Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 23rd Apr 2012 20:26 UTC
Intel AnandTech puts Intel's new Ivy Bridge through its paces. "While it's not enough to tempt existing Sandy Bridge owners, if you missed the upgrade last year then Ivy Bridge is solid ground to walk on. It's still the best performing client x86 architecture on the planet and a little to a lot better than its predecessor depending on how much you use the on-die GPU."
Thread beginning with comment 515661
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[2]: Comment by Radio
by Kebabbert on Wed 25th Apr 2012 11:58 UTC in reply to "RE: Comment by Radio"
Kebabbert
Member since:
2007-07-27

(In case you weren't aware, Intel underestimated demand for 386 chips and had to cut a deal with AMD to use their fabs in exchange for sharing the 486 market. When the time came, they said "We've changed our mind... oh, and if you sue us for breach of contract, our lawyers are better and we'll just bleed you dry in court.)

Do you have links on this? Sorry, but I am not going to trust a post on the internet, without more proof...

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[3]: Comment by Radio
by zima on Sun 29th Apr 2012 17:14 in reply to "RE[2]: Comment by Radio"
zima Member since:
2005-07-06

Perhaps he got it a bit backwards, but quickly checking the most straightforward place and doing a ctrl+f gives:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intel#Slowing_demand_and_challenges_to...

The lawsuits were noted to significantly burden the competition with legal bills, even if Intel lost the suits.[27]
"Bill Gates Speaks", page 29. ISBN 978-0-471-40169-8


Perhaps he got it a bit backwards... Intel specifically worked to stop 2nd sources by then, and through litigation blocked AMD386 for many years: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Am386
(or: it was a bit like he says, but 286 & 386, not 386 & 486)

Yeah, many might scoff at it "oh, over 2 decades ago" ...but all this shaped the present landscape. Plus Intel didn't play nice a mere less than a decade ago, which quite possibly impacted resources AMD could direct towards R&D and fab development.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AMD_v._Intel
In November 2009, Intel agreed to pay AMD $1.25 billion as part of a deal to settle all outstanding legal disputes between the two companies.[6][7]

You don't just pay such amount if your hands are clean. Then there's 250 million to Transmeta and:
In May 2009, the EU found that Intel had engaged in anti-competitive practices and subsequently fined Intel €1.06 billion (US$1.44 billion)

Reply Parent Score: 2