Former AMD Exec: Even I Wouldn't Buy AMD
Intel says even AMD wouldn't buy AMD CPUs five years ago.
Despite a settlement late last year that saw Intel pay AMD $1.25 billion in damages, the Federal Trade Commission is still pursuing a case against Intel regarding anti-competitive business practices.
In a recent filing to the FTC Intel has cited a former AMD executive who admitted that if it wasn't for company loyalty, he "would never buy AMD" when it came to purchasing a personal system.
CNet reports Intel cites a 2004 internal AMD communication from former AMD Executive Vice President Henri Richard, the company's then-highest-ranking sales executive who said, "If you look at it with an objective set of eyes, you would never buy AMD. I certainly would never buy AMD for a personal system, if I wasn't working here."
Intel spokesman Chuck Mulloy told CNet News that the company got the internal AMD communication through the discovery process and that over time, "more and more [of] this kind of information will be available in the case."
Intel filed the papers on December 31, 20 days after it paid AMD the $1.25 billion in damages that the two settled on in November.
- AMD ,
- Intel ,
- anti-competitive ,
- Henri ,
- Richard
- Recycled HTPC is Woody, Fuzzy
- World of Warcraft Blamed for Porn's Decline
- MSI's All-In-One PC Has Sliding Screen, 3D
- Wednesday Deals: Specials for January 13, 2010
- Old Laptops Become Usable Again With SSDs
- HP Starts Shipping USB 3.0 Envy 15
- Google Lets You Upload Any File to Google Docs
- Google Threatens to Withdraw From China
- Hi-Tech Platinum Coffee Table Has Built-In PC
- China Pushes Censorship Amidst Google Threat
- Kingston Coming With 30 GB 'Boot' SSD for $80
- Star Wars: TOR Confirmed for 2011
- PCs Getting Expensive Again, Say Analysts
- McAfee Blames IE Hole for Google-China Hack
- Gigabyte Unveils 2 Radeon HD 5600 Cards
- Intel Q4 Numbers, Net Income Up 875 Percent
- Friday Deals: Big Sale Continues on HP Envy
- Survey: File Sharing is More Immoral Than Porn
Seems there is a reason he is the Former VP.
He's a salesman, wtf would he actually know about computers.
He also said this before AMD acquired ATI, around the time AMD was launching the first opteron's aimed at the server segment of the market for the first time. I am willing to bet that this is in relation to the great difficulties he must have faced trying to convince server makers/buyers to buy into a completely new platform without the history of supplying enterprise parts.
I think it is irrelevant to the case as the case is more about the consumers segment of the market where AMD had previously enjoyed taking a large bite out of intels share. Intel played dirty to keep above water at that time. Case closed.
If constrained by budget I would currently buy AMD as their top end chip is decent and they have good upgrade paths unlike Intel motherboards.
I lean towards the underdog as we all Love a competitive market.
However thankfully I can afford it and Intel is Streets ahead of AMD at the moment, especially with the new 32nm process chips just about to come out...
...and I hear AMD has nothing special new to offer till 2011
Q2 this year is seeing the i7-920 equivalent refresh to 32nm I understand - with I read lots of new power saving features such as even shutting down whole cores while not needed. Hope it OC's like a Daemon hehehe
Or maybe the new 6 core GulfTown I7-980 which is meant to draw 50% less power than the current Quad core I7's and clocks to over 4GHz with a little persuasion
Am still Loving my Q6600 which is Prime stable at 3.6GHz
At the time AMD had nothing that could touch this chip when it 1st came out!!!
If AMD were that bad, why did Intel need to resort to arm-twisting to sell their products?