Samsung Rumored to Be Acquiring AMD

pxc

Extremely [H]
Joined
Oct 22, 2000
Messages
33,064
Zarathustra[H];1041515128 said:
In fact, our desktops could be faster, AND use less power if we moved away from x86.
lol, no. As ARM has moved up into original Core performance territory, it's also seen significant increases in power consumption. Nothing comes for free. You can have low power and low performance, or higher power and better performance. There is no magical ARM pixie dust.
 

tetris42

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Apr 29, 2014
Messages
4,518
Oops, I lied, Samsung has more cash reserves now than Apple, I didn't realize that. Pretty ridiculous that the company has so much money, when the OBVIOUS investment of that money should be in its employees that make the company the money in the first place. That's how pirate ships worked... if you attacked a Spanish galleon and it was full of gold, you divided it up and the officers and captain would get a larger share, but you didn't have a total divorce where how much money coming in was irrelevant to how little the sailors were paid that are fixed income regardless of the profitability of the enterprise. And pirate ships were democracies in which bad captains could simply be voted off, and everyone had their little say in how things were run with real accountability in management (if a captain was REALLY REALLY incompetent, they might kill him instead of just vote him off).

Pretty broken as system, and sad that we really need to look at how pirates run things to make a more fair system!
Yeah, you're basically describing syndicalism. The idea being everyone gets a voice in the operation of a company and there isn't such a massive divide between the people on the top and the people on the bottom. It's far more democratic than what most businesses / corporations have now.
 

Zarathustra[H]

Official Forum Curmudgeon
Joined
Oct 29, 2000
Messages
29,482
lol, no. As ARM has moved up into original Core performance territory, it's also seen significant increases in power consumption. Nothing comes for free. You can have low power and low performance, or higher power and better performance. There is no magical ARM pixie dust.
Pay attention to what I said and what I didn't say.

I didn't suggest that ARM would be the alternative solution for desktops. I DID however say that the legacy x86 instructions don't make sense today for any other reason than software compatibility.

That being said, I would still argue that a well optimized ARM instruction set would definitely perform better in the desktop arena than x86 in perormance/watt, all else being equal.

The only reason Intels x86 SoC's are competitive in this area is because they are able to stay a process node ahead on launch. This won't be able to continue for ever.
 

Zarathustra[H]

Official Forum Curmudgeon
Joined
Oct 29, 2000
Messages
29,482
Oops, I lied, Samsung has more cash reserves now than Apple, I didn't realize that. Pretty ridiculous that the company has so much money, when the OBVIOUS investment of that money should be in its employees that make the company the money in the first place. That's how pirate ships worked... if you attacked a Spanish galleon and it was full of gold, you divided it up and the officers and captain would get a larger share, but you didn't have a total divorce where how much money coming in was irrelevant to how little the sailors were paid that are fixed income regardless of the profitability of the enterprise. And pirate ships were democracies in which bad captains could simply be voted off, and everyone had their little say in how things were run with real accountability in management (if a captain was REALLY REALLY incompetent, they might kill him instead of just vote him off).

Pretty broken as system, and sad that we really need to look at how pirates run things to make a more fair system!
Disagree.

Employees are resources, and should be paid at their going market rates.

No one should be paid more than the free market makes them be paid.
 

Zarathustra[H]

Official Forum Curmudgeon
Joined
Oct 29, 2000
Messages
29,482
Zarathustra[H];1041515240 said:
Disagree.

Employees are resources, and should be paid at their going market rates.

No one should be paid more than the free market makes them be paid.
To add to this, Samsung is a corporation.

The purpose of a corporation is to add value for its investors.

EVERYTHING it does should be towards that goal.
 

pxc

Extremely [H]
Joined
Oct 22, 2000
Messages
33,064
Zarathustra[H];1041515238 said:
Pay attention to what I said and what I didn't say.

I didn't suggest that ARM would be the alternative solution for desktops. I DID however say that the legacy x86 instructions don't make sense today for any other reason than software compatibility.

That being said, I would still argue that a well optimized ARM instruction set would definitely perform better in the desktop arena than x86 in perormance/watt, all else being equal.

The only reason Intels x86 SoC's are competitive in this area is because they are able to stay a process node ahead on launch. This won't be able to continue for ever.
Let's look at what you wrote again, with even more quoted for context:
Zarathustra[H];1041515128 said:
In fact, our desktops could be faster, AND use less power if we moved away from x86. Legacy compatibility is the only reason for x86.
...
The only reason Intel is even competitive in the SoC space with x86 chips is because their advantages in small process node manufacturing. At equal process nodes ARM absolutely destroys x86.
1. No, there is no other architecture which is faster and uses less power, and which is suitable for replacing x86 on the desktop. None, not even considering the poorer economics of scale such a hypothetical replacement would have, and definitely not anything ARM has announced in the pipeline.

2. No, the only reason for x86 is not legacy compatibility, although it does help keep the manufacturing volume high and support a large commodity PC industry. x86 continues to be improved, with software targeting those new features, and is a vibrant example of modern microprocessor architecture advances. I mean, what other ISA is there that runs on everything from 3/4 lb tablets to big iron mainframes (and even crappy phones, if you really want)?

3. You can only compare older x86 processor architectures with far later ARM designs when you limit it to same node, so it's not exactly an apples to apples comparison. I'm not sure why anyone would do that, except when struggling to reach for something positive and unimportant. Price, power and release frame are valid real world metrics. ARM's licensing model is what generally limits node, since designs must be manufacturable from multiple foundries. Some companies put in more work (and have an architecture license) to tune the designs, such as Samsung, which has a significant benefit from vertical manufacturing, in both clock speeds and target node. Good thing they didn't do something stupid like sell off their fabs and still hope to be competitive. :D

I'm not sure why you objected to me using ARM as an example since the post I responded to exclusively compared x86 to ARM and in your response, only compared it again to ARM. lol
 

next-Jin

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Mar 29, 2006
Messages
6,253
Zarathustra[H];1041515240 said:
Disagree.

Employees are resources, and should be paid at their going market rates.

No one should be paid more than the free market makes them be paid.
Yep.
 

Ducman69

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jul 12, 2007
Messages
10,445
Zarathustra[H];1041515240 said:
Disagree.

Employees are resources, and should be paid at their going market rates.

No one should be paid more than the free market makes them be paid.
But what happens when the market rates are dicated by a select few individuals in positions of power? Such as boards and CEOs that are all buddy buddy and award themselves massive multimillion dollar bonuses, while laying off tens of thousands and placing cost-of-living increase freezes on compensation?

That's the problem, is that the "market" can massively divorce company contribution from compensation, thanks to the influence of 1% of the workforce.
 

tetris42

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Apr 29, 2014
Messages
4,518
Zarathustra[H];1041515243 said:
To add to this, Samsung is a corporation.

The purpose of a corporation is to add value for its investors.

EVERYTHING it does should be towards that goal.
Might want to look up the Mondragon corporation. It's one of the more successful ones in Europe, run democratically by the workers. You say everything should be towards that goal, that's only because it's the investors saying that. In companies that practice syndicalism, what the employees in the company decide on is what goes. Investors in those companies know that also. Might want to rethink your assumptions.

That said, Samsung is obviously not one of those types of corporations.
 

Zarathustra[H]

Official Forum Curmudgeon
Joined
Oct 29, 2000
Messages
29,482
But what happens when the market rates are dicated by a select few individuals in positions of power? Such as boards and CEOs that are all buddy buddy and award themselves massive multimillion dollar bonuses, while laying off tens of thousands and placing cost-of-living increase freezes on compensation?

That's the problem, is that the "market" can massively divorce company contribution from compensation, thanks to the influence of 1% of the workforce.
You are mixing things up here.


Market forces are simple supply and demand, not corruption of boards overpaying CEO's and scratching each others backs because, "Hey, You're on the board of the company I'm the CEO of, and I'm on the board of the company you're the CEO of" type situations.

When it comes to labor, it usually has to do with how replaceable you are.

If anyone can do your job without much training or experience, and there are lots of people looking for work, I would expect compensation to be low. If you have skill sets very few others do, and it would be difficult to replace you if you left, you can bet you are paid higher.

There is no magic Illuminati setting market rates. It's simple supply meets demand.
 

Zarathustra[H]

Official Forum Curmudgeon
Joined
Oct 29, 2000
Messages
29,482
Might want to look up the Mondragon corporation. It's one of the more successful ones in Europe, run democratically by the workers. You say everything should be towards that goal, that's only because it's the investors saying that. In companies that practice syndicalism, what the employees in the company decide on is what goes. Investors in those companies know that also. Might want to rethink your assumptions.

That said, Samsung is obviously not one of those types of corporations.
There are plenty of examples of employee owned corporations. Sometimes they are successful in the short term, but usually long term they wind up with inefficiencies and higher labor costs, and difficulty raising new capital and either convert to traditional ownership, or sell themselves to other organizations.

This is what happened to Nypro, a large plastics molder and one of the largest ESOP organizations in the U.S. They wound up selling themselves to Jabil a few years ago due to a combination of rising costs and difficulty raising capital.
 

tetris42

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Apr 29, 2014
Messages
4,518
Zarathustra[H];1041515673 said:
There is no magic Illuminati setting market rates. It's simple supply meets demand.
No, they just help write trade agreements in Congress to dismantle laws that have protected workers for decades so that the workforce has to compete against labor in countries where workers have no rights or minimum wages.

There are plenty of examples of employee owned corporations. Sometimes they are successful in the short term, but usually long term they wind up with inefficiencies and higher labor costs, and difficulty raising new capital and either convert to traditional ownership, or sell themselves to other organizations.
Doesn't sound any different than most other businesses then. Mondragon's been around over 50 years for what it's worth.
 

Uvaman

Gawd
Joined
Jan 6, 2008
Messages
849
Zarathustra[H];1041515240 said:
Disagree.

Employees are resources, and should be paid at their going market rates.

No one should be paid more than the free market makes them be paid.
Ok Mr. WallStreet.

I mean you know that our economic system is a you know, a 'system', an artificial human-creation right? right?
I mean for GOD's sake you do understand that money has as much value as it is given right?
So then, 'labor' can have as much value as it is given in this 'system' right?.
So then surely you do understand that even in this system labor 'cost' or value can be set higher than what the 'free market' 'wants' which BTW per wall street will always be lowest possible, even if you can't make a living!.
For God's there is no such thing as a 'free market' just WTF are people talking about?
There is no such thing as 'a job creator'. I mean JEEEE-SUS talk about buying wallstreet crap hook, sinker, fishing pole, the fisherman and boat!
The only 'Job creator' is the freaking SUN, which bathes us with the energy to function. Every single other thing is human-created artifice. 'Economic' concepts that can be substituted for others, defied values many of them controlled to a significant extent by the people that hold the money, because of the system we have now. This system, can fail us badly, or it can work well, but one thing remains a definite truth there is no 'free market'. At best one can say there is no market, and then a market, which is always under the influence of the players, its NEVER free, which is why influence of government on the market on behalf of 'the people' ARE ALWAYS FAIR GAME and that includes setting human 'labor' and higher prices. I don't get why certain people are so eager to accept depreciation so readily, I mean they get their head filled with shit and accept it as fact that there is a 'free market' and easily substituted labor is meaningless, and crap like that.

Then what I hear back is pickup an 'economics 101' book or some other stupid comment.
Sure, what I want to answer to that is pickup a brain, and get out of the box with it.
 

Pieter3dnow

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Jul 29, 2009
Messages
6,789
If you read the 1st line where it states compete with Intel , then you know this is false. Intel is not a threat to Samsung whatsoever.

To buy AMD for GPU cores is also a steep price because AMD has debt so the business decision to do so on that front can be eliminated . Samsung can just get a licence from AMD for those cores cheaper and without a headache of a merger.

AMD has nothing to give in the mobile department. All their shit sucks.They have a few low power chips that no one wants.
If your direct competitor sells chips on the premise buy 1 get 1 free and has other money funnelling options then AMD can not compete.
 

geok1ng

2[H]4U
Joined
Oct 28, 2007
Messages
2,132
Some consumers believe that such a corporate action would benefit them.
Hence it is bound not to happen.
The Zen of Wally.:)
 

CreepyUncleGoogle

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Mar 10, 2013
Messages
6,871
I really don't know what to say about the rumor since I haven't pretended to read about it from an unnamed, credible insider source on the blog I pretend to write, but if it does happen, I wouldn't be surprised and maybe it'd be a good thing since AMD hasn't been credible competition for Intel for like, IDK, 6...8 years?
 

Obi_Kwiet

2[H]4U
Joined
Dec 25, 2004
Messages
3,858
lol, no. As ARM has moved up into original Core performance territory, it's also seen significant increases in power consumption. Nothing comes for free. You can have low power and low performance, or higher power and better performance. There is no magical ARM pixie dust.
ARM wouldn't be a good desktop instruction set. A replacement for x86 would. That's just not what ARM is.
 
Joined
Jul 30, 2009
Messages
835
And the biggest thing about this is if Samsung buys AMD they also get access to the coveted and highly guarded x86 code rights, meaning Samsung could make phones that are x86 & x64 capable
No they don't and no they couldn't. Intel would have to agree to allow the cross-license to transfer to Samsung. Why would Intel allow that?

Any buyout of AMD would terminate the agreement and cause AMD to forfeit the use of both x86/AMD64.

Intel would keep the licensing as previously agreed until the contract's end date (there isn't one) or Intel terminates the contract. Intel would still have to pay royalties to AMD for their tech but that is nowhere near the amount AMD makes selling CPU's.

Samsung cannot buy AMD but they could infuse them with money as long as control stays below 49%. GPU and other divisions could be sold off by AMD to Samsung and Intel can't say a word.
 

TheCommander

2[H]4U
Joined
Apr 2, 2003
Messages
2,999
And the biggest thing about this is if Samsung buys AMD they also get access to the coveted and highly guarded x86 code rights, meaning Samsung could make phones that are x86 & x64 capable, and all without having to deal with Microsoft OR Intel
Wouldn't that have to be re-negotiated with Intel?
 

Zarathustra[H]

Official Forum Curmudgeon
Joined
Oct 29, 2000
Messages
29,482
No they don't and no they couldn't. Intel would have to agree to allow the cross-license to transfer to Samsung. Why would Intel allow that?

Any buyout of AMD would terminate the agreement and cause AMD to forfeit the use of both x86/AMD64.

Intel would keep the licensing as previously agreed until the contract's end date (there isn't one) or Intel terminates the contract. Intel would still have to pay royalties to AMD for their tech but that is nowhere near the amount AMD makes selling CPU's.

Samsung cannot buy AMD but they could infuse them with money as long as control stays below 49%. GPU and other divisions could be sold off by AMD to Samsung and Intel can't say a word.
Agreed.

I can't understand why AMD would have Sig ed such a one sided agreement. Seems foolish.

They should have had it automatically terminate AMD64 licensing to Intel if intel terminated x86 licensing to AMD to avoid a situation like this.
 

mi7chy

2[H]4U
Joined
May 22, 2013
Messages
3,985
x86 is dead and wasted die space anyway. Samsung and AMD should move forward with x64 only and use the free space for more cache, better iGPU, FPGA, etc.
 

Zarathustra[H]

Official Forum Curmudgeon
Joined
Oct 29, 2000
Messages
29,482
x86 is dead and wasted die space anyway. Samsung and AMD should move forward with x64 only and use the free space for more cache, better iGPU, FPGA, etc.
x64 is based ontop of IA32, which in it's turn is the third expansion of the original x86.

None of them function without the original instruction set they are based on.

Thus, x64 will never stand on its own without the x86 license.
 
Top