AMD Responds to Intel Fine; Likes it a Lot

Status
Not open for further replies.

1raflo

Distinguished
Jan 1, 2009
42
0
18,530
0
wouldn't be hypocrite if amd just had said "we DONT support in any way that decision"?

of course they're happy :)
 

icepick314

Distinguished
Jul 24, 2002
705
0
18,990
1
giving discount to manufacturers should be allowed but payoffs for delaying or canceling AMD products is downright dirty...

i'm not a fan of AMD products, Intel/Nvidia user myself, but Intel SHOULD pay the fine for what they did to European market...
 

cryogenic

Distinguished
Jul 10, 2006
449
1
18,780
0
[citation][nom]IzzyCraft[/nom]Why wouldn't they be anytime your competition is brought to justice for taking anti competitive actions, is a good time for you.[/citation]

Fixed.

 

cyberkuberiah

Distinguished
May 5, 2009
812
0
19,010
12
we wish for good am3 processors for the future , 800 series chipsets and the next gen of radeon cards . with ddr3 premium falling steadily , should give a solid offering hopefully at good value too .
 

PC_GI

Distinguished
May 14, 2009
66
0
18,630
0
Intel's procs are way way way too expensive. I use only Intel but I wish they had prices like AMD. And I'm sure most Intel users feel the same way. Maybe this SMALL chunk of money will help them start making the right decisions and hold the consumer in their better interests. But that's not at all whats really going to happen. Greed greed greed.
 

humand

Distinguished
Mar 6, 2009
10
0
18,510
0
while "offering rebates to manufacturers who agreed to obtain the majority of their processors from Intel" might be debatable of weather is right or wrong, "paying manufacturers to either delay or cancel the launch of AMD-based products" is plain wrong and they should pay dearly for it.
 

rooseveltdon

Distinguished
Jan 18, 2009
364
0
18,790
4
I am really disappointed with the way intel tried to keep AMD out of the game,offering rebates in one thing,but paying OEM's to keep or delay AMD products is very "mafia" like and affects the consumers the most,i think intel owes every consumer an apology especially those who actually buy their overpriced products despite intel's stupid pricing.
 
G

Guest

Guest
The companies that took the payoffs and rebates are just as much at fault and should be held accountable as well.
 

mdillenbeck

Distinguished
Jun 11, 2008
504
0
18,980
0
[citation][nom]tipoo[/nom]This would only benefit AMD if Intel was forced to pay a royalty for every processor sold through their "rebates".[/citation]
The decision for Intel to appeal or pay the fine will cost them a decent chunk of change. This hurts profitability, and thus both shareholder returns and their credit (in a time where every company needs to hold onto every bit they can).

Also, I believe the cost to Intel's reputation would be great (hence the appeal). After all, outselling the competition and having superior products sounds great - but doing so because you had to pay your customers to not use or delay use of your competitor's product sounds like you knew they had a decent product.

True, it might be nice for AMD to see an infusion of cash for this, but how do you prove the potential lost income for a market that your company wasn't allowed to participate in?

Myself, if I were AMD, I'd just go after perpetual rights to the x86 architecture for whomever fabricates their chips. No direct cost to Intel, only a cost of future income. :)
 

vexing

Distinguished
May 14, 2009
1
0
18,510
0
[citation][nom]spongebob[/nom]"AMD Responds to Intel Fine; Likes it a Lot"Thanks for taking the time to write this article and point out the obvious.[/citation]

Haha.
 

falconqc

Distinguished
Dec 15, 2002
128
0
18,680
0
Unless end users see any benefit from this, then this ruling has no meaning whatsoever. Oh sure Intel loses a little reputation and a little bit of money, and the EU feels like they did something right.

The truth is, we as customers will probably not see any benefits from this at all.
 

JMcEntegart

Splendid
Moderator
Aug 25, 2007
8,445
0
30,780
0
Hey we wanted to post an article with AMD's response, in the interest of telling the complete story. That said, I realised it was a pretty obvious response from AMD, so I figured this title reflected that. Would you rather we posted no follow up comment from AMD at all?
 

anamaniac

Distinguished
Jan 7, 2009
2,447
0
19,790
1
We as consumers may be the ones harmed in this...

That's $1.45 billion less to go into research and development.
With less R&D, me may as well go back to 10MHz CPUs. :)
 
G

Guest

Guest
Intel CPUs cost more because they are worth more. They simply produce better chips, and if you want to buy a better product you have to pay more than what you would for an inferior product. So what exactly is so wrong with their pricing? i7, the cheapest one, is pretty damn cheap for its performance, and AMD can't even compare to them. This fine will only harm the speed at which Intel can improve their tech (and Intel is the much more innovative than AMD), which would benefit us all, just to do what? support a shitty company like AMD with terrible products? What a waste.
 
G

Guest

Guest
Seriously, Intel CPUs cost more because they are worth more than AMD's chips. Intel simply has superior technology, and the amount the cheapest i7 is worth, is much lower than anything comparable that would ever come from the AMD side, but AMD doesn't even have a chip to compete with i7.

So what exactly is the benefit of finning Intel, why should we support an non-innovative, old, unoriginal, and worthless company like AMD? AMD has never made a good product.
 
G

Guest

Guest
Hopefully AMD follows up and sues for their 15%. They've come out with some great products lately, imagine what kind of R&D they could do with the extra money.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts