AMD on cross-license dspute, Xeon 5500 and HP Pavilion DV2

Following my recent posts on the Intel-AMD cross-license dispute, I was fortunate enough to be able to meet up with Ramkumar Subramanian, VP, Marketing & Sales, AMD India, and Vamsi Krishna, Senior Technical Manager, AMD India, and discuss this, and more, in greater detail.

On cross-license dispute
On the cross-license dispute, Subramanian said: GlobalFoundries is a subsidiary of AMD. The agreement is already there with AMD. It is unclear what an artificial dispute will achieve. Intel is a much bigger company than AMD, and if they wish to divert attention from their difficulties, this is nothing much than a distracting strategy."

He added that if one reads what the European Commission's (EC) findings are, these steps are not taken unless they really believe there has been some abuse of monopoly power.

By asking questions on different angles, is Intel trying to gather more information? Remains to be seen!

Subramanian added that the end customers -- enterprises or home users -- they will tell you that the price of computing has reduced signiificantly and the quality of technology available to them has increased substantially. This is a direct result of competition. "We have merely asked for the competition to be fair and open," he contended. Value for money assumes great importance.

It is perhaps, fit that two people do not sit across the table and discuss to form a monopoly. A person who's looking to stretch their dollar would stand to benefit more from competition!

On HP Pavilion DV2
AMD also showcased a new notebook, released recently, the HP Pavilion DV2. This notebook is using the AMD Athlon NEO. Subramanian said: "We are working on platforms. At the platform level, a lot of innovation has happened in this notebook, which will give you a very rich, visual experience."

So, what does it bring to the consumer? According to Subramanian, it is the visual experience, which would be available in the normal notebook segment. Users can play HD content, complex games, etc. Krishna, added: "The moment you tune the notebook for high-end graphics applications, the Office applications become a cakewalk."

On workstation graphics
AMD also touched upon workstation graphics.

Subramanian said that AMD entered this business post the acquisition of ATI. The ATI FirePro cards available today -- whether in the range of application suites, or performance, or price -- seems to be an unbeatable proposition. "We are bringing the value of competition in the workstation space," he added.

Nvidia has been a partner in many ways, but in this space it is a competitor. AMD's FirePro series -- the applications certified on this particular card -- that's important. "We believe we will be able to penetrate this space very well," he remarked.

Why AMD commented on Intel's Xeon 5500?
I took this opportunity to ask AMD why it chose to comment on the Intel Xeon 5500, prior to its launch in India?

Krishna contended that AMD has brought a lot of innovation to the table ahead of the competition. "We have been leaders in this space, and brining innovative products to the marketplace," said.

Subramanian added: "The world should know that we are the leaders in technology. Our position would be much stronger if the market was fair and open."

Krisha noted that most people would think one-dimension -- performance. "It is the overall value you give in the whole package. A simple example -- Istanbul -- it is exactly pin compatible to the existing server platforms. The value -- customers have an extended product lifecycle.

Nehalem is a new processor, with a new platform. The IT managers would probably weigh all of the pros and cons, and arrive at decisions. Competition requirements are going up. Krishna added: "If your server investment is on the AMD server platforms, and they have a requirement of increasing computation requirements, they can swap the processors. Istanbul is a six core processor.

"In the same footprint, without changing the equation, they are multiplying the performance. Istanbul is also on the same power envelope as the existing dual- or quad-core Optron processors."

I surely need to have AMD and Intel on stage, someday, for a proper panel discussion and sort out all issues, if possible.

AMD and Intel at each other, again! Post launch of Intel's Xeon 5500 processor series

Intel has recently introduced 17 enterprise-class processors, led by the Intel Xeon processor 5500 series. The Xeon processor 5500 series, previously codenamed "Nehalem-EP," offers several breakthrough technologies that radically improve system speed and versatility. Technologies such as Intel Turbo Boost Technology, Intel Hyper-Threading Technology, integrated power gates, and Next-Generation Intel Virtualization Technology (VT) improved through extended page tables, allow the system to adapt to a broad range of workloads.

Now, even before I could analyze all of this, it was interesting to find first, AMD, and then Intel, exchanging pleasant notes on the chip's features itself! And, I am being quite mild in my statement here! :) The picture here is from the Intel Xeon 5500 launch in India.

First, AMD! According to Vamsi Krishna, Sr. Technical Manager, AMD India, "Intel launched its new processor architecture (Nehalem) yesterday, which is quite different from any of its predecessors. However, what’s amazing is that many of the ‘groundbreaking, innovative technologies’ are quite similar to technologies AMD pioneered years ago, 2003 to be precise.

"Memory controller integration into the silicon die is one of the many features included in the new Intel architecture and this is believed to boost the whole system performance significantly. However, this is a standard feature on all of AMD’s server products since 2003. Nehalem is also supported by a high speed internal bus known as Quick Path Interconnect. It will replace current FSB (Front Side Bus) in most of the current design. Again, the concept is quite similar to existing HyperTransport technology available in AMD products and is known as Direct Connect Architecture (DCA).

"Products like Nehalem and technologies like Quick Path Interconnect are simply Intel’s admission that AMD was right all along about an integrated memory controller being the key to superior processor architecture."

Naturally, I had Intel's response too on these remarks. As per an Intel spokesperson: "The platform architecture of the Xeon Processor 5500 series has some similarities with AMD’s platform architecture in the use of an integrated memory controller and high speed serial interconnect, although the QuickPath Interconnect offers greater performance and additional capabilities compared to HyperTransport. The individual design tradeoffs are not as important to customers as overall performance and efficiency. Previous generations of Intel Xeon processors were superior to competitive alternatives due to superior microarchitecture, process technology and cache implementation. The new platform advances help the Xeon Processor 5500 series widen this competitive lead."

Great! Here's a classic case of two folks sledging over nothing!

First, the Intel chip is one of its kind, as of now, and I don't think any other chip maker has a similar product, as of April 1. If they have, please come forth!

Two, AMD, if it had indeed pioneered such technologies, as those used in the Xeon 5500, in 2003, my simple question to them is: why aren't you the no. 1 player in the semiconductor space today?

Three, will this new chip make Intel a runaway winner? Too early to say! We are still in a downturn, although, some positive news have been forthcoming. Will the chip be able to make its mark? That remains to be seen. IT spends need to go up significantly for that to happen, isn't it?

Gartner recently put out a report on global IT spends. It says: "The unprecedented decline of the global economy is impacting the IT industry with worldwide IT spending forecast to total $3.2 trillion in 2009, a 3.8 percent decline from 2008 revenue of nearly $3.4 trillion. IT organisations worldwide are being asked to trim budgets, and consumers are cutting back on discretionary spending," said Richard Gordon, research vice president, and head of global forecasting at Gartner. "The speed and severity of the response by businesses and consumers alike to these economic circumstances will result in an IT market slowdown in 2009 that will be worse than the 2.1 percent decline in IT spending in 2001 when the Internet investment bubble burst."

It is not about the technologies you are using, or the process nodes. It is about market share and being there first. Who's able to do so, timely, wins! Any other discussion won't have any bearing!

Finally, to my friends at Intel and AMD: folks, do not take that cross-license deal issue to such levels. The industry does not need these things. It is a time to ally and move forward, focus on your core businesses and contribute to the overall health and growth of the global semiconductor industry.

Frankly, it takes off the joys of analysis, when people try to influence you to form a judgement they prefer! Well, I have always formed my own judgement, and right now, I feel that both friends of mine are in the wrong. Request, please shake hands!!

AMD's response on cross-license deal with Intel!

Folks, as promised, here's the response from AMD on the ongoing cross-license affair with Intel.

I posed the same set of questions I had for Intel, and AMD's spokesperson, Michael Silverman, very kindly sent me the replies.

Is this affair helping anyone?
So, if AMD and Intel were stick to their lines, will it help anyone?

Silverman said that AMD would be happy to make the entire agreement public if Intel drops its insistence on secrecy concerning its exclusionary business practices under the guise of confidentiality it has imposed on evidence in the US civil antitrust case. There is no commercial reason to have those documents under seal; it is simply a means for Intel to try to conceal its illegal behavior.

Now, AMD wants Intel to lift a demand that evidence submitted in its US antitrust suit against the chip maker be kept confidential. If it is a demand, why is it being raised?

According to the AMD spokesperson: "It is clear that global antitrust regulators are zeroing in on their illegal monopoly, with rulings against the company in Japan and Korea, and a Statement of Objections issued in Europe. Intel has so far failed to convince any regulatory body that has studied evidence obtained from Intel and its own customers that its business practices are lawful."

In exactly what specific manner, according to AMD, has Intel's actions violated the cross-license agreement?

AMD's response on this count is that the AMD-Intel cross-license agreement is a two-way agreement, the benefits of which go to both companies. "Intel leverages innovative AMD IP critical for its product designs under the cross license. This includes AMD patents related to 64-bit architecture extensions, integrated memory controller, multi-core architecture, etc.). The cross-license is very much a two-way street. In fact, we informed Intel that their attempt to terminate AMD’s license itself constitutes a breach of the cross-license agreement, which, if uncured, gives AMD the right to terminate Intel’s license."

Again, an Intel spokesman had said it was willing to make the agreement made public, but said AMD prevented this from happening. What's the mystery?

Silverman said: "It was actually AMD that made the redacted version of the cross-license agreement public to begin with -– not Intel, so we reject this notion out-of-hand. AMD would be happy to make the entire agreement public if Intel drops its insistence on secrecy concerning its exclusionary business practices under the guise of confidentiality it has imposed on evidence in the US civil antitrust case. There is no commercial reason to have those documents under seal; it is simply a means for Intel to try to conceal its illegal behavior."

How is all this helping the industry?
Finally, how is this dueling over the license helping the global semiconductor industry? I don't see it helping anything at all!

Silverman added that Intel has manufactured this diversion as an attempt to distract attention from the increasing number of antitrust rulings against it around the world. "With a ruling from the European Commission and a US trial date looming, and investigations by the US FTC and NY Attorney General, the clock is ticking on Intel’s illegal practices -- and yet with its dominant monopoly position it still tries to stifle competitors.

"We believe that, ultimately, Intel will either decide on its own or be forced to cease abusing its monopoly power and allow natural market forces to occur. This would speed the pace of innovation, lower prices, and improve the lives of consumers everywhere."

Shake hands, guys
Right, this blog post is an attempt from my side to help Intel and AMD settle their differences, instead of consistently pointing fingers at each other. I personally have nothing to gain out of this, except a few readers who may wish to read this. It would really be great if these two very admirable companies could bury the hatchet and work out some sort of an agreement.

Intel has already expressed a desire to sit down and negotiate with GlobalFoundries about a license. I hope this happens, soon!

Following this, I hope I am, at some stage, able to conduct an event, where I can discuss global trends, with both AMD and Intel on the dias, along with many others from the global semiconductor industry.

My request to both AMD and Intel: please take off those gloves and shake hands! :)

Intel keen on discussing license with GlobalFoundries!

Friends, I am very pleased to report that Intel has expressed a desire to sit down and negotiate with GlobalFoundries about a license! Now, it is up to AMD to take up Intel's offer and sort this out, once and for all!

This is possibly the best news coming out as far as the Intel-AMD cross-license affair is concerned. Isn't it?

I did promise that I'll bring you the responses from Intel and AMD. Intel's spokesperson very kindly replied to all of my queries!

Right, I had asked both that if AMD and Intel stick to their lines, Let's Make the Cross-license Deal Public... Will this help anyone?

According to Intel, it will help the public, the press and investors have a clearer understanding of the terms of the cross-license and in particular, why Intel believes AMD is in breach of that agreement.

I also asked them, rather bluntly, how their fracas was really helping the global semiconductor industry! To this point, Intel replied: "Our view is that AMD has a license agreement with Intel. Cross-licensing has long been a cornerstone of this industry. However, given the value of the IP assets at stake, we must continue to protect our IP and we do not believe that AMD can transfer those assets to a third party without the consent of Intel. We would be happy to sit down and negotiate with GlobalFoundries about a license. However, we cannot do so until AMD and GlobalFoundries acknowledge our rights under the agreement."

Protective order
Now, AMD wants Intel to lift a demand that the evidence submitted in its US antitrust suit against the chip maker be kept confidential. What is this all about? If it is a demand, why is it being raised?

According to Intel, this is a red herring! "That case has nothing to do with this contract. AMD knows very well that the information in the US antitrust case is confidential under a protective order signed by the Court. AMD was part of the process of drafting that protective order and knows very well that Intel cannot change it nor can AMD."

Why is it also being said that Intel's actions have violated the cross-license agreement? The Intel spokesperson said that AMD's theory is that Intel has breached the agreement by implementing the dispute resolution process outlined in the cross-license agreement. That is not what the agreement says. If AMD is right, then there is no dispute resolution process, which is not the case.

An Intel spokesman had earlier said that the company was willing to make the agreement made public, but said AMD prevented this from happening. I asked Intel to clear its side.

Bound by agreement
Here's Intel’s response: "In 2001 or 2002, AMD published a redacted (partial) agreement with the US Securities and Exchange Commission. Portions of the agreement are related directly to this dispute, and Intel has suggested multiple times that the entire agreement be published to provide the clarity outlined above. AMD has refused. Intel is bound by that agreement and can’t unilaterally make the rest of the agreement public."

Quite interesting responses from Intel! Now, I await AMD's replies.

At the end of the day, all differences should be kept aside, especially during this recession. I am sure, both of these wonderful companies can come to some sort of an agreement and find a way forward for the overall good of the global semiconductor industry.

I know this is not an easy matter, rather, it is quite complicated. However, I feel there's a way out of each and every problem!

Intel has now extended its request to GlobalFoundries, and AMD, to sit across the table and negotiate with GlobalFoundries about a license. It is sincerely hoped that the two companies can come to some sort of arrangement. There's no point in making claims and counter-claims through the media, or any other way!