Even if Intel is executing different instructions for its processors than AMDs (which I don't doubt considering, like others said, their developers are more familiar with Intel chipsets), it honestly shouldn't even be that big a deal. There's nothing locking software developers into using Intel's compilers for their programs. If AMD wins this part of their suit, all it will do is (maybe) convince some developers to move to a different compiler.

If AMD is complaining about the compilation process, they have a few options. A) Provide Intel with the information they need to optimize their compiler for AMD chips (which Intel can actually use or just ignore). B) Make their own compiler (but they'd probably do the same thing against Intel chips that Intel is doing). C) Simply remove the AMD-specific isntructions and adopt all of Intels so that they have the same instruction sets and therefore optimize the same.

Either way, as someone who does write software applications and occassional embedded apps, I've seen how different programs run under different processors, operating systems, graphics cards, etc. It happens.

Is there anything saying that Intel's compiler even has to support AMD chips? I can mention quite a few compilers for handheld computers which will only compile for specific chip manufacturers (not even chip sets, I mean physical chips). At least Intel's giving the option to compile for AMD chips, even if it is sub-par compared to compilation for their own chips. They could simply cut AMD support all-together and leave developers out to dry, causing them to have to switch to a different development enviornment or simply not support AMD chips for their software. But I'm ranting, so I'll shut up now. :D

As for the compiler being optimized for Intel processors, that is not really relevant. AMD has caught up to and is beating Intel. There is some software that is Intel specific and when run on AMD based machines actually runs faster on the AMD boxes than on the Intel boxes.

What is really relevant is that Intel is scared of AMD. AMD has caught Intel with their pants down and is consistently beating them with better processors. AMD processors run code Intel compiled or not better than Intel can and they do it for less money and with less heat production.

Intel is trying to be like Rockefeller and Standard Oil was in the early 20th century. They are offering "motivation" in any form they can to keep their market share. There are articles out there that state that Intel will offer "motivation" so that software manufacturers write code that is optimized for Intel processors. That tells me that Intel is aware that their CPU design is poor. That is what that says to me.

Since the Japanese have found evidence that supports AMD's case, then Intel is violating monopoly laws.

I wonder how much "motivation" Intel is going to throw at Dell, Toshiba, Sony, etc. to keep them quiet?

Please do not read "motivation" as implying money only.

if it's not really relevant to AMD, AMD wouldn't have brought it up.
Even though I'm currently using AMD in all my machines right now, and even though I think AMD right now has a much better performance CPU portfolio than Intel, I still think AMD is trying to bite more than they can swallow this time around

if the program detects an “Authentic AMD” microprocessor, it executes a different code path that will degrade the program’s performance or cause it to crash."

Maybe this is because the optimized code is built only for features found in Intel chips? Why in the world would Intel have to provide a solid code base for a processor they didn't even build? If you ask me, AMD just needs to make better chips and stop whining.

You are an idiot! They already have proof of the misconduct on Intel's part, they are in court for restitution and to stop the monopoly. Be an Intel fan and stand by them, but AMD has already proven(the long way)on their ability to develop a quality chip. Some comparable to Intel, and yet others superior.

In case you didn't know, MS, AOl, IBM, Xerox, Sony(to name a few) have been doing similar things for years and screwing over the public in its wake. You should become more informed before making your decisions.

Me become more informed? You are the one calling people idiot's and on top of that you just told me that AMD makes good chips.

Never said they suck, or their chips are slow, etc. AMD is fine except for thiking that Intel would do something like this.

What is this "proof" other than you saying they have it? Seriously use your head and think about what AMD is saying...they are upset that Intel would not optimize code for their chipsets (slower, can crash, etc) which is a given because it's un-optimized!

You are going to sit where-ever you are and really try to tell me Intel should have to write optimized code for something they did not even build?

The optimized code path should run on all x86 processors be it Intel, AMD or VIA. There should not be two code paths. All processors that are Intel x86 compatible will run the code fine if not slower (or maybe faster, that could be a reason that Intel did this) then "Genuine Intel" processors.

What AMD is saying is that the Intel compiler looks for "AMD" or "VIA" and executes diffrent, maybe even x86 INCOMPATIBLE, code. It should just execute the same Intel optimized code path.

Maybe somebody out there can get the Intel compiler to use the other code path on an Intel processor. I am curious about what would happen.

It's made to look like AMD protecting customers from evil Intel. Hmmm... Too complicated to adjust my friend-or-foe system for this case, Intel wins or AMD wins no matter - it will be for corporation's profit, not mine.
Still I eager to see what happens if AMD gets the prize :)

I would love to see prices come down! It is getting to be ridiculous.

I am a gamer and after years of loving Intel processors (up to 2002) I switched to AMD. I'm not married to neither of them, but I must admit that AMD's reviews PLUS a lower price left no room for doubt of what my next CPU had to be.
If what this filing states is true, then it's another tip of the iceberg (according to AMD in their larger accusation )... all I would like to see is more price reductions if AMD is able to ship more CPUs after this :)

I wonder Why AMD Dont maken Their Own Copiler, There is alot of stuff they can optimize!!
OFF Topic: by the way if any one knows of such compiler (AMD optimezed) let me know!

Why should AMD need to make a compiler that is so specific?

I feel such a compiler should be available if the end user of the software requires it to take advantage of the processor or certain aspects of it. In Intel's case, they are "motivating" software companies to make their software Intel specific.

Why should AMD need to make a compiler that is so specific?

I feel such a compiler should be available if the end user of the software requires it to take advantage of the processor or certain aspects of it. In Intel's case, they are "motivating" software companies to make their software Intel specific.

That is not the issue here folks..

THe issue is this..

Programmer buys intel compiler.. which claims to create X86 compatible code yes?

They compile said program with intel's compiler.. and it creates executeables that have a forking path.. one for Authentic AMD and one for Genuine Intel..

The ONLY issue is whether or not the Intel Compiler PURPOSELY creates "bad code" on its AMD path.

You see it would be 1 thing for the compiler to create code that ONLY ran on Genuine Intel chips.. its when you claim that you compiler optimizes for both, but in reality creates faults intentionally on the other guys hardware.

Kinda makes me wonder whether Transmeta suffered from a similar treatment...

this is some serious accusation...if proven, this is a criminal case and intels eggs are fried. no matter how big that company is. crime is crime. they do have to fear amd since amd is a threat to not only intel. their products are (wether you like'm or not) solid and perform and are ways cheaper than lot of manufacturors. this case can trigger a whole lot more. who is to say that these practises are not between manufacturors of video cards, memory sticks, etc ? way to go amd, lets see some smuck turned up !

Crime is crime, but remember Microsoft, the monopoly? They are definitely still around and the law caused them little harm.

It's already been proven - just not in court. AMD is in a pretty s***ty boat right now, and they better not have any holes in their case or they're screwed.

That said, if they indeed have no holes, they could do very well with this case. Considering what they can actually prove, I wonder what is really going on behind our backs? It's always worse than is known...

Intel and MS are the same. You wont hurt either in the pocketbook, but hopes are that their business practices will change for the benefit of all.(us)

i hope intel fix the Compiler Routine so that AMD processors run without Exploid's.

Or is this a new AREA of CRiME?

I never did like intel...AMD made better processors.

We can't have one without the other. I think they both make a great chip, but would like the prices to drop. If AMD loses, we will all lose.

I could see Intel's argument on the side of the compiled code being generated running slower on AMD chips. They can claim that their engineers who write the compilers are familiar with the Intel chips and know how to generate the most effective code. They don't spend the time to learn AMD chips, so they aren't as prepared to create specific code that will not run as well on the AMD chips.

There are bound to be instruction sequences that work extremely well on Intel, but not so on AMD, so they take the path of least resistance.

Now, if it can be shown that they are deliberately generating code that causes the AMD to crash, then they guilty as all heck.

But who hasn't written code that ran better on a i386 than a i286 because we knew a few short cuts or better paths to take in order to get a few more oomphs out of our software?

I'm still not convinced that Intel has done anything wrong in regards to this filing.

No one asks Intel to optimize code for AMD processors. They just want Intel to let the SAME code run on Intel and AMD processors (and it will run, as soon as they remove specific checks for "Genuine Intel" chips).

That's exactly what they're doing, billweh. The article says that instead of running the same code on Intel and AMD processors, the compiled code detects the processor type and then runs 'Intel' code (fully-optimised) or 'AMD' code (no optimisations, designed to crash). That's gotta be illegal.

If they just wrote code to work on Intel processors, that's fine - it would work just as well on AMD processors, as they share tech patents and instruction sets (SSE, SSE2, etc). But the programs created by this compiler detect AMD processors and run alternate code that is slower and unstable. Not cool.

they might(will) run, but what if it crashes when you put that check for genuine intel chips? is intel responsible for the crash then?
it's a lot like overclocking. you put in a 3GHz cpu in, and the mobo detects and runs it at 3GHz. But if you were to bypass the check for it (ie overclock) an run i at 4G, who are you to blame if it crashes? That's probably why intel put in the check for their processor; because they can only guarantee their processor runs that optimized path well.
Intel can just as well say that they dont know how the AMD will react under certain conditions, so they just made a fallback (emulation) path for it. They can also just as well not support it at all.
If intel markets their compiler as intel optimized, then I dont see how AMD can win this argument. But if intel says their compiler is also optimized for AMD, and it's found that they delibertly are slowing AMD down, then AMD got a case here.

Can AMD guarantee that they can run the same exact path in the compiler as Intel without any problems? If not then there is no way Intel will risk it. And there is no way AMD can guarantee it without either 1. have intel's cpu design blueprints, 2. undergo years of simulations, 3. design the compiler in conjunction with intel.

I agree, we they are just trying to cover their A****. Don't forget that little voice that is in your head or that gut feeling you have. There was/is illegal activity going on. To what extent we can only imagine, but Intel was dirty - no different than any other company out there, but they got caught. They need to take their licks and move on.

> They can also just as well not support it at all.

That's exactly what AMD wants! Don't "support" it. Just execute the SAME code as if it is Intel processor.

> Can AMD guarantee that they can run the same
> exact path in the compiler as Intel without any problems?

Yes, they can. Their processors share the same INSTRUCTION SET. It is called AMD64 and Intel copied it from AMD.

We see this all the time in our 3D render applications. Mhz Vs Mhz, the INTELs always render faster. By a lot actually. BUT the software we use does plainly state "optimized for INTEL".

This one I've heard about--and witnessed--myself. If that isn't illegal, I don't know what is. However this could potentially be a huge can of worms, for example, many games are optimized for NVIDIA and "ATI is supported", and others prefer ATI to NVIDIA. Is there a fine line here? Technically the only thing Intel is being screwed with is directX support for most games--the 915 chipset is quite capable for integrated, but no one wants to support it in games. Still, back on subject, some older games are optimized for 3Dnow! and not SSE so Intel may get out of this one.

I think the problem isn't that the compiler gives Intel chips an optimized code path, it's that it gives AMD chips a purposely slower path.

-->
http://yro.slashdot.org/...amp;tid=118&tid=123

burgeoisdude AMD has 3Dnow! too...

AMD invented 3DNow! so they've always had it. I think you meant AMD has SSE now too.

Your right, it is a fine line. I believe that AMD is trying to illustrate the bigger picture of illegal activity by Intel writing code, bullying the vendors, etc. I would even bet the AMD is not perfect in this area either. There are several things going on here. If we get stuck on one issue, they can dwindle it down to some irrational/incoherant reason and pull the light away from all the activity they are participating in to undermine their competition.

As it has been stated before, there are several companies that have similar tactics to push their revenues above their competitors. The industry as a whole needs to be cleaned up.

Car manufacturers, Coke, Pepsi, Dell, HP, MS, AOL, Compaq, IBM, Zerox, Lexmark all use similar tactics. I am glad to be aware of it, but it does not seem to end.

yeah all these price wars will get hot soon with dual core ..intel has a cheap dual core out but ..AMD owns intel in gameing benchmarks and that catches the eye of gamers ..as for the lawsuits ..does any company play fair with the enemy?

Playing fair is one thing. But sabotage is completely way off. I can legitimally claim that AMD is a loser chip, if I were Intel. But writting code to sabotage their product, that's not just unfair, that's downright cut throat. We live in a free enterprises world, not an everything goes world. Intel will not get away with this.

What happens if I write software that makes ALL AMD chips run at 100% cpu, causing them to fail in Excel. That would make a lot of accountants very upset. But if Intel simply has better hardware to take advantage of Excel, then its up to AMD to make their chip better.

You can't make the other guys product implode to prove a point, that's just wrong. If your product is superior, the test of time will prove it out. You don't need to sabotage another product just to make your product smell sweeter. That's how we get distrust and make enemies, because in the eyes of a customer, both sides will be hated, and the only thing that will come out of this, is nobody will want to buy them.. People will just find an alternative method.

This isn't good when one comany has to break a competitors product. How good can your product be, if you resort to that level just so that theirs doesn't work? Let the products speak for themselves, and quit playing these dangerous games.

Well said!

I believe I heard a while ago that at one point AMD market share was nearing 40%. Given a few more years of fair competing, and they most certainly would have surpassed Intel.

Now they're down to around 15%, though. :/

Yes, that is the point. If AMD just sucked, then we all would tell them to shut up and make a better chip; but Intel is illegally sabotaging them to make themselves look better(sore losers).

I am hoping this will help clean up some of the industry - MS included.

@ 40% Intel must have been crapping their pants.

More law suits I see AMD and Intel will never be able to get along. Oh well this could be helpful to the consumer when they start price wars.

Or there won't be price wars because the companies are too busy paying lawyer bills.

Not until they settle at 50% market share each will they enter into price fixing cartel.
:-)

and anyway AMD chips are waaaaay cheaper than intel's. you are most def. payin for the name even on complete trash like those celery or celeron whatever it is called processors. i doubt intel would or even could undercut amd without destroying their profits. unless they eliminated most commercials and marketing.