AMD chief condemns Intel 'abuses'
Calls for end to illegal monopolies
AMD boss Hector Ruiz today called for an end to “illegal abuses” by Intel - the AMD competitor that controls 80 percent of the worldwide x86 microprocessor market.
Speaking at the annual conference of the American Antitrust Institute in Washington, D.C., he proclaimed: There is no proper or defensible place for illegal monopolies in the 21st century global marketplace.
"I think that is a vision we share, as business leaders, regulators, economists, lawyers, and others dedicated to ensuring fair and open competition in the market. And I believe it is our responsibility - not just to the global economy, but to society as a whole - to make that happen."
In 2005, after the Japan Fair Trade Commission found Intel guilty of offering illegal rebates to Japanese PC makers, AMD filed an anti-trust suit against its competitor in the U.S. District Court in Delaware. The case has not been decided.
Though Intel's x86 market share dipped slightly in 2006, it regained a significant chuck during first quarter of this year. According to Mercury Research, Intel now controls 80.5 per cent of the worldwide market for desktop, laptop, and server chips that use the dominant x86 architecture.
Ruiz began his Antitrust Institute speech with a general condemnation of monopolies in today’s global marketplace, but gradually zeroed in on Intel. “I want to give you an idea of what it’s like to do business day in and day out when you are competing against an abusive monopolist,” he said. “How it makes no difference whether you are just as efficient – or even more efficient – than they are.”
He gave a laundry list of examples where Intel had used “illegal tactics explicitly aimed at preventing customers from doing business with AMD.” These include the findings of the Japanese Fair Trade Commission and investigations in Europe and South Korea, as well as the 48 pages of examples cited in AMD's U.S. complaint against Intel.
Ruiz believes that Intel's practices have stifled innovation across the PC marketplace, resulting in machines that are little different from those used 10 to 15 years ago. If these practices are curbed, he says, consumers will have access to more powerful machines at lower prices.
"In an IT industry without an abusive monopoly, computer manufacturers are empowered to flourish because innovation and differentiation are rewarded – rather than be obligated to a single supplier. The benefits are passed on to consumers through lower prices and greater choice in the marketplace." ®
So first off, I've got to say that I've heard and seen a number of things that Intel has done to leverage against AMD, but I think AMD has done a reasonable job battling against them up 'til this year.
I've always liked AMD because they've been the underdog, and that forced them to innovate in order to succeed. Their K8 arch was amazing, with dual core ability built in from the start. Keep in mind that when it was released Intel was still claiming that dual core and 64 bit were worthless and that they'd never do that. They changed their minds in a few months.
Intel, with their market lead, can produce nearly anything and keep their lead. That doesn't make for better products.
Whoever mentioned Intel's R&D should read up on the Core products. You know the last new arch that Intel made from scratch? Yeah, that was netburst, and look how well that did. If I do recall the 1.8ghz chips at the initial release were not only slower than the AMD chips that had been on sale for a while, but also had to be recalled for thermal issues.
The Core series is based on the Pentium M series, which is heavily based on the Pentium III, which was just a Pentium II with some added instructions, which was, in itself, just a Pentium Pro with a new shape and new cache.
So Intel's great R&D has come up with... the Pentium Pro. And even with all the features that they advertised for the core chips, they still had to pack 4MB of cache onto them to compare to Opteron speeds. And what, are they the last company on the planet to use an FSB? Hell I think my RPN calculator has moved on to bigger and better things than an FSB.
As to the AM2 socket upgrade, AMD hasn't changed sockets any more often than Intel, who've had 775, then 2 seperate 470 something pin sockets (one for P4, one for Xeon) in the amount of time that AMD has gone through just as many. Plus I think that an on chip memory controller is worth some socket upgrades.
If there's anything that AMD hasn't done right, its get their K10 out in time. If they were shipping those in January or February, Intel would be in rather worse shape than they've ever been. Its really hard to compare the Core series with the K8, which was released about 4 years ago, and I reckon that once K10 is out, we'll see some more of that amazing innovation that AMD does with regularity.
Re: Who decides?
"As far as I am concerned, the consumer has the right to choose what they want..."
Not strictly true. Can a UK consumer legally purchase a copy of Manhunt 2? The simple answer is no because it is not an available option. And that is where your argument falls down, imo.
The consumer has the right to choose BUT only from what is available to them.
Pacifier for Hector Ruiz, Plz...
Someone need to give Hector Ruiz a pacifier PLEASE... So he stops whinnin n cryin...
Hector tries to misinterpretes Intel's innovations and R & D as a monopoly...
If Hector really cares about AMD he should step down...that would be a great & much needed favor to AMD
How dare they make better chips than us. it is just not fair, can you make them go back to netburst for us?
AMD and google...
AMD buys out ATI, starts losing market again to intel and still has CHEAPER cpu's than intel and they are COMPLAINING?
Whats going on with these big companies whining so much to US Anti-trust boards?