SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
AMD shares rose to a nearly six-year high [autoplaying video] ahead of its December 13th preview of the company's Zen chips, and amid rumors that AMD will license its integrated graphics technology to Intel:
Nvidia and Intel began suing each other in 2009 over Nvidia's nForce chipsets for Intel CPUs. The suits were eventually settled in 2011: Nvidia agreed not to build chipsets for Intel's Core i7 CPUs, and Intel was free to build graphics cores without getting sued by Nvidia. The price of Intel's freedom was high, though: The chip giant agreed to pay Nvidia licensing fees over the next six years totalling $1.5 billion.
After writing the last $200 million check in January 2016, the licensing deal is winding down, which means Intel has to go shopping for patent protection for its graphics cores. As AMD and Nvidia essentially own the lion's share of graphics patents in the world, developing graphics cores is nigh impossible without licensing deals.
[...] Such a deal wouldn't come cheap, but Intel was already cutting checks of $200 million to $300 million to Nvidia every year. "Intel would have to pony up some significant money to make this deal work," Krewell told PCWorld. "The amount of extra cash AMD could make on royalties would be very appealing to the shareholders."
Fans may be concerned that such a deal would all but give up the last advantage AMD's upcoming Zen-based APUs would have over Intel chips. AMD's Zen core could equal Intel's newest cores in x86 performance. Combine that with AMD's much more powerful graphics cores and you'd have an instant winner. Financial realities, however, overshadow any moral victories. "Is it better to make a royalty on 80 percent to 90 percent of the PC processor shipments or fight it out for the remaining 10 percent or 20 percent?" Krewell said. AMD can make a lot more money partnering with Intel rather than competing.
Also at Nasdaq. Rumor source.
(Score: 2) by Hairyfeet on Friday December 09 2016, @04:52PM
I really see no reason to upgrade from my FX-8320E as its already insane overkill. I mean I already get between 75-110FPS and that is while recording my gameplay, blow through video transcodes and complex multitrack DSP renders like they were nothing,seriously how much more power can I possibly use?
And I think that is the problem both AMD and Intel are facing right now, except for a small minority with tasks that require every cycle you can throw at them and those that just want the new hotness for bragging rights most folks simply aren't able to use up all the power the chips AMD and Intel have been putting out for several years. To use a car analogy its like the tasks people have are mid tier sedan level of performance and AMD and Intel have been putting out top fuel dragsters, its just insane overkill. Once AMD and Intel switched from the MHz wars to the core wars? Software just got blown away by the hardware, heck even the gamers just don't need to be bleeding edge anymore. I know several gamers with Phenom II X6s and paired with decent cards they are all quite happy and are staying above 60FPS so what is the point? To go from 100FPS to 120FPS?
If my system were to die? I would grab a Zen no doubt, but considering the fact that my late father's Phenom I is still purring away at the shop and the wife is using my Phenom II X4 which has ran virtually nonstop since 09? I just don't see that happening anytime soon, nor do I see myself needing more than 8 cores at 4.1Ghz for the jobs I have to do. I gotta give AMD credit in that regard, pair their chips with a decent board and they just never seem to wear out, last I heard my Sempron from 03 is still running 6 days a week, it handles inventory and invoices for a salvage yard down the way.
ACs are never seen so don't bother. Always ready to show SJWs for the racists they are.
(Score: 2) by linkdude64 on Friday December 09 2016, @05:51PM
I think their sales will be good on release, but what to look for will be their success over the first year. I imagine many people are in my situation - with a 5+ year old machine that is showing its age, with retirement on the horizon due to 4k, VR, etc. and now we'll have a much easier time justifying a purchase that will look capable at handling the first several years of that kind of content. Never in my wildest dreams could I see myself justifying a $1000 CPU. A $500 CPU equivalent...? Especially when I can throw a cheaper APU in a decent mobo temporarily to spread out build costs...?