• Competitor rules

    Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.

Tech giants form tiny chip group (AMD included) - interesting i promise!

Joined
10 Oct 2007
Posts
1,165
Location
in the arse of england.
Seven of the world's leading chip makers are collaborating on chips which contain transistors with features just 32 billionths of a metre wide. IBM, Toshiba, AMD, Samsung, Chartered, Infineon and Freescale have formed the alliance to cut development costs. More transistors on a chip equals more processing power, but the development process is highly expensive. Analyst Malcolm Penn of Future Horizons said the alliance was an example of "pre-competitive collaboration". Mr Penn said: "The industry needs a huge amount of money to reinvent itself every two years."
He likened the cost of building a new chip factory to buying a fleet of more than 12 A380 Super Jumbos.


The seven companies have agreed to work through 2010 to design, develop and produce the chips using tiny circuitry. 'Contained market' Chips built using the 32-nm process can have more than one billion transistors on them. The group's chips could be used in everything from memory, computers, graphics cards, set-top boxes to games consoles. Intel, the world's biggest supplier of chips to the computer industry, is not part of the alliance.


Mr Penn said: "Intel is in a very focused market place; it really only makes chips for PCs. It's a contained market with very, very little competition so Intel's absence in this alliance is not important." Mark Bohr, Intel Senior Fellow and Director of Process Architecture and Integration, said the need for the alliance show what a giant undertaking the roll out of new chip technology was.

He said a new fabrication plant to produce the chips could cost $3bn and that Intel would be building three in order to meet demand. Despite the huge costs, he said Intel was able to go it alone. "Not only can we do it, it gives us an advantage," he told BBC News. "We don't have to deal with the co-ordination issues that the alliance will. We are able to lead the way with the technology."

The alliance will focus on sharing the cost of developing the building blocks of the 32-nanometre chips. Mr Penn said: "This is about sharing the basic development of the recipe for the chips. Those building blocks are then put together by the separate companies in a fiercely competitive way."

http://newsvote.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/7149704.stm

seems like the little guys are forming their very own rebel alliance headed by the big boot of IBM. I wonder what the evil emperor [SIZE=-1]Otellini[/SIZE] will think... :)
 
Heh I would hardly call some of them "little guys" :P

well... most of them are little compared to the main rival... :) although i guess its true, IBM Toshiba, and Samsung are hardly small... still, it could be interesting, who knows, AMD could be the first onto commercial 35nm tech... it certainly opens new doors given IBM`s processor experience and technology.
 
Last edited:
AMD really need that tbh and IBM has a lot of experiance with silicon too. would be nice to see AMD sort out their clock speeds to be sure. Else I'm moving to Intel for my next upgrade.

IBM have been helping AMD for the last 5 years. Intel are already ahead on the 32nm roadmap, but it does seem like AMD will be closer than usual if all goes to plan.
 
I guess Mr Penn doesnt know that Intel make flash memory, sdram, embedded processors, rfid chips, network processors (ethernet chips), infact a long list on 'non PC specific' parts.

a lot more than 'PC's have intel parts inside. Although naturally the X86 processor line is a major part of Intels production.
 
I guess Mr Penn doesnt know that Intel make flash memory, sdram, embedded processors, rfid chips, network processors (ethernet chips), infact a long list on 'non PC specific' parts.

a lot more than 'PC's have intel parts inside. Although naturally the X86 processor line is a major part of Intels production.

there are a lot more non-pc amd parts out there though, arent there?
 
i actually used to like amd somewhat due to the underdog thing but i dont like how they do business. basicly when they killed off the 939 platform and didnt keep producing cpus or did but made them the lower end parts. they could have hapily made a 3ghz 939 im sure. they could have done quad on 939 too i here but no. total death of the best platform in history untill intel came along with the c2d. they did exactly the same with the socketA and socket754 too.

the only problem i ever had with intel really was the pushing of inferior cpus but with higher clock speeds. they cant be acused of that now so i guess i have no problem with intel at all. other than the price of their mobos....
 
I always hear that arguement but is it that different to what Intel does? They may have kept s775 but you certainly can't just chuck a Core2 CPU into any 775 board.
AM2 was the move to DDR2, I didn't really mind it, DDR2 was becoming much cheaper anyway and by the time you shifted the old kit it wasn't a big deal.

Socket A was pretty ancient, why wouldn't you have dumped it? Look at the CPU sizes, massive! Socket 754 with single channel memory, wasn't too big a deal to lose that either.
Technology moves on, that's just how it goes.
 
Well valid points but oversimplified tbh. yeah it is true that intel cant seem to make a new cpu without having to bring out a new chipset to run it. and AMD have generaly been very good with their and partners chipsets.

939 should have been run along side am2 for atleast a year. it was the bigest marketing ***kup in amds history giving the only option to customer who want to upgrade beeing a platform change and amd having an inferior product at the time.. and still sadly. people just went to intel.

as for the duel channel vs single channel argument. total maximum posibly emagenable boost from duel channel over single is 5% unless your using onboarrd gfx then you may see an improvement in gaming more like 20% duel channel really just doesnt matter that much in real life.

to me its like buying a car. then a tire goes so you pop down the garage to be greated with. "sorry mate dont make tires for those things any more, nothing will fit that rim it will have to be a full set of wheels for you... or you could try ebay" its just **** customer support tbh and its becoming clear that amd doesnt seem to care about existing customers. just the new ones. i shall not reward that with brand loyalty.
 
Back
Top Bottom