Intel reserved $ 3 billion in 2019 to competitively block AMD

Discussion in 'Frontpage news' started by Hilbert Hagedoorn, Oct 14, 2019.

  1. ManofGod

    ManofGod Maha Guru

    Messages:
    1,346
    Likes Received:
    45
    GPU:
    Sapphire R9 Fury Nitro
    AMD released what they released, simple as that. (They did not have the money to start over, although what they had was good, but not great.) Not narrow minded, just a bit of common sense, since Intel had the money to do the R&D and simply did not bother, since they would rather milk their customers instead.
     
    carnivore likes this.
  2. Aura89

    Aura89 Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    7,673
    Likes Received:
    921
    GPU:
    -
    You make a statement like that and then call someone else narrow minded? That's.............interesting.

    You're effectively blaming the company that made a product that on paper seemed like a good idea and fell through, causing them to have effectively no money to produce an entirely new architecture, again, to compete, over the company who had more then enough funds to advance themselves countless times over, and chose not to.

    You can't blame AMD for what Intel did to themselves and their consumers. The fact that AMD even got back up after bulldozer is fairly astonishing, and probably is only due to console sales keeping them afloat.

    No one forced Intel to stay still for so many years, they did that to themselves.
     
    carnivore likes this.
  3. vbetts

    vbetts Don Vincenzo Staff Member

    Messages:
    14,714
    Likes Received:
    1,296
    GPU:
    RTX 2070FE
    Some of us need to calm down a little bit. Oof
     
    K.S., fantaskarsef and ManofGod like this.
  4. D3M1G0D

    D3M1G0D Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    1,959
    Likes Received:
    1,250
    GPU:
    2 x GeForce 1080 Ti
    Need I remind you how Intel illegally blocked AMD by bribing the OEMs? Even if AMD had a competitive product, how could they compete when their much richer competitor was blocking them left, right and center?
     
    Mesab67 and Neo Cyrus like this.

  5. Neo Cyrus

    Neo Cyrus Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    9,239
    Likes Received:
    315
    GPU:
    GTX 1080 Ti @ 2GHz
    That's not a deal, it's a mafia shakedown that also breaks anti-competitive laws, that IS DOUBLE super illegal unless the laws have been shat on. There was a reason they were fined a billion dollars the last time. But everyone knows they laughed their asses off as they nearly sunk AMD for that measly billion and raped the rest of the world for a decade.
    I wouldn't call him an AMD shill considering he flamed AMD when he felt it was called for. He expresses how the vast majority of PC enthusiasts feel; we've been screwed over by Intel for far too long and nVidia now has been doing it for years.

    Do you guys like paying double+ prices for inferior products, compared to what we'd get with competition, while technology development is effectively halted because they can? That's what it sounds like. Enjoy your i9-9900KS-XYZabc34^4potatoSS on the 14nm+++++++++++++++^∞ node. The KS stands for Keep Spending. The next revision may or may not require an industrial chiller like their live demo, and by that I mean liquid helium cooling like what's used in the LHC... also a tiny black hole to power it.
     
    Last edited: Oct 15, 2019
    Mesab67 likes this.
  6. Aura89

    Aura89 Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    7,673
    Likes Received:
    921
    GPU:
    -
    I really find it funny how people combine intel and nvidia into the same group.

    I'm not saying nvidia, specifically currently, is not expensive, but every generation of new GPUs from nvidia we've gotten a clear performance boost, new features (even if proprietary) and doesn't look like they are trying to sit still at all. I have literally never seen nvidia sit on the same architecture and process node unnecessarily long.

    Sure, you could say that the GTX 10 series was released awhile ago, but node changes have also slowed down, and what did nvidia bring out even though it was the same effective node as the 10 series? New GPUs will even higher performance, and again very importantly, advancement in features. Someone might say they don't care about the specific features that came with the 20 series, but who cares? That's not the point.

    So how is Intel staying still for years on end with no real advancements in....anything, the same as nvidia advancing every generation they create and bringing features we otherwise didn't have?

    Again i'm not saying it shouldn't be less expensive, but the two companies don't look even remotely the same.
     
  7. Neo Cyrus

    Neo Cyrus Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    9,239
    Likes Received:
    315
    GPU:
    GTX 1080 Ti @ 2GHz
    I agree, they're not 100% comparable. It's just a really bad situation regardless. The fact that my OC'd 1080 Ti I have with a cheapo 120mm AIO slapped on it is in 2080 Super territory, even if OC'd if I'm correct (based on guessing from benchmarks), is pretty horrible if you think about it. The 1080 Ti was released in March 2017, it's ancient history, and it's based on the the 2016 Titan. nVidia are no different in the fact that they'll milk every penny they can with the least amount of effort like Intel would, and we'd expect most companies to do the same, but I would't expect it to Intel's degree... how many companies could realistically get away with pulling a full blown 100% Intel?
     
  8. metagamer

    metagamer Maha Guru

    Messages:
    1,177
    Likes Received:
    446
    GPU:
    Palit GameRock 2080
    Every single one of them would do just that.
     
  9. Neo Cyrus

    Neo Cyrus Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    9,239
    Likes Received:
    315
    GPU:
    GTX 1080 Ti @ 2GHz
    Every single one of them don't have billions of dollars extra on hand to use as a cost of business after they lose lawsuits.
     
  10. metagamer

    metagamer Maha Guru

    Messages:
    1,177
    Likes Received:
    446
    GPU:
    Palit GameRock 2080
    That's because couldn't sell a cpu for a decade. I'll say this again, if AMD were in Intel's shoes for the last 10 years, we'd see the same, or at least very similar practices from them.

    Because there is no way they would spend big on improving their product when the competition is asleep. No chance.
     

  11. Neo Cyrus

    Neo Cyrus Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    9,239
    Likes Received:
    315
    GPU:
    GTX 1080 Ti @ 2GHz
    I'm talking about companies in general. There are plenty of multi billion dollar companies, how many of them get caught with their pants down like Intel, gaining effective monopolies? Can't think of one off the top of your head eh? No, not every company goes full mafia asshole.

    Didn't sell a CPU for a decade... because Intel crippled them for a decade with their illegal practices. Enjoy having your wallet raided, we're done here.
     
    Fox2232 likes this.
  12. metagamer

    metagamer Maha Guru

    Messages:
    1,177
    Likes Received:
    446
    GPU:
    Palit GameRock 2080
    we are indeed.
     
  13. Kool64

    Kool64 Master Guru

    Messages:
    378
    Likes Received:
    133
    GPU:
    Gigabyte GTX 1070
    Well they’re still faster so there’s that?
     
  14. Astyanax

    Astyanax Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    3,658
    Likes Received:
    982
    GPU:
    GTX 1080ti
    [​IMG]
     
    K.S., mohiuddin and HK-1 like this.
  15. svan71

    svan71 Member

    Messages:
    40
    Likes Received:
    17
    GPU:
    GTX 1080
    Simple test, can you go to Dell,HP, or Lenovo and buy a Ryzen 3000 series computer? If not, why not?
     
    Neo Cyrus likes this.

  16. Neo Cyrus

    Neo Cyrus Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    9,239
    Likes Received:
    315
    GPU:
    GTX 1080 Ti @ 2GHz
    They might be more sneaky about it. They might arrange it to limit stock to only certain parts, or very limited overall stock, and may even wait a generation or more. They're not going to make it as obvious as last time, unless they're stupid as much as they're greedy and soulless. And by they I mean Intel, if the companies buying chips feel like they're cornered by the mafia tactics they'll go along with it.
     
  17. airbud7

    airbud7 Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    7,508
    Likes Received:
    4,217
    GPU:
    pny gtx 1060 xlr8
    no integrated graphics.
     
  18. sykozis

    sykozis Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    21,055
    Likes Received:
    670
    GPU:
    MSI RX5700
    Adaptive Sync is a Vesa standard. It was also part of eDP, used in laptops. NVidia is not stealing anything. They are simply adding support for an industry standard.

    IF true, it is wrong. As long as Intel is not offering financial incentives in exchange for refusal to sell products based on AMD processors, it's still legal. I've found no law that prohibits Intel from marketing their products nor offering price reductions on said products, so long as they aren't directly inhibiting AMD's ability to sell their own products like in the past.

    Actually, the deals Mundosold insinuated, are in fact illegal. That's why Intel agreed to settle with AMD and why Intel has lost every anti-trust case filed against them. Intel essentially paid Dell to use strictly AMD processors. Intel bankrupted Compaq after they refused to stop using AMD processors. Intel tried to force HP to stop using AMD processors. This behavior is in fact illegal in the US.

    Wrong....yet again.

    Whether a company is considered a "monopoly" is based on their overall market share. It has absolutely nothing to do with a competing company selling products and making money. If that were the case, US v. AT&T would have turned out completely different.

    Intel does in fact have a monopoly on desktop and server processors. Having a monopoly, is actually not illegal. There is actually no law that prohibits a company from having a monopoly. You should really research more. You keep posting this same, completely wrong, claim.

    Intel has a monopoly on desktop and server processors.
    Microsoft has a monopoly on desktop operating systems.
    Google has a monopoly on mobile operating systems.

    There is nothing illegal in any of those 3 cases, so long as none of them hinder or attempt to prevent competition.

    Microsoft can not, under any circumstances, directly hinder the ability of an alternative product to compete in the desktop computing market.
    Google can not, under any circumstances, directly hinder the ability of an alternative product to compete in the mobile computing/smartphone market.
    Intel can not, under any circumstances, directly hinder the ability of an alternative product to compete in the desktop or server processor markets.

    You should really research the Sherman AntiTrust Act of 1890 as well as the Federal Trade Commission Act and Clayton Act. Those are the laws in regards to monopolies.

    What Intel did in the past, directly violated the FTC Act. Since Intel and AMD "settled", the FTC was unable to pursue legal action against Intel for their violations. Had AMD maintained their complaint with the FTC, Intel would have been at risk of potentially being broken up under the Sherman Anti-Trust Act of 1890. In total, Intel violated all 3 Anti-trust laws to some extent.

    https://www.ftc.gov/tips-advice/competition-guidance/guide-antitrust-laws/antitrust-laws
    There's a very brief summary of all 3 Anti-Trust laws at the above link.

    There is no law against a company being or becoming a monopoly, as there can be no legal requirement for competition to exist within any market. A monopoly can not, under any circumstances, take action to directly hinder, prohibit or eliminate competition.

    Phenom, Phenom II, Bulldozer..... You can't blame everything on Intel. Phenom was in development before Intel resorted to illegal activities. AMD was late to release, as has always been common business practice for them.
     
  19. Neo Cyrus

    Neo Cyrus Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    9,239
    Likes Received:
    315
    GPU:
    GTX 1080 Ti @ 2GHz
    I was under the impression that the vast majority of the development of Phenom was done while they were under financial strain?
     
  20. sykozis

    sykozis Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    21,055
    Likes Received:
    670
    GPU:
    MSI RX5700
    It is important to keep in mind that at this point, we have no evidence to suggest that Intel is using illegal tactics to maintain their market share, nor do we have proof that Intel intends to commit to such actions again. The information has not been verified to any extent.

    I don't know how far into development Phenom was. I just know that AMD had already been developing Phenom when Intel's illegal activities began.
     
    Neo Cyrus likes this.

Share This Page