Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 16th Mar 2009 17:04 UTC
AMD Recently, AMD spun off its manufacturing business in a partnership with the Abu Dhabi government into Global Foundries. Apparently, Intel isn't very happy about this, and has said in correspondence to AMD that the patent cross-license agreement from 2001 has now been broken by AMD.
Thread beginning with comment 353376
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[3]: tisk tisk
by DigitalAxis on Tue 17th Mar 2009 04:33 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: tisk tisk"
DigitalAxis
Member since:
2005-08-28

My understanding is that Intel 64 *IS* AMD64, and Intel licensed AMD's 64-bit extensions via the cross-licensing agreement. My source on this is Wikipedia, which points out they're not completely identical, and doesn't say who VIA licensed their x86-64 implementation from (the VIA Nano is 64-bit)

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[4]: tisk tisk
by Treza on Tue 17th Mar 2009 12:16 in reply to "RE[3]: tisk tisk"
Treza Member since:
2006-01-11

Now that Intel plans to manufacture Atoms in TSMC Fabs as part of SoC chips, and if these Atoms gets the 64bits extensions (which most of them currently lack), then Intel could have some troubles as well.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[5]: tisk tisk
by tylerdurden on Tue 17th Mar 2009 15:38 in reply to "RE[4]: tisk tisk"
tylerdurden Member since:
2009-03-17

Actually all Atoms have been 64bits from the get go....

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[5]: tisk tisk
by segedunum on Tue 17th Mar 2009 23:18 in reply to "RE[4]: tisk tisk"
segedunum Member since:
2005-07-06

Now that Intel plans to manufacture Atoms in TSMC Fabs as part of SoC chips...

Certainly plausible and it looks like a similar position to what Intel is accusing AMD of being in.

Reply Parent Score: 2