc. And that laundry list would only bring more questions. Simply saying, No this isn't true, is enough. Tell me, what would Intel say that would represent a clear denial? Not withstanding any "forever" statements.
 
What kinda further detail could Intel provide? A laundry list of pretty simple "AMD is our competitor" x10, we don't need it, etc, etc. And that laundry list would only bring more questions. Simply saying, No this isn't true, is enough. Tell me, what would Intel say that would represent a clear denial? Not withstanding any "forever" statements.

We are not looking to license any GPU technology nor are we in any talks at this time or in the near future.

Just a straight we have no deal at this time is a pretty standard denial when talks are in progress or a deal is made but not ready to be official. For instance at Chrysler I would have told you something similar when Daimler was looking to sell us to someone. Even tho it's obvious that something is going on. Corporate world is quite different and large companies dont always react the way you expect. I am not saying for sure I am right but I have some faith in Kyle as well.
 
We are not looking to license any GPU technology nor are we in any talks at this time or in the near future.

Just a straight we have no deal at this time is a pretty standard denial when talks are in progress or a deal is made but not ready to be official. For instance at Chrysler I would have told you something similar when Daimler was looking to sell us to someone. Even tho it's obvious that something is going on. Corporate world is quite different and large companies dont always react the way you expect. I am not saying for sure I am right but I have some faith in Kyle as well.

Don't forget the ending of the Intel-Nvidia patent agreement. If they are trying to remain vague, the wording of denial will conflict with future Intel-AMD patent agreements, something much more likely to occur. So this one sentence answer could be all they can say before that patent agreement goes through.
 
  • Like
Reactions: spine
like this
I think the way a lot of this reporting has to work is that there is 100% no deal until the deal is concluded and filed (even if they have been discussing it for months and are in agreement). Once that is done both companies will probably announce it simultaneously.
 
the fact that anyone trusts corporate PR statements & wont read into them at all never ceases to astound me

The fact that people keep believing rumors when they are flat out denied, astounds me.

The rumor was this was a signed, done deal, something like a year ago.

If that were true, Intel could not say there is no such deal, without risk of lawsuit.

At best Intel might have had talks with AMD, but clearly no deal was signed.

That rumor was false.
 
Could Kyle be accountable for releasing unsubstained rumors which made AMD stock price skyrocket and then bounce back?
 
nope he has nothing to do with AMD, he doesn't have any direct influence over stock prices.
 
nope he has nothing to do with AMD, he doesn't have any direct influence over stock prices.

His post did have a direct influence over stock prices. I assume he didn't have any AMD stock so he didn't benefit from it. But some people did.
 
he has not direct influence because he is not associated with AMD, his article is other people believing on info that was not confirmed that is the same thing as an analyst downgrading or upgrading a stock based on certain info that may or may not be correct. Just because Warren Buffet buys preferred shares doesn't' mean its a good time to buy the same stock that he is getting preferred shares in right?
 
he has not direct influence because he is not associated with AMD, his article is other people believing on info that was not confirmed that is the same thing as an analyst downgrading or upgrading a stock based on certain info that may or may not be correct. Just because Warren Buffet buys preferred shares doesn't' mean its a good time to buy the same stock that he is getting preferred shares in right?

The stock surged ~12% on Fudzilla's "confirmation" of this rumor. That is influence.
 
he has not direct influence because he is not associated with AMD, his article is other people believing on info that was not confirmed that is the same thing as an analyst downgrading or upgrading a stock based on certain info that may or may not be correct. Just because Warren Buffet buys preferred shares doesn't' mean its a good time to buy the same stock that he is getting preferred shares in right?

Wether he is associated with AMD or not is irrelevant. His information had a direct effect on stock prices.

Now I'm not saying he is accountable, but [H] is a reputable site, so when he said it was a done deal, I believed him, even when I thought it was far fetched.
 
I'm not sure what Kyle had to gain from leaking this rumor in the first place unless he was secretly invested in AMD stock. He's risking his and this site's reputation on claiming it's a "done deal" and now it's blowing up in his face.
 
I'm not sure what Kyle had to gain from leaking this rumor in the first place unless he was secretly invested in AMD stock. He's risking his and this site's reputation on claiming it's a "done deal" and now it's blowing up in his face.

I trust that Kyle told us the truth as he knew it, but he probably placed too much trust in someone who didn't deserve it.
 
Back
Top