Intel faces $3.5bn fine on antitrust claims.

[marco123]

http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/industry_sectors/technology/article2152256.ece

Why would Intel do that? Can't they see how good competition in the processor market is? It must be pure greed. Home desktop processors have developed in leaps and bounds in recent years largely because of this competition.

The reason windows is rubbish is because there is no competition, go figure. :confused:

[eentonig]

Because their primary objective is NOT 'To make a good processor'. Their primary objective is 'To make as much money as possible for our shareholder'.

In the short term, the means to achieve this, is by making the best processors they can. In the long term... well, continuous development is very, very, very expensive. Maybe they thought they could save a buck in the long run, by killing the comptetion. That way, there is no challenger that forces them to improve all the time.

[PatrickMay16]

Suck it up INTEL!!!! Just today I recieved by mail an Opteron which I ordered a few days ago. I won't buy intel until I have no choice.

[Paul820]

Pure greed! They make all that money and still want more. *shakes head*

[starcraft.man]

Much as I might not like Intel for their practices, they still make the best processors currently available (performance, not price wise). I know the tactics are appalling but it's no different than any other giant business that reaches large market control, they always demand more and want to snuff the little guy. I hope AMD gets their act together, I may buy NVidia and Intel but I know without any competition you get complacent... look at how little MS cares about the consumers.

[a12ctic]

I will never buy a intel chip, theyve always been terribly unstable, hot, and bug ridden for me. On top of that, while AMD might have borrowed some stuff from them 10 years ago, now Intel is the company stealing AMD tech. The simple part of it is that AMD has better engineers, sure, the intel chips might be a little faster right now, but solely because AMD hasnt released anything new.


Sense Intel has some money in the bank, and AMD doesnt really, they are selling all their processors at a loss to try to kill off AMD . Its an incredibly cheap shot and they should be fined for higher in my opinion.

[ev5unleash1]

I think intel has enough money, I have an Intel centrino Duo Processor right now and it does not heat up as much as an AMD. AMD Processors try to make theres faster by upping the power going to it where Intel is all about low power consumption. Plus by AMD upping the voltage makes the processor hotter on CPU Spikes and makes it's like shorter.

[kostkon]

Ts ts, shame!!

[a12ctic]

I think intel has enough money, I have an Intel centrino Duo Processor right now and it does not heat up as much as an AMD. AMD Processors try to make theres faster by upping the power going to it where Intel is all about low power consumption. Plus by AMD upping the voltage makes the processor hotter on CPU Spikes and makes it's like shorter.

Are you kidding? The TPW on AMD processors is much superior...

[Yaffle]

Already Made my Decision \\:D/

[Paul820]

What really annoys me about it is that the big companies trying to knock out the smaller companies, these guys have families and children to support. Yes, i know it's all competition, but, intel is a multi billion dollar company, they don't need to do that, they have enough money. Like i said, it's just greed. :mad:

Edit: i hope they get fined more...

[marco123]

I will never buy a intel chip, theyve always been terribly unstable, hot, and bug ridden for me. On top of that, while AMD might have borrowed some stuff from them 10 years ago, now Intel is the company stealing AMD tech. The simple part of it is that AMD has better engineers, sure, the intel chips might be a little faster right now, but solely because AMD hasnt released anything new.


Sense Intel has some money in the bank, and AMD doesnt really, they are selling all their processors at a loss to try to kill off AMD . Its an incredibly cheap shot and they should be fined for higher in my opinion.

Thats right, the new Intel quad core Xeons are red hot at the moment. But you just know that AMD will come back with something equally as good, if not better. Again thats the beauty of competition.

I personally have an AMD 64bit X2 and with the "cool and quiet" technology I find it quite energy efficient.

I always thought AMD processors were superior though. Hence the 6000+ when it actually runs at 3.0Ghz per core, because the algorithms were superior so they do more per clock cycle? :confused:

[Dimitriid]

Much as I might not like Intel for their practices, they still make the best processors currently available (performance, not price wise). I know the tactics are appalling but it's no different than any other giant business that reaches large market control, they always demand more and want to snuff the little guy. I hope AMD gets their act together, I may buy NVidia and Intel but I know without any competition you get complacent... look at how little MS cares about the consumers.

If they cannot lower their prices its because their manufacturing process is not as efficient as AMDs so even thats questionable if you ask me.

But most important, just because every company does it is ok for Intel to use illegal business practices because they are expected to "snuff the little guy"? Thats how microsoft operates and that is a complete failure of the free market since it exposes competition does not encourages technological advances but instead encourages ruthless business practices that only hurt the consumer by creating needless price speculation and lower quality products, not to mention the continuous exploitation of the working class but I just assume that is irrelevant for most people living on an imperialistic capitalism right now so I wont get into that any further but it is worth pointing it out.

[SunnyRabbiera]

The thing is that Intel has improved over the years though and this kind of news makes me kind of iffy.
The main reason why I buy intel is that a lot of hardware and software is catered to intel and not AMD or anything else.
Intel has been branching out to the open source community a tiny bit over the last year, all thanks to their deal with apple.
I am honestly hoping intel can learn from this suit though, as even though they are opening up they are still behind in some areas.

[Redache]

I used to be a huge AMD fan and wouldn't think of using anything else. But recently i bought a Core 2 Duo because AMD just aren't up to scratch anymore. Maybe in a year or two they'll be back on top but right now, at this very moment Intel offer the better value, especially with the Nvidia 650i and up Chipsets, Overclocking has never been easier and with most of the current Intel chip's it's so easy to get 3.0ghz out of a 1.8ghz processor. I have found that my Intel runs a hell of a lot cooler than any of the other AMD chips I've had, and it is a lot more energy efficient.

Intel have changed alot and AMD have forced them to compete, which is why I never want to see AMD die, but the fact is as of right now Intel is the logical choice for a new processor.

[kamaboko]

Pure greed! They make all that money and still want more. *shakes head*

"Greed is good"
- Gordon Gekko

[starcraft.man]

If they cannot lower their prices its because their manufacturing process is not as efficient as AMDs so even thats questionable if you ask me.

But most important, just because every company does it is ok for Intel to use illegal business practices because they are expected to "snuff the little guy"? Thats how microsoft operates and that is a complete failure of the free market since it exposes competition does not encourages technological advances but instead encourages ruthless business practices that only hurt the consumer by creating needless price speculation and lower quality products, not to mention the continuous exploitation of the working class but I just assume that is irrelevant for most people living on an imperialistic capitalism right now so I wont get into that any further but it is worth pointing it out.

LOL! I wasn't condoning the practices. Course it's a crappy way of doing things, and it certainly doesn't represent anything near to a "free market" or real "capitalism" (see philosophic and economic papers as penned by their proponents). Certainly not with all the government lobbying and intervention (yes, even in the US which labels itself the model of capitalism) That however is a mute point, criticizing the select few businesses that become so large and ruthless doesn't do anything. They are powerful and now (by edict of their shareholders often, and other factors of the "system") are driven to make as much money as possible. The system (at least as it stands now) is the problem, and unless the people are willing to force a new system in place, then this is what stands. It certainly won't be the corporations or governments that bring about any change...

Oh and they did lower their prices, their Q6600 (among other things cut) is now just around 299 (a bit more costly here in Canada, that's down from 560 I think). That's not bad considering it's 4 cores and very overclockable from what I see :).

[kamaboko]

Intel have changed alot and AMD have forced them to compete, which is why I never want to see AMD die, but the fact is as of right now Intel is the logical choice for a new processor.

Yes, I too got an Intel C2D laptop. AMD has slacked off a bit. I've been using AMD for the past five or so years.

[smoker]

i hope they do get fined. this is also the company that tried to sabotage the OLPC project!

[Beamerboy]

I think intel has enough money, I have an Intel centrino Duo Processor right now and it does not heat up as much as an AMD. AMD Processors try to make theres faster by upping the power going to it where Intel is all about low power consumption. Plus by AMD upping the voltage makes the processor hotter on CPU Spikes and makes it's like shorter.

That simply is NOT true. The new X2 processors from AMD use LESS power. Instead of going down the route of providing more MHz for your buck they went the green route and released their current generation at the same speeds as the old ones but using FAR less power.

Intel went the other way, the produced faster chips that use MORE power.

Please get your facts right.

[a12ctic]

Just to make this clear, by intel winning, they released a chip that beats the AMD chip arcitecture released several years ago by no more than 25% and in some cases performance worse. Intel didn't win, they invested all their money in one hand and its going to be a rough path for them once AMD releases their new arcitecture. Also, for the low/mid end+oem systems AMD chips are generally a much superior price/performance, especaily if you dont overclock. They have lower power requirements, run cooler, and are quite a bit cheaper.

[Ralob]

this kind of thing always makes me frown. but, alas, it happens more often than not.

[handy]

I have been using AMD cpu's exclusively since the first Athlons went on sale, both for myself & for my customers. If not for AMD we would have far slower cpu's that cost a great deal more than they do now. AMD introduced the 64bit cpu's to the desktop market, & have a more intelligent design than the Intel chips; the AMD chips do far more work per cycle than those from Intel. Intel's chips have been notorious producers of heat & users of energy, the P4 is a horror in those regards.

The interesting & unfortunate thing about this, is that if AMD swapped places with Intel, AMD would most likely be just as corrupt. It all comes down to the directors of the company in the end & they all believe that if you don't keep growing you die.

Anyone would think that there are infinite resources on this planet!

[PatrickMay16]

the AMD chips do far more work per cycle than those from Intel. Intel's chips have been notorious producers of heat & users of energy, the P4 is a horror in those regards

I thought this was different now with intel's Core range. It seems to me like the Core processors are faster at the same clock than anything AMD has right now.

Man I don't like the feel of this. Now he's really getting huge. I just hope that AMD pick themselves up and start beating intel again.

[zenwhen]

I have always used Intel chips in my builds. Not because I have some sort of brand loyalty, but because they have always worked well for me. I do not see myself buying another non-Apple computer for quite some time. so I will continue to buy Intel CPU's since Apple has chosen Intel as their exclusive chip provider.

Intel's "Core" line of CPU's has put them ahead of AMD in terms of amount of work done per clock cycle.

Intel will survive any outcome of the antitrust cases, and will continue to compete with AMD. I very much want to see AMD stay competitive, but I really do not understand the love people have for AMD.

It's like they are a favorite rock band or something.

[Depressed Man]

I thought this was different now with intel's Core range. It seems to me like the Core processors are faster at the same clock than anything AMD has right now.

Man I don't like the feel of this. Now he's really getting huge. I just hope that AMD pick themselves up and start beating intel again.

Well performance wise per cycle it was something like this.

Most of the AMDs beat the Pentium 4s in performance wise per cycle. But with the release of Core 2 Duos they beat the AMD chips in performance wise per cycle.

Tis why I got my AMD Opteron 165 chip back when I built my PC. It was before the Core 2 Duos were released (otherwise I'd be using them).