Slashdot Mirror
AMD To Stop Production Of 486, 586 & K6 Chips
Dear VersaLogic Customer:
This letter is being sent to alert you to an important change in the long-term availability of several VersaLogic products. Please read it carefully.
AMD, the supplier of CPU chips that are used on many of our products, has notified us that they plan to re-tool the production line that currently produces 486, 586 and K6 CPU chips. AMD needs to use their Fab 25 facility to produce a different line of products and will stop production on these CPU chips on June 28, 2002. The CPU chips produced by this facility are used in our VSBC-2, VSBC-6, VSBC-7, Panther, VL-686-2, and VL-586-1 products.
This decision by AMD, with whom we have worked closely for many years, is a major blow to the embedded computer market. It is very surprising that their long-standing dedication to the embedded market has taken such an abrupt turn. As recently as October 2000 they announced new processors (the K6-2E+ and K6-IIIE+) and assured us of their continuing long-term support for the embedded market.
Please note that this decision by AMD does not mean that they will immediately halt production or that these CPU chips will be in short supply. Normal production of these chips is scheduled to continue through June 2002. Last-time-buy orders can be placed in June for delivery of the chips in late 2002 and early 2003.
VersaLogic management has been hearing rumors of this possible change (various versions of it) over the last few months and has been working closely with AMD to avoid this radical change in their direction. We prepared for the possibility that their decision would ultimately be to issue an end-of-life notice. Now that the decision has been made, our focus will be on assisting our customers with planning and migration issues over the next 12-24 months.
Although this change is not immediate, each customer must look at the long term impact that this announcement will have on their product usage. In some cases this will mean placing an end-of-life purchase order with VersaLogic to continue delivery of the current product even after the AMD chips have been discontinued. For others it may involve qualifying new products, or using Intel Tillamook versions of our current products, for the current application. Tillamook versions of most impacted products will be available before year end. For further information please see the roadmap and migration information on our web site at http://www.versalogic.com/support/rdmp/rdmp.asp or contact us directly at info@versalogic.com.
Again, this change is not immediate, but planning steps should be taken now to assure a smooth transition in the future. We stand ready to support you as needed to make this transition as easy and painless as possible. "
I've gotten a couple of these e-mails - full test of the e-mail is pasted below.
This is a test of the AMD emergency broadcast message. This is only a test. If this had been an actual email, you door would have been kicked in by federal agents, your AMD CPU's would have been confiscated, and you would have been arrested for violation of the DMCA. We now return you to your regularly scheduled email.
Probably because they're fast enough to do the task required for many embedded applications, and they require significantly less power than a Pentium class chip.
"The invisible and the non-existent look very much alike." -- Delos B. McKown
I don't think that's the case at all... The K6IIE+ and the K6IIIE+ are going to be AMD's new embedded solutions (denoted by the "E"), and it says so in the article. As embedded devices become more and more complex, I think there'll be a greater demand for more powerful processors to run them. I think AMD is just thinking ahead, and the fact that they're gonna keep on making older processors until June 2002 says that they're not just jumping ship. I don't think AMD has ANY intention of giving away ANY market to Intel... they are competitors, after all. Not to mention that in the long run, it's probably easier and cheaper for them to fab K6-2/3 processors than the old stuff.
"Cut word lines. Cut music lines. Smash the control images. Smash the control machine." - William S. Burroughs
Curmudgeon Gamer: Not happy
Companies who have spent millions of dollars designing and testing an embedded device running on a rock solid, low power 25Mhz SX 486 don't want to go through the whole process again to upgrade their boards (different pins, more power) or even to put in a faster 486 (you might have to actually cripple your application to keep its execution speed constant).
The cost of the CPU isn't really the issue (you often pay more for older, slower chips!), it's the associated re-development cost that keeps the demand for old chips going.
If you were blocking sigs, you wouldn't have to read this.
In the desktop PC market, AMD had basically replaced the K6 with Duron, and they'd done the same with the recent mobile Athlon and Duron products for laptops. I suspect they just weren't seeing a lot of demand for the older classes of processor anymore (or at least not enough to justify a fab anymore), and decided to let Intel service the low-end embedded market instead. A year-plus for a transition period isn't too bad, though companies making medical products that use embedded AMD would want more (I believe changes like that have to be certified, and that takes time/money).
Given that AMD has only a fraction of Intel's resources, that's probably a smart move on their part. Spend your money where the opportunity for a return is best. Interestingly, the embedded market can make money (at least a little higher-up) - that's pretty much what's kept PowerPC cranking along all these years. It's popular in cars, printers, and networking equipment, to a much greater degree than Apple buys them. I think Intel still makes i960s, too - for that purpose.
-- Josh Turiel
"2. Do not eat iPod Shuffle."
I think people here who are saying "Big deal, it's how the industry works.. Old CPU's stop getting made" are missing the point.
The "embedded" world is a bunch of companies producing devices that are usually small, lower powered, small production runs, and generally get made for alot longer than most electronics you're used to.
The last company I worked for (Midway Games) made arcade(coin-operated) video games. For a brief time, I worked with the group called "Wavenet". Wavenet was an idea to link arcade games up in arcades all through the world, to allow real-time tournaments. The first game that was tried was Mortal Kombat 3. MK3 used a really weird processor called a 34010 from Texas Instruments. (Weird in that it had *BIT* addressable memory, funky graphics opcodes built in that we never used, etc) However, the game designers pretty much pushed the CPU to its max before we had a chance to make it a networked game. There wasn't enough RAM, CPU, or ROM (for networking code) left to do it, as well as this board didn't have an ethernet output on it to connect it up to the router.
Midway ended up designing a tiiiiny little board (running a small embedded OS that just translated game commands into TCP/IP and vice versa) that plugged into an expansion connector on the MK3 board. It had an Ethernet controller, some ram, more ROMs for the networking code and a 386SX CPU made by AMD on it. Why not use a Pentium, or Pentium Pro? (which was the newest CPU out at the time)
Cost. Right now, you can get 386SX CPU's for a couple of dollars.
Power. Compare the latest generation of 386 CPUs to even a slow PII. HUUUGE difference here.
Board space. The embedded 386's are a little bigger than an american nickle. Pentium class CPU's... well... are big.
Longevity. When we bought these, we got committments from our suppliers that the CPU would be around for at least X months/years. This is REALLLLY important to us. If we're going to spend a ton of cash designing a board based around a CPU, we don't want it to disappear next month when something better comes along.
Had the embedded world not existed, and we had to use a faster/newer CPU, the board cost would have doubled, it would have been a bigger board(again more $$), We likely would have needed to put a bigger power supply(or played tricks with regulators), and then had to redsign the board every time the trendy chip got unpopular. All for horsepower we didn't even need!
Take a look here. Intel is still supporting and selling 80186 CPU's, for embedded controller uses.
Many many companies depend on slower CPU's for things. I don't know if it's still true, but at one point nearly every computer-controlled traffic light system sold used an 80186 CPU. Intel(?) came up with a "hardened" version of it that tolerated extreme cold and extreme heat. Companies that produce products like that are even happy paying double price for an old CPU that can do that, than installing air conditioners and heaters in every traffic light box.
The embedded CPU industry is a place where normal PC economics do not apply. It's not unheard of to pay extra for a part just because you know it'll be around for 10 years, instead of a cheaper(sometimes better) part that will go away as soon as it's not trendy.
While I don't know the specifics of this deal, it sounds like AMD is breaking their previously announced EOL(End Of Life) dates. This is quite likely going to piss a lot of people off who built their product around one of these CPUs.
Probably because they're fast enough to do the task required for many embedded applications, and they require significantly less power than a Pentium class chip.
Absolutely. I own a Garmin II+ GPS receiver, which is powered by an Intel 386EX processor - an unglamourous CPU, but one that does the job very nicely. Similarly my Palm III is powered by 16MHz Dragonball processor (68000 derivative) - nothing special these days, but serious grunt 10-15 years ago.
I may be showing my age here, but I first started computing at around 10 years of age on Z80 boxes (TRS-80/System-80: where 48k RAM and lowercase displays were a luxury!) I am still amazed at how good some of the software was on such limited hardware. Conversely, I see how crap some of the current software is and think "WTF"?!)
Competitions like the Perl obfuscated code contest are cool, but I'd like to see some contents based upon the best program than can be squeezed into an "antique" box like the TRS-80 Model I - that would really separate the hackers from the script kiddies...