Chode Posted April 6, 2004 Share Posted April 6, 2004 here is some interesting claims: After investigating the instruction sets used by 64-bit chips from AMD and Intel, an industry analyst has concluded that Intel reverse-engineered the AMD64 instruction set to create its own 64-bit microprocessor architecture. Tom Halfhill, an analyst at In-Stat/MDR in San Jose, said Monday that he had compared the instruction sets of AMD's 64-bit chips, called AMD64, with the 64-bit extensions to be used in the Intel Xeon processor and future desktop chips. The smoking gun, Halfhill said, was Intel's choice to mimic a decision AMD made in its early Opteron designs, and later reversed. Speculation that Intel had reverse-engineered AMD's processor began circulating almost immediately after Intel announced its own 64-bit plans in February. AMD announced plans to develop its 64-bit Opteron processor, then code-named "Hammer", in Oct. 2001, and began shipping it in April 2003. Intel's "Nocona", the first chip to use its own 64-bit extensions, will launch this quarter with the Intel Extended Memory 64 Technology, or "Intel EM64T". While exactly copying a processor's microarchitecture would be illegal, creating a compatible product through the use of an original "clean room" design is legally protected. According to Halfhill, Intel clearly reverse-engineered AMD's products, a tactic AMD and other X86 chip designers have used to quickly catch up to Intel's historical leadership in the design of new microprocessors. Intel's decision, however, clearly places AMD in the role of market leader. "There's no shame in it," Halfhill said of the reverse-engineering. "AMD has reverse-engineered everything Intel has done for years." Halfhill said that AMD initially left out a pair of instructions from its early AMD64 documentation, then decided later to add them back in. The two instructions are somewhat innocuous; the LAHF and SAHF instructions load and store status flags into a particular address. However, all of the other instructions listed in AMD's published documents were later included in Intel's chips. Halfhill said Intel engineers were unaware of the discrepancy until he contacted them. "It's impossible for this to be a coincidence; it's just too similar," Halfhill said, who added that a article describing the similarities will be published in The Microprocessor Report, which is published by In-Stat/MDR. Intel engineers did not contradict his conclusions when Halfhill submitted a copy of the article for a technical review, he said. According to Intel, its 64-bit extensions are mostly compatible with AMD64. "Each company has a different microarchitecture," George Alfs, an Intel spokesman, wrote in an email. "The real question is whether software ported on one processor will also run on the other. The answer in most cases is yes. As you remember from IDF, Steve Ballmer outlined the joint work both Microsoft and Intel have been doing for some time now on this technology." As the differences in the two architectures become more commonly known, Halfhill said that he believed a single version of a software program could be written to support both architectures, by avoiding all but the instructions used by both processor families. Some food for thought... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Electronic Punk Posted April 6, 2004 Share Posted April 6, 2004 I think it's already on the frontpage. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chode Posted April 6, 2004 Author Share Posted April 6, 2004 If what you say is true......CURSE! :( Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaffa Posted April 6, 2004 Share Posted April 6, 2004 If what you say is true......CURSE! :( i dont think it's a problem you made a thread. now we can discuss it in here too.. maybe it should be moved out of this section to i dunno where.. but my opinion: amd used intels instruction set.. that's like something everyone knows.. they even had to pay intel royalties for it but intel is trying to copy it and pass it off like it's a brand new instruction set developed by them :rolleyes: .. so what if amd won this time? they beat intel fair and square :yes: ... copy it.. say you "desigined" a new one.. (yeah SSE3 intstructions.. woohoo!).. and then take credit for it... ****ers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-=||MIKE||=- Posted April 6, 2004 Share Posted April 6, 2004 Who cares, as long as it works and its fast ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaffa Posted April 6, 2004 Share Posted April 6, 2004 Who cares, as long as it works and its fast ! *sniff sniff*.. what do i smell :shifty: i think it's an intel fanboy :p Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-=||MIKE||=- Posted April 6, 2004 Share Posted April 6, 2004 *sniff sniff*.. what do i smell :shifty:y: i think it's an intel fanboy :p:p *Sniff sniff* Whats that, is that an AMD fa ... No thats just crap sorry Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaffa Posted April 6, 2004 Share Posted April 6, 2004 *Sniff sniff* Whats that, is that an AMD fa ... No thats just **** sorry ah you smelled your own morning breath.. nice going! :laugh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-=||MIKE||=- Posted April 6, 2004 Share Posted April 6, 2004 Yo mommas ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaffa Posted April 6, 2004 Share Posted April 6, 2004 Yo mommas ! come on.. grow up little kid :laugh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-=||MIKE||=- Posted April 6, 2004 Share Posted April 6, 2004 come on.. grow up little kids:laugh:h: KSb>? .... I dont got multiple personalities ! :blink:k: :laugh:h: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaffa Posted April 6, 2004 Share Posted April 6, 2004 KidS? .... I dont got multiple personalities ! :blink: :laugh: you changed it yourself :p :laugh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-=||MIKE||=- Posted April 6, 2004 Share Posted April 6, 2004 Aha.... :shifty: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pink Floyd Veteran Posted April 6, 2004 Veteran Share Posted April 6, 2004 it doenst surprise me amd > intel since a couple of years Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chode Posted April 6, 2004 Author Share Posted April 6, 2004 If this was actually pursued by AMD, does that mean they could get massive royalties from Intel for the missed payments during the development? Man...that would be one way to hurt a hardware "developer" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Electronic Punk Posted April 6, 2004 Share Posted April 6, 2004 The irony is, they will use AMDs technology, but sell it to consumers for more than AMD do? hehe Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eds Posted April 6, 2004 Share Posted April 6, 2004 If this was actually pursued by AMD, does that mean they could get massive royalties from Intel for the missed payments during the development?Man...that would be one way to hurt a hardware "developer" The way I read it, AMD would get nothing from Intel using their architecture. Much the same way Intel will get nothing from AMD borrowing some of its architecture. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaffa Posted April 6, 2004 Share Posted April 6, 2004 The way I read it, AMD would get nothing from Intel using their architecture. Much the same way Intel will get nothing from AMD borrowing some of its architecture. actually if im not mistaken.. amd has to pay intel royalties for using their architecture :blink: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
XLS Posted April 6, 2004 Share Posted April 6, 2004 Am i the only one who is confused ? Wheres the fun in taking other peoples work :s ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaffa Posted April 6, 2004 Share Posted April 6, 2004 Am i the only one who is confused ? Wheres the fun in taking other peoples wor:s:s ? $$$$ <- that explains a lot:no:o: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
XLS Posted April 6, 2004 Share Posted April 6, 2004 Ya, but if everybody knew they where "Stealing" other peoples work wouldnt it be minus $$$$$$ ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Symbiotic Hat Posted April 6, 2004 Share Posted April 6, 2004 It actually seems like a smart idea for everyone. This way all the 64bit progs and OS's will work on both chips with no extra steps. I say way to go Intel. Smart move. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GotoLamia Posted April 6, 2004 Share Posted April 6, 2004 its not for fun... its for moneys!!!!! Chill out, be Groovy, --GotoLamia-- Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eds Posted April 6, 2004 Share Posted April 6, 2004 actually if im not mistaken.. amd has to pay intel royalties for using their architecture:blink:k: I am assuming youre talking about SSE and its successors. I thought that was a quid pro quo agreement. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
99 to Life Posted April 7, 2004 Share Posted April 7, 2004 if ever company sued another for making technology similiar, then we'd be 10 years behind in technology now. I'm glad there's a way to do the same thing differently with the same ideas and get away with it. It sucks for the companies, but it's good for us. Otherwise, it'll be a loooooong time before we see a 64-bit operating system and so on to take FULL advantage of the technology. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts