1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

News AMD denies ATI spin-off explorations

Discussion in 'Article Discussion' started by Gareth Halfacree, 22 Jun 2015.

  1. Gareth Halfacree

    Gareth Halfacree WIIGII! Lover of bit-tech Administrator Super Moderator Moderator

    Joined:
    4 Dec 2007
    Posts:
    17,383
    Likes Received:
    7,222
    Gareth Halfacree, 22 Jun 2015
    #1
  2. Dave Lister

    Dave Lister Minimodder

    Joined:
    1 Sep 2009
    Posts:
    880
    Likes Received:
    12
    Interesting little bit of history, so why does Intel have the x86 license and not IBM ? just something i've always wondered about seeing as PC's were sold as IBM compatible for a long time. Oh and do you have any idea what happened to Cyrix ?
     
    Dave Lister, 22 Jun 2015
    #2
  3. Gareth Halfacree

    Gareth Halfacree WIIGII! Lover of bit-tech Administrator Super Moderator Moderator

    Joined:
    4 Dec 2007
    Posts:
    17,383
    Likes Received:
    7,222
    Because IBM didn't build the CPUs; they bought them and stuck them inside the PC. Same reason Dell doesn't have an x86 licence; it just buys chips and sticks them in its PCs.
    The 'IBM Compatible' nomenclature comes from the fact that prior to the IBM PC standard, 'PCs' were by and large incompatible. You bought a Commodore 64, and your friend bought an Acorn Atom: totally different systems, and software for one will not run on the other. Multiply this by a few hundred, and you have the joys of computing in the late-70s early-80s. Then IBM comes along with the terribly expensive PC; Compaq and others reverse-engineer the BIOS and build cheaper compatibles; the compatibles flood the market; non-IBM Compatibles die a death; we enter the modern era where games are labelled as for the "PC" in a way that would have been impossible prior to IBM's PC. Bonus: if IBM had built its own CPU for the PC, that would never have happened: Compaq et al were only free to build IBM Compatibles because they could buy the same processors as IBM did, from Intel, AMD, Texas Instruments, Cyrix, whoever.
    Merged with National Semiconductor in 1997, which then sold the bulk of the CPU stuff to VIA Technologies - which is still going today, although I don't think it uses the Cyrix brand any longer.
     
    Gareth Halfacree, 22 Jun 2015
    #3
  4. Dave Lister

    Dave Lister Minimodder

    Joined:
    1 Sep 2009
    Posts:
    880
    Likes Received:
    12
    Thanks Gareth for the extra history you should teach computing history ! and I suppose I should thank IBM for their part in the modern PC !
     
    Dave Lister, 22 Jun 2015
    #4
  5. Panos

    Panos Minimodder

    Joined:
    18 Oct 2006
    Posts:
    288
    Likes Received:
    6
    The article missed to mention the AM64s, on a period where Intel was selling 32bit cpus only.......
     
    Panos, 22 Jun 2015
    #5
  6. Gareth Halfacree

    Gareth Halfacree WIIGII! Lover of bit-tech Administrator Super Moderator Moderator

    Joined:
    4 Dec 2007
    Posts:
    17,383
    Likes Received:
    7,222
    AMD64, you mean. Yes, that was another of the company's breakthroughs - although while AMD64 was the first 64-bit extension to x86, Intel had been working on a non-x86 64-bit architecture since 1994: IA-64.
     
    Gareth Halfacree, 22 Jun 2015
    #6
  7. Corky42

    Corky42 Where's walle?

    Joined:
    30 Oct 2012
    Posts:
    9,648
    Likes Received:
    388
    Didn't IBM cobble together a "PC" in a bit of a rush due to Apple?

    If that's true we probably would have the modern PC if IBM had the time to make everything themselves, or if Apple hadn't come out with a mass-market PC scaring them into it.
     
    Corky42, 22 Jun 2015
    #7
  8. rollo

    rollo Modder

    Joined:
    16 May 2008
    Posts:
    7,887
    Likes Received:
    131
    Whats the saying no Smoke without Fire. AMD have probably looked into this and relised its not really viable as too many of there products are linked to each other.

    Problem is they are kinda out of stuff they can sell to get closer to break even. Another negative year is nigh on certain to happen already. They are ripe for a buy out just for patents they own. Q1 was another $180mil net loss cant keep loosing money at that rate forever.

    SeaMicro was scrapped when they left the Microserver market earlier this year.

    They desperately need to hold on till ZEN and hope it can change there fortunes in the markets they are in. Q2 for them is next month and I have my douts that it will be a happier quater than the one before. AMD share price also nearly halved in the last 1 year alone.
     
    rollo, 22 Jun 2015
    #8
Tags: Edit

Share This Page