Intel and AMD Settle Antitrust, Patent Lawsuits 165
Kohenkatz writes "Intel has agreed to pay $1.25 billion to AMD. In return, AMD will drop its lawsuits about patent and antitrust complaints. The two companies released this joint statement: 'While the relationship between the two companies has been difficult in the past, this agreement ends the legal disputes and enables the companies to focus all of our efforts on product innovation and development.' The press release also says, 'Under terms of the agreement, AMD and Intel obtain patent rights from a new 5-year cross license agreement,' and that 'Intel and AMD will give up any claims of breach from the previous license agreement.'"
Re:Only $1.25 Billion? (Score:4, Informative)
Q: How did you arrive at this number
our SGNA expenses will decrease a bit on a go-forward basis
for us this has never been about money, it's about the marketplace, and there's no correlation between the settlement amount and anything... it's a negotiated number
what's important... it signals a new era, it's a pivot from war to pease, and we're trying oto redefine not only the path to a fair and fierce competitive fight in the blah blah blah tonality blah blah blah buzzword get this behind us and move forward in a very respectful way, blah blah blah
You can tell I'm listening to the webcast.
AMD was smart to take the money _now_ (Score:2, Informative)
My transcript (Score:3, Informative)
Jumped in a little late, here you go.
Q: So what does this mean ... in terms of ... ownership
Um uh, um uh. We have a obviously very important relationship with Abu Dhabi, global foundries is part of the vision of AMD, great thing for industry and us ... we will be implementing the agreements
the key thing here is that for AMD and for global foundries, this addresses anybody's concerns about robustness and entitlement
AMD the product company is well-poised to move ahead on its strategy in order to serve the market and be a key buzzword blah blah blah
the new patent cross-license between AMD and intel does give AMD broad rights
no longer requires global foundries to be structured as a subsidiary of AMD
Q: intel has agreed to provide business practice provisions
think of it in terms of marketplace and customer access ... in the compiler business, compilers will not unfairly/artificially impair the performance of our products, we're never looking for any help, just not unfairly... intel has an obligation not to do things simply designed to hurt us
ability for multinational OEMs and key channel partners to have "freedom of action" and choice to differentiate offerings between AMD and intel
respect to specific practices and ground rules, the agreement... totally transparent about this, the agreement will be totally public as quickly as we can achieve that
the key points are for us that intel will not be able to condition doing business with them on not doing business with us, that's one way I would put it. they can't use inducements in order to force exclusive dealing, delay customers from using our products, delaying companies from delaying advertising... withholding benefits from OEMs
blah blah lots of repetition of buzzwords like 'ecosystem' and 'productitivity gains'
Q: global foundries separation timeline
clearly gives AMD, global foundries, and atek flexibility esp. in light of acquisition of charter, and does pave the way for merger of charter and global foundries, but no announcemnet being made, no timeline
Q: ?
We are trying to reset the relationship between AMD and intel. That relationship has been intense, emotional, and at times acrimonious for ... all too many years. The one thing that I would say that is a touchstone principle ... we are going to be fierce competitors in a free and open marketplace, we are going to be mutually respectful, we want to put this behind us... healthy, normal relationship that competitors do. you will see in the agreement fought-out procedures by which we will build relationship and trust and try to resolve our differences without spilling into the courts, into the public affairs domain. this is a start and both parties intend this agreement to be an opportunity to pivot the relationship and go forward in a very classy way.
Q: Is this only x86? No graphics etc?
I uh, um, uh, that's a complicated answer but I think the general answer to your question is yes. The suits ... have pertained to x86 processors and platforms,
there's two parts to the agreement, one is antitrust, the other is patent cross-license, broad, covers "all productS"
let me put it this way... it is an important feature of our agreement ... that we have resolved ALL disputes. on the IP side, amd and intel have had patent peace with each other since 1976. design freedom to innovate, great contributors to patent portfolio... we have now the flexibility with rights under IP agreement for full use of foundries.
Q: is the cash being deployed towards reducing debt
you now understand why we were not more specific in yesterday's meeting on debt restructuring
Q: What happens to the cases around the world, what is your expectation
the regulatory investigations etc are conducted by sovereign governments ... so the regulators will do what they are
Re:Only $1.25 Billion? (Score:2, Informative)
Re:DOJ? (Score:3, Informative)
Not if the Bush/Obama administration tells DoJ [eff.org] not to. Look at the pattern for the last 9 years and there's little reason to expect DoJ getting involved. As far as I can tell, these days the DoJ's main purpose in computers and communication industries seems to be to fight FOIA requests, keep cases out of courts, etc.
Re:Only $1.25 Billion? (Score:4, Informative)
The best AMD (Phenom II X4 965) is about on par with the i5 and they cost about the same. As the CPU gets faster the price performance gets worse for Intel CPUs.
To be fair, if your buying a whole system that extra CPU cost becomes less significant. An i7-860 might be worth it if it increases the cost of the system by at most 30%. Even an i7-960 can be OK if it increases the price by at most 60%. Given that a good AMD computer costs maybe 600 then the i7-860 is probably worth it, but the i7-960 is overpriced when you factor in the motherboard.
Of course, Intel wouldn't have such good prices without AMD, so in the long run it's good to support AMD. Also most people don't really need the extra speed. If you need a new machine then a midrange AMD for around 500 is probably your best bet.
If you are really concerned about speed then just use the money you save to upgrade more often. Given Moore's law, on average, you'll have a faster machine (or at least a machine with more cores.) Also, when just upgrading, the AMD price/performance gap gets even better.
Huh? AMD's TDP is quite competitive with Intel (Score:5, Informative)
According to Newegg:
AMD Phenom II X4 965 Black Edition Deneb 3.4GHz Socket AM3 125W Quad-Core Processor $199.99
Intel Core i7-975 Extreme Edition Bloomfield 3.33GHz LGA 1366 130W Quad-Core Processor $999.99
So I'll grant you that Intel's flagship i7 is faster than AMD's flagship Phenom II, but the Phenom has a slightly LOWER TDP and is 1/5 of the cost of the i7. Is the i7 4-5 times faster?
Re:What AMD needs to do - and quickly (Score:3, Informative)