Slashdot Mirror
AMD and IBM Working Together on Future Chips
oogbla writes "There is a story over at news.com which says that AMD is teaming up with IBM for its sub-100 nanometer process and is de-emphasizing its previous relationships in that area. Also seems that the Silicon-on-Insulator (SOI) technology they were supposedly getting from Motorola isn't going too well and has caused at least one delay to Barton."
I am quite sure that IBM and AMD teamed together could easily give Intel a run for speed and technology. Alone IBM and AMD have some amazing technologies that have some amazing potential (like IBM's 64bit PPC chip coming soon).
...that i'll never get a ThinkPad with a TransMeta chip in it. I love IBM laptop hardware, and Transmeta seems to have a grasp of what should be in a laptop processor, but whether or not it will ever become a reality one has to wonder.
In SOVIET RUSSIA... erm...NSA AMERICA, the Internet logs onto YOU!
What, Motorola caused a delay for someone it was supplying something to? That's crazy! Motorola is never *achem*G5*achem* late! I'm sure that it's just a big misunderstanding on AMD's side.
Then again maybe it's the year of the Laptop for AMD too!
I guess this means, that there might actually be a big computer manufacturer that will back AMD. I'm sure AMD execs are drooling of the possibilities of having someone in their corner against Intel.
From some articles I read in the past, IIRC, IBM is known for having some of the slowest management progression out there. I hope AMD isn't getting itself into an Apple/MOT stalemate.
~A'Ëq'i4d)^'$ÊSÈòB
to me, the most interesting part of the article is this: "The deal also marks a break in an alliance between AMD and Taiwan's United Microelectronics, a foundry that makes chips for other companies Earlier, AMD and UMC agreed to jointly develop 65 nanometer processes and build a fabrication facility together. AMD also said it would use UMC for excess factory capacity if necessary."
at first glance, it might seem like it's bad that AMD is breaking business ties. but the last sentence indicates that the option to tap UMC is still available, which to me means that the relations between the two must not have soured that badly.
looking at the big picture, it seems that AMD has made a pretty decent business move upwards, scaling up as they need, and acquiring a nice, big name to throw around as good PR.
which is not to say that it'll make AMD successful. but you know how dippy people are when it comes to stocks. Joe Trader who was "like, wtf?! UMC? wtf UMC?" might be more like "miammiam, IBM. mmmn, juicy goodness."
AMD seems to be making a lot of different decisions lately. I wonder if this apparent inability to decide if AMD is in the market or out, if they're going to pander to consumers or the embedded market, whether they're going to use cogswell cogs or spacely sprockets, is going to hinder adoption of Hammer? Especially since Intel (at least tries to give the appearance) that Itanium is a planned technology with a solid roadmap and development plan.
Go away, or I will replace you with a very small shell script.
The Athalonito, and it will come in Ranch, Nacho and BBQ flavors.
Here's another link to the EE Times: http://www.eetimes.com/semi/news/OEG20030108S0038 (care of [H]ard|OCP)
Hopefully this means that the next CPUs out of AMD won't be able to warm up the apartment come winter.
Generally this means that AMD won't be working with United Microelectronics (UMC) anymore... a contract that was just recently made (January). (EE Times hints that IBM has been "muscling in" on UMC's turf lately - ouch).
The deal apparently marks an end to AMD's arrangement with United Microelectronics Corp., a Taiwan-based foundry with which AMD was to develop process technology and build a 300-mm fabrication facility in Singapore. Asked about that earlier partnership, an AMD spokesman said the two sides "are amicably winding up their joint development relationship."
I certainly fell for the hype initially, thinking "AMD + IBM + Hammer?!?!?", alas, not to be.
FWIW IBM also has similar arrangements with Intel.
A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
Let's all hope that they can come up with a next generation processor that Apple will use for Mac OS X.
Karma: The shiznight, mostly because I am the Drizzle.
Didn't IBM spin off AMD as seperate company long ago like it more recently did with Lexmark?
Just a Tuna in the Sea of Life
It's interesting how all the hardware sites lambasted Intel for the design of the Pentium 4, because it didn't have the raw speed of the AMD Athlon or Pentium 3. What made this all rather amusing to me, however, was that these people weren't around to see the evolution of the 386 vs 486, 486 vs Pentium, and, to a lesser extent, the 286 vs 386. In each of these situations, the previous generation of chip was able to eek a few more cycles over the next generation... in the beginning of the next generation's run! Intel has a very strong history of designing chips that ramp up very well (except for their one CPU engineering failure, the Pentium Pro, which was too ambitiously designed).
I wasn't surprised when the AMD Athlon pulled out ahead of the Pentium 4, then fell very far behind. The Athlon was not engineered to ramp up well over 1 GHz. AMD was very foolish to race to that point, seeing as how long it took them to get working silicon at just 2 GHz.
I'm not saying that I bought a Pentium 4, just that I knew it would eventually overtake the Athlon. I'm quite happy with a cheap Athlon, myself. Semiconductors is a soap opera for nerds. That's why I read The Register, not EE Times.
My guess is that there's going to be a lot more consolodation in the semiconductor and memory world. I bet Micron, AMD, Motorola, and Apple are all going to end up merging, buying out, and/or disappearing in the next few months. Maybe HP will buy them all.
...that blamed Motorola for the delays with the G4 chips, as well as the lack of big speed increases? What's going on with Motorola these days? They seem to overpromise and underdeliver a lot.
My Greasemonkey scripts for Digg &
I hope this leads to better x86 chips and faster PPC chips. Apple really needs a bost, and AMD makes great ships, but need an IBM to give them a shot in the arm to beat the bohemith called Intel. GO AMD....and GO IBM.
David Vasta iSeries(AS/400) Admin & Junkie
Licensing technology out to others is exactly what IBM should be doing in this case. It helps the industry and that will, in turn, help them. This is great for IBM in the short term and the long term.
--naked
Very popular slashdot journal for adul
Drat! I was really looking forward to buying a Barton chip! Oh well, I'll just keep saving, I suppose.
I know it's not exactly the same, but remember what IBM did to Cyrix? They licensed Cyrix's chips and then undercut them in price, which I believe led to the eventual demise of their chip.
It seems as though making a deal with IBM is almost as risky as making a deal with Microsoft, although I guess dealing with Microsoft has an even worse track record (Sybase with SQL Server, IBM with OS/2, Sendo with their phone stuff).
Even after paying hundreds of millions to IBM, AMD should still be able to undercut Intel's outrageous pricing and sell chips of equal or greater quality (ie, chips that have a detailed instruction set, not chips that just do nothing fast) and still make a decent profit
Just my $0.02
HallmarkOrnaments.Com
Google doesn't index user sigs, so stop trying to "Google Bomb" with them.
I think a lot of people are misreading (or in /. fashion, not reading) this. Or just not understanding. This does not mean IBM and AMD are working on some new type of processor together (ie no new processor architecture).
What this means is that they will work together on having manufacting technoligies in the future. Fabs and fab equptment are extremely expensive and it is generally hard to move from one manufacturing process to another. This alliance should help shave costs and improve manufacturing quality on the process (I believe it said 0.65 micron) in question. Each will continue to design cpus separately.
He said, "You'll be able to tell your grandchildren that you helped assemble the first NT supercomputer," and I cringed.
Hmm, I am rather sure that the 486 was in fact quite a bit faster than the 386, clock for clock.
Things like integrated FPU made it run a lot faster. Yeah, the SX version was crap (kinda like a Celeron) but the DX did deliver.
First, AMD must get their product out. 64, 32, whatever. They have to speed up the chip too. For a same number of model and mhz, I am not sure which is better in term of real speed (AMD vs. Intel), but I have a gut feeling that Intel chip can not be slower (but AMD could). So, that's bad for AMD.
Then, they have to move to more advance manufacturer process quicker. That's how you save cost. Intel has higher mhz chip, has more advance (300mm) fab (translate to lower cost), move to smaller process quicker. What does all this means? In addition, they move faster products out to the market quicker and more frequently.
I would be nervous if I were AMD. They miss the PDA chip space (I may be wrong on this). I think that's where money goes. Create a gig hertz pda then sell it. That's when handheld computer become reality. It's the convegence of wireless phone, pda, multimedia (mp3 player, video player), games, and anything you haven't think of. Ofcourse, it can do messaging, audio conference, and video conference.
Hey, the future is there. Whoever get their first, and make it cheap enough (for all poor comsumer) will win. (technology won't become reality unless they're good enough, but also cheap enough).
AMD is known for its competitive price. Use that war game.
In summary, you can not compete if you can not bring a new, better product out (ok, and enough for us to buy, not just a demo one).
Everyone who's talking about Apple 64 bit hammer-based PPC whatever is totally off the mark. They're cooperating on future technologies that we won't see for years and which have nothing to do with processor design, only processor technology. There will be no visible effects from this for at least the next year, and even if/when it does lead to change, it will be change most people won't even notice.
Apple is consulting with IBM about the PPC970. AMD is consulting with IBM about a new fab process. So, with any luck from IBM, there's a chance that representatives from both Apple and AMD will be in the same room together! With any more luck, they'll be opposite genders (then again, that doesn't much matter these days), and they'll hit it off!! (..but we've got to see their offspring.. it will be wonderful!)
That's always a good news/bad news type of thing. Still, the fact that IBM/AMD are going to concentrate on SOI tells me that perhaps the newers AMD's will require less power, which can ONLY be a 'good thing'(tm)
Chuck Bucket
free ipod and free gmail!
this just sounds like another TCPA trick. What better way to slip DRM in our hardware.
They're using their grammar skills there.
AMD and IBM Working Together on Future Chips
I don't believe it. Time travel is impossible!
FoundNews.com - get paid to blog.,
If you're thinking "PowerHammer", "IBM Athlon", etc., then you REALLY don't get it. This is like GM and Ford cooperating on expensive research needed to meet new Federal safety & pollution standards:
- An engineer who used a saw to cut GM & Ford airbags or catalytic converters open a few years later could see similarities in the technology.
- Someone who was expecting to see a Pontiac Mustang or Lincoln DeVille would be SOL.
It's easy to make up & spread cool- and credible-sounding stuff. Finding & checking hard facts is hard work.
AMD:
... only cheaper for the 2.6 .... no where else .... hmmmmm
...
$319 Athlon XP 2700 333
$280 Athlon XP 2600
$274 Athlon XP 2600 333
$173 Athlon XP 2400
$130 Athlon XP 2200
$86 Athlon XP 2100
$71 Athlon XP 2000
$70 Athlon XP 1900
$62 Athlon XP 1800
$52 Athlon XP 1700
Intel P4:
$635 - Pentium 4 3.06GHz
$356 - Pentium 4 2.8GHz
$271 - Pentium 4 2.6GHz
$224 - Pentium 4 2.53GHz
$182 Pentium 4 2.4GHz 533MHz
$185 - Pentium 4 2.4GHz 400MHz
$166 - Pentium 4 2.2GHz 400MHz
$168 - Pentium 4 2.26GHz 533MHz
$168 - Pentium 4 2.26GHz
$146 - Pentium 4 2.0GHz Sock 478
$171 - Pentium 4 2.0GHz
$133 Pentium 4 1.9GHz Sock 478
$192 - Pentium 4 1.9GHz
$104 - Pentium 4 1.8GHz Sock 478
$159 - Pentium 4 1.8GHz
$114 - Pentium 4 1.7GHz Sock 478
$132 - Pentium 4 1.7GHz
$106 Pentium 4 1.6GHz Sock 478
$130 - Pentium 4 1.6GHz
$103 Pentium 4 1.5GHz Sock 478
$119 - Pentium 4 1.5GHz
$117 - Pentium 4 1.4GHz Sock 478
$110 - Pentium 4 1.4GHz
Hmmm
I'll stick with my earlier statement
HallmarkOrnaments.Com
I read a similiar article recently that had the headline "Former AMD and IBM Employees Working Together on Fish n' Chips."
all chips are made of chocolate and are found in cookies.
I saw one of these IRL and man was I confused! http://www.cpushack.net/images/AMD8088-2-BQA.jpg http://www.cpushack.net/images/AMDD8086-2.jpg
I live to gib...
"Mighty fine nerve tonic...and boy do I have nerve!"
Cartoon reference...anyway, I digress...
The first Celerons were junk. No cache. Wretched things. Ugh. However, the Mendocino Celerons, the Coppermine Celerons and best of all the Tualatin Celerons were almost as good as their respective PIII "big brothers." Great price point made them the choice for anything that didn't absolutely, positively need all the caching the PIII provided.
However, the "Celeron...eew!" equation has become a reality again. Basically the chips Intel are selling as Celerons are very neutered P4s. Avoid them like the plague.
"But you've already got a DVD. It lasts forever....In the digital world, we don't need back-ups..."
-- Jack Valenti
I recently converted from using intel chips (I had a dual celeron linux box and a P200 windows box) to Athlon XPs... I've had nothing but trouble since. I've had two athlon chips give out on me completely, random crashes even under linux, IDE controller problems, startup problems, etc. This isn't just a bad motherboard since both computers are giving me problems. It isn't just the chipset since each motherboard has a distinct chipset (AliMagick and VIA respectively). This experience has led me to believe that AMD chips and motherboards are simply below the quality standard I need, and I've started saving my cash for P4 or celeron motherboards and chips. I just don't have the time to deal with junk hardware. Maybe I'll just give up and switch to Apple.
I wasn't surprised when the AMD Athlon pulled out ahead of the Pentium 4, then fell very far behind. The Athlon was not engineered to ramp up well over 1 GHz. AMD was very foolish to race to that point, seeing as how long it took them to get working silicon at just 2 GHz.
It gave AMD some very good credibility, having the fastest processors, not just being some copycat always behind. Without that credibility, they would never have gotten Athlon MP in on the market. Most likely they wouldn't get money for the investments they'd need (and still do) to keep up with Intel otherwise.
It showed that Intel could be beaten, at least for a short while. Kinda like the gfx cards. Geforce, Geforce DDR, Geforce 2, Geforce 2 GTS, Geforce 3, Geforce 3 Ultra, Geforce 4... Radeon 9700! Ok Nvidia might strike back just as hard with Geforce FX, but it's the same thing.
Besides, it's not like AMD is really far behind. I've seen AMD2800+ in the stores, Intel has 3.06GHz (assuming those PR ratings are still close to valid). Of course AMD is now playing pretty much every design trick in the book (FSB, additional layer, minor core improvements+++) to keep up, so they need SOI and/or Hammer fairly soon, but they're still in loop.
Kjella
Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Moderation is seriously broken on Slashdot. Seriously, people rush to post as quickly as possibly with whatever inane, useless comment they can think up, and conversely later people follow up only the early, inane comments with their comments lest they get lost in the late post refuse.
QUIT MODERATING UP DUMB SHIT JUST BECAUSE IT'S AN EARLY POST. At best this post might be a +2 "No Shit Sherlock", but it certainly is neither insightful nor informative.
no, actually I don't think Intel has an explicit sharing agreement like this... although intel and IBM are both members of research groups like sematech they battle pretty fiercly over who has the fastest/smallest/most efficient transistor
I think the reasons why Intel was able to quickly ramp up the speed of the Pentium 4 were:
1. The architectural design of the CPU core was intended to handle speeds well beyond 3 GHz CPU clock speed.
2. Intel's Northwood-core Pentium 4's with 512 KB of L2 cache on the CPU die substantially speeded up performance.
3. The introduction of Hyper-Threading Technology on the CPU core starting with the 3.06 GHz P4's will offer a bigger performance boost when software that takes full advantage of it arrives over the next six months.
If anyone remembers the original Socket 423 P4's, they ran very hot and had performance that was in many ways inferior to the Thunderbird-core Athlons. The current Northwood-core P4's run quite a bit cooler and offer extraordinary performance.
AMD bought out and now produces the Alchemy chips based on the Mips architecture for their embedded space alongside their Elan x86 embedded chips. I guess the situation's a little like DEC--Alpha and Arm, one for the desktop (workstation and servers too), and one for embedded apps.
So, when's lunch?
AMD has got a killer processor with trhe hammer but the current sample versions have a tiny cache. This is because AMD never had good luck with production flaws and their yeild is usually low (So I hear). So they are forced to making smaller chips. Now IBM have had some silly sized silicon experience. They are way way ahead of the others. especially as the hammer is a dual ISA chip so it would need a copy of each library for both architectures. Thus a need for a doubled cache.
I remember a colegue coming back from Hot Chips and there being a presentation by some people of the so called giant chips they theoreticly could make and IBM just blew them out the water with some 8 metal layer 5x5 cm monstrosety (numbers are prob. way out).
Mouse powered Chips, Open source Processors and Lego
Thats not true at all. The AMD K6 233 beat the Pentium Pro 233 and Pentium 266 for some time (about 4-5 months) before the Pentium II's came out. The K6 is really a processor that has been underappreciated, but in 1997 it was great. Remember, AMD purchased NexGen which had the Nx586 which was a great processor in its day. NexGen was founded by quite a few ex-intel engineers who wanted to bring RISC computing to the desktop. The K6 is what would have become the NexGen Nx686. To this day, the Athlon uses RISC instructions internally.
What made the Athlon special was how its floating point performance was so far superior to the Pentium II's and III's. The original NexGen Nx586 didn't even HAVE a floating point unit and the K6 had relatively terrible floating point performance. Going all the way back to the original Nx586 P60 (50 mhz), clock for clock the technology always beat Intel for integer performance. NexGen STARTED the P- rating system because of this. This was the same fate that befell Cyrix which has been out of the game for years because the FPU performance sucked.
In reality you are right, this is the same game that has been going on now for eight years. Intel competitors create processors more efficient than Intel, but Intel can ratchet up the performance.
For geeks however, the floating performance was an issue even five years ago for games, filters, and such.
Its just unfortunate when some people are ignorant of the whole story, because its really fascinating. Me, I haven't owned an Intel processor since 1994 with my first NexGen Nx586 66, so I have a long history of antiquated boxes to prove it.
I don't read or respond to AC posts
--this is my bleeding edge 5 year old top of the line machine. It was medium doggy with 32 ram, but at 226 it seems perfectly normal on rh7.2. I am just constantly amazed at all the references to machines this old as being useless, throw em away, etc. I can ran a half a dozen apps at the same time and it works perfectly OK. I don't run videogames or do weather modeling, that is apparently the only (very generally speaking now) real need for latest multiple giga herz machines that I can see.
Can't wait to actually find the correct stepping chip and the correct volt regulator for like 5$ so I can add the second cpu to the mobo. heh, poor mans easy upgrade path.
And a hearty "thankyou" rich guys for buying new stuff at ridiculous prices so all us peons can get them for peanuts later on. Capitalism roolz.
http://news.com.com/2100-1001-208550.html?tag=rn
"Look dear, I didn't mind you starting a company here when we were young and there was no office. I even let you make chips here, I EVEN didn't mind when you extended our living room to 4 square miles BUT I WILL NOT LET YOU BRING IBM IN HERE!"