AMD and IMB to merge?

red_ice

It appears IBM and AMD have teamed up to make the ‘chips of the future’. The new chip-making technology will be used in the high performance machines of the future. Here is a snippet from the press release:

The new processors, developed by AMD and IBM, will be aimed at improving microprocessor performance and reducing power consumption, and will be based on advanced structures and materials such as high-speed silicon-on-insulator (SOI) transistors, copper interconnects and improved “low-k dielectric” insulation.
The agreement includes collaboration on 65 and 45nm (.065 and .045-micron) technologies to be implemented on 300mm silicon wafers.

AMD and IBM will be able to use the jointly developed technologies to manufacture products in their own chip fabrication facilities and in conjunction with selected manufacturing partners. The companies expect first products based on the new 65nm technologies to appear in 2005.

Let the games begin Intel!

reD.

^CwAzY^

That's great news. I heard a while ago that AMD were going to stop making cpus until I heard this. They always had the edge over intel on price : performance ratio.

Typedef

This would be where wintel takes one in the ...umm... profit margin.

Tom Dunne

They may have the price/performance ratio, but neither IBM, nor AMD have the manufacturing prowess Intel has. Intel is slowly pulling away from AMD (in terms of raw GHz speed, which sadly seems the be the only factor that sells PC's). Intel can manufacture high-volume, high-margin products that other manufacturers can't. The profits Intel makes from these is ploughed back in to the next generation of chips, which gives Intel the edge in terms of R & D and keeps the company that little bit ahead of the competition.

The same thing was said approx. 10 years ago when the PowerPC chips were released - watch out Intel. Look where they are now.

spooky donkey

Well for all of our sakes i hope AMD keep up the chip race. Or we will all start playing high prices for our future CPU`s.

The power PC chip though never dominated never disapeared. Its still used in a lot of IBM`s 64 but unix servers. The game cupe also has a 405mhz power pc chip in that and look at all the work that can do with its 400 or so megahertz!

fatmander

It is good news, but we have to remember that
1/ Intel have been using 300mm platters for nearly 2 years, they are soon to increase to an even larger size, which means more profits(supposedly lower prices for us) from more chips per `wafer

2/AMD seem to be struggling with L2 cache size overheating problems,
L2 is where massive performances are to be found.

3/Intel are soon to release pentium 5, new architecture, more speed, below 0.9 microns- they cant take .13micron much further

4/It will take AMD and IBM time to introduce this new production, they are gonna both have to lay off staff, merge marketing and production teams etc.

It will be a entertaining and educational, but it's just gonna be the same old chip battle stepped up a gear

astrofool

I don't think one thing in the previous post is true

Tom Dunne

Originally posted by fatmander
It is good news, but we have to remember that
1/ Intel have been using 300mm platters for nearly 2 years, they are soon to increase to an even larger size, which means more profits(supposedly lower prices for us) from more chips per `wafer

That's not true. Intel have been using 300mm wafers for the past two years, correct, but they have only last Autumn began producing sellable product. There are no wafers currently under development bigger than 300mm (there are enough problems with 300mm technology)

2/AMD seem to be struggling with L2 cache size overheating problems,
L2 is where massive performances are to be found.

It would seem unusual that L2 cache would give problems - this is simply a mesh of memory cells. The logic within the main CPU (where there are much more transistors) would be more likely to give heating problems. I could be corrected on this, though.

3/Intel are soon to release pentium 5, new architecture, more speed, below 0.9 microns- they cant take .13micron much further

That's simply not true. There are architecture changes, but the core is still the P6 core that the Pentium II, III and IV are built on. The Pentium IV has plenty of life in it yet, I think.

4/It will take AMD and IBM time to introduce this new production, they are gonna both have to lay off staff, merge marketing and production teams etc.

I am not so sure about this either. IBM is a massive company with massive resources, and they have their own fabs (where chips are built) so I can't see them merging with AMD. This romour may be to do with complicated historical licensing deals IBM/AMD/Intel had.

It will be a entertaining and educational, but it's just gonna be the same old chip battle stepped up a gear

Yes, the masses predicting the end for Intel and the end of the Pentium line.

Same old, same old...

cerebus

I am not so sure about this either. IBM is a massive company with massive resources, and they have their own fabs (where chips are built) so I can't see them merging with AMD. This romour may be to do with complicated historical licensing deals IBM/AMD/Intel had.

The AMD/IBM announcement has nothing to do with a merger. The agreement between the two companies will simply allow AMD to take advantage of IBM's fabrication facilities and process expertise, something that might be essential to AMD's survival. It has been mentioned already in this thread that AMD has nowhere near the resources that Intel invests in research and development, and therefore might not be able to get new products developed and manufactured without these kind of partnerships.

FYI (in case anyone is interested), the announcement will have an impact on some existing AMD partnership agreements. For instance, AMD and UMC (United Microelectronics) had an agreement to develop a fab in Singapore but this will probably be shelved in light of the IBM deal.

Hairy Homer

At the risk of being anoraky, there's a misprint in the original posting with regards to the press release.

'The new processors, developed by AMD and IBM, will be aimed at improving microprocessor performance and reducing power consumption, '

What the release actually says is 'The new processes' not 'new processors'. So in reality this is an agreement to collaborate in the development of new manufacturing technology, not in the actual production of chips. Nowhere in the statement is there any mention of IBM helping AMD out with capacity.

And as another poster has pointed out, AMD's move has cast a shadow over an arrangement it had (and indeed still has) with another chip manufacturer to jointly build a new wafer fabrication plant.

So the prospects of AMD becoming anything more than a pimple on Intel's bum remain remote.

Actually, if you want to worry about upward pressure on component prices, worry about memory. The days of massive Japanese semiconductor companies beating each other up in an insane competitive battle seem to be over.

Would I be right in thinking (don't follow this as much as I used to) that where once there were five Japanese giants (NEC, Hitachi, Fujitsu, Toshiba and Mitsubishi) making DRAM, soon there will be only one, a joint venture between the chip arms of Hitachi and NEC called Elpida?

Reports say that this company is also taking over Mitsubshi's DRAM operations and a cursory glance on the Websites of Fujitsu and Tosh shows no evidence that either of them sell standard DRAM any more.

fatmander

I have to disagree with Tom for the following reasons

re. 12" wafers
"That's not true. Intel have been using 300mm wafers for the past two years, correct, but they have only last Autumn began producing sellable product. There are no wafers currently under development bigger than 300mm (there are enough problems with 300mm technology)"

It was spring 2001 when intel started selling the northwood 1.6a socket478 production................................

"It would seem unusual that L2 cache would give problems - this is simply a mesh of memory cells. The logic within the main CPU (where there are much more transistors) would be more likely to give heating problems. I could be corrected on this, though."

L2 cache gives serious heating problems
Why haven't AMD got half a meg on their chip?
One of the main things that changes with the development of processors is the size and position of the L2 cache, and how close it can be to the chip.



"but the core is still the P6 core that the Pentium II, III and IV "

The core is the x86 core which has been around(begun) since the 70's, parts come from the 60's and 50's.
-no-one has re-invented computers since 'DEC' tried and unfortunately went bust, then intel took them over and robbed all their technology- (i.e.- ARM processors to mention but one)


" am not so sure about this either. IBM is a massive company with massive resources, and they have their own fabs (where chips are built) so I can't see them merging with AMD. This romour may be to do with complicated historical licensing deals IBM/AMD/Intel had"

If they do merge as they said they would,
then what I said stands, unless all the people now gotta fly to work- or 2 or 3 people gonna be doing the same job in different places round the world
We gonna really make some money now......


"Yes, the masses predicting the end for Intel and the end of the Pentium line"
Hopefully, not likely

fatmander

Opps Intel did the 1.6A in spring 2002, not 2001
Sorry

Tom Dunne

Originally posted by fatmander

re. 12" wafers

It was spring 2001 when intel started selling the northwood 1.6a socket478 production................................

What's this got to do with the size of wafers? You can make any product on any size wafers, as Intel do. You just get more on the bigger wafers.

L2 cache gives serious heating problems
Why haven't AMD got half a meg on their chip?
One of the main things that changes with the development of processors is the size and position of the L2 cache, and how close it can be to the chip.

Yes, but my point is that there are a hell of a lot more complex circuits in the logic section of the chip than the L2 cache, hence it would generate a lot more heat.

The core is the x86 core which has been around(begun) since the 70's, parts come from the 60's and 50's.
-no-one has re-invented computers since 'DEC' tried and unfortunately went bust, then intel took them over and robbed all their technology- (i.e.- ARM processors to mention but one)

I think you have your core and your architecture mixed up - it's the x86 architecture, the P6 core is the base chip, still part of the x86 architecture, but with extra bits added on. For example, the PII had MMX and SIMD, Pentium 3 had SIMD2 and the Pentium 4 has this new fandangled hyper threading. The are all based on the same chip, the P6, which in turn is based on the x86 architecture and is compatible with everything since the early days.

Intel did not, by the way, take over DEC, Compaq did. Intel bought one of DEC's fabrication plants near Boston as part of a settlement when DEC sued Intel for patent infringement.

If they do merge as they said they would,
then what I said stands, unless all the people now gotta fly to work- or 2 or 3 people gonna be doing the same job in different places round the world
We gonna really make some money now......

Read Hairy Homer's post, they are not merging.

If anybody is an anorak around here, it is me.:D

Typedef

Originally posted by tom dunne
They may have the price/performance ratio, but neither IBM, nor AMD have the manufacturing prowess Intel has. Intel is slowly pulling away from AMD (in terms of raw GHz speed, which sadly seems the be the only factor that sells PC's).

Intel have more in the way of GHz, but AMD's new generation of 64bit CPUs will support both 32bit and 64bit applications, while Intel system's will need to use software emulation for that.

This in itself makes the AMD chip much more desireable for the cross over market.