gloriouscowgloriouscow@oldbytes.space
Nov 11, 2026, 1:11 AMWho needs Intel chips though really? AMD has our back.
Intel sued AMD over this chip too. But what didn't Intel sue AMD for?
Replies
- gloriouscowgloriouscow@oldbytes.spaceNov 11, 2026, 1:12 AM
What amazes me is how many lawsuits there were over the terms of Intel's technology sharing agreements with other companies.
... did they just have really shitty lawyers? Why were the terms so ambiguous that it led to a decade of court battles?
- gloriouscowgloriouscow@oldbytes.spaceNov 11, 2026, 1:15 AM
Like why is it even a question whether their agreement covered the 287. why didn't they spell out exactly what it covered.
they just gave a license to AMD for "Intel Microcodes" and just left that hanging there. what does that mean?
I am not even a lawyer and I realize how stupid that was
- gloriouscowgloriouscow@oldbytes.spaceNov 11, 2026, 1:18 AM
It sounds like Intel thought they were just giving AMD a license to the microcode that they had written to that point, but accidentally gave them a perpetual microcode license which allowed them to continue legally reverse-engineering every Intel chip.
It's crazy to think about the fact that AMD probably only exists today because Intel's lawyers were high on cocaine and couldn't write a proper contract
- gloriouscowgloriouscow@oldbytes.spaceNov 11, 2026, 1:23 AM
no wonder Intel partnered with Harris for the 80c286 design considering they were suing AMD at the same time. That would have been an awkward date.
- gloriouscowgloriouscow@oldbytes.spaceNov 11, 2026, 1:37 AM
anyway I didn't own an AMD 80c287 but now i do
- gloriouscowgloriouscow@oldbytes.spaceNov 11, 2026, 1:41 AM
Be sure to read the installation manual
- gloriouscowgloriouscow@oldbytes.spaceNov 11, 2026, 1:43 AM
you know i didn't even check to see what was installed in my AT
Nov 11, 2026, 4:05 PM@gloriouscow you can never have enough chips :3
Nov 11, 2026, 1:29 AM@gloriouscow I was told the reason was that Intel couldn't trademark a number. When they released the Pentium to overcome that AMD already had a strong foothold on the market...
- gloriouscowgloriouscow@oldbytes.spaceNov 11, 2026, 1:34 AM
@dermoth right. they were annoyed with the clone '386' and '486' chips.
Pentium was a brilliant brand name though, so that was definitely a good call
Support GrapheneOS 667SupportGrapheneOS_667@social.tchncs.deNov 11, 2026, 6:03 AMThe start of the Pentium1 was bumpy because of the in-house concurrent i486dx4 processor and later the PSN (pentium serial number) totally backfired.
fuzzyfuzzyfungusfuzzyfuzzyfungus@cyberplace.socialNov 11, 2026, 3:00 AM@gloriouscow Do you know if the meaning of 'intel microcodes' in 1976 would match the contemporary one; or would it have been much less clear at the time whether they were talking about what we mean by 'microcode' or whether that was more of an ISA license?
That conceptual distinction would definitely have come early enough; but I don't know what the state of the terminology was.
- gloriouscowgloriouscow@oldbytes.spaceNov 11, 2026, 3:02 AM
@fuzzyfuzzyfungus i'm trying to find the actual verbiage of the 1976 patent agreement
- gloriouscowgloriouscow@oldbytes.spaceNov 11, 2026, 3:08 AM
here we go:
https://www.ardent-tool.com/CPU/docs/MPR/19920708/060901.pdf
seems they would have saved themselves a lot of trouble by adding "...Written before 1977" to that clause
- gloriouscowgloriouscow@oldbytes.spaceNov 11, 2026, 3:09 AM
another possibility is that they actually did intend to grant AMD a perpetual license in the first place but then tried to weasel out of it.
- gloriouscowgloriouscow@oldbytes.spaceNov 11, 2026, 3:12 AM
AMD was an official second-source manufacturer for the 8088 and 80286 so it clearly wasn't a problem for those particular chips
- fuzzyfuzzyfungusfuzzyfuzzyfungus@cyberplace.socialNov 11, 2026, 3:45 AM
@gloriouscow I wonder if there were some real iAPX 432 optimists involved.
The contract still seems weirdly vague; but that seems like the least baffling explanation for why they might have seen a fairly broad license to AMD as strategically narrow in 1976; only later attempting to make it explicit that, even if x86 had turned out not to be temporary, AMD was still supposed to be.
- gloriouscowgloriouscow@oldbytes.spaceNov 11, 2026, 3:51 AM
it's interesting that it points out that the agreement predates the 8088 which was the first intel CPU to even contain microcode, so perhaps it wasn't even on their radar.
AMD didn't have to copy the 8088 and 80286 as they were second-source manufacturers and so Intel just gave them the die masks, everything soured when AMD wanted to make a 287 which for whatever reason Intel hadn't hired them to produce
- gloriouscowgloriouscow@oldbytes.spaceNov 11, 2026, 3:52 AM
@fuzzyfuzzyfungus the whole second-source CPU thing was, from what I understand, an external requirement of IBM, who wanted to make sure there was not going to be supply issues getting CPUs for their PC products.
grapeshotgrapeshot@mastodon.socialNov 11, 2026, 8:27 AM@gloriouscow All of Intel's mental energy was spent on reducing the pin count of the packages. save a pin, add twenty extra support chips
argv[-1]argv_minus_one@mastodon.sdf.orgNov 11, 2026, 5:44 AM
XavianFoxXavianFox@hear-me.socialNov 11, 2026, 7:30 AM@gloriouscow Eh, it's arguable. Intel is the only chip maker for consumer and corporate devices that you can theoretically change the ENTIRE proprietary BIOS level programs (ex. Intel ME)
At the moment, MUCH older versions of the Intel ME can be fully removed. While all Intel ME images used in anything newer than the X200 Thinkpad, can only be neutered and reduced to a smaller more freedom respecting program, while keeping essential components for a full working boot.
While AMD has an equivalent but burned in chip ROM called AMD's Security Chip. Even though at a feature level, it is way less problematic for freedom compared to a turned on and working Intel ME, but it can't be removed or changed at all. It also makes using an alternative BIOS like Coreboot more difficult to use and get working.
I love AMD hardware, especially their GPUs just being friendly to Linux users. They're CPU's are also fantastic, but I like the idea of being able to disable the Intel ME region on nearly any given Intel machine.
