apple used similar architecture for powerpc (dual integer + 1 fpu ) so they would not be immune to this
they advertised them as dual core
It is call terrorism through litigation. Suit has no merit but will cost AMD millions. The timing here is perfect for those who want to see AMD go under. Also a law firm based out of Chicago, the most corrupt city in the US? Allot of things smell wrong about this
1 Like
It would be interesting to see... Basically this is the architecture of this specific chip. I am curious what defines "core", keeping in mind innovation and stuff may offer something new, that haven't been defined yet... So really, I am curious... Compared to other designs it's different, yes, 2 cores are connected in one module, but how does that means there aren't two cores? Does having shared L3 cache means, that the cores aren't working independently? Why should they? I mean who sais what the definition is?
Then there is the can of worms that could be opened with mobile devices ~ 8 cores -> 2x quad cores @ different speeds etc.
Exactly my point... It's an argument "this is different than the other one, therefore it's not a cpu", because for some reason it should have only one specific design?
nothing trolls like patents
I agree with you on that, but this isn't a patent troll, this is someone trying to claim they were mislead by the marketing. But like most patent trolls this guy is trying it on to get some compensation. I doubt he will get anywhere as AMD never hid the architecture and all the information about how it would operate was in the public domain very early on. The timing also seems odd - as pointed out the chips have been out for over 4 years now.
I also wondered if any of the names matched this similar case against Nvidia from earlier this year: http://legalnewsline.com/stories/510632377-california-man-sues-nvidia-over-alleged-misleading-product-information but they don't.
2 Likes
And i'm glad it isn't, we would be in some dire situation. I brought this topic in because, I perceived it as trolling. I bet the outcome will heavily depend on money.
might be something to it though. I can't wager that.
He's not going to win because his argument is basically that it's not an octacore because it doesn't work the way he would want an octacore to work. But AMD has every right to design their architecture the way they want in order to achieve what they want. It may not be the most efficient or best way to make an 8 core CPU, but it still has 8 cores.
This was always an interesting point; in many respects it was effcient. A lot of software is far more dependent on integer cores rather than the FPU (I remember back when FPU's were optional extras). To that end the design is partly what helped make the chips affordable by cutting out unneeded parts - especially as a GPU can be used as a much more powerful co-processor for FPU type calcultions if desired by a software dev.
Anyhow, the single 128bit FPU in the FX81xx/FX83xx chips could always calculate two 64bit FPU instructions at the same time (as far as I understood it) so I really don't get the point of his whole case - you always could execute 8 threads simulataiously and I'm sure the judge will agree when someone who knows what they are talking about gets pulled in. I nominate @wendell :-)
1 Like
yep
big arm and little arm
It has 8 cores and 4 Floating Point Units. It also has shared Level 2 cache.
Let AMD just name the Zen cores "noodles" or "Doopsies". They can advertise it as "Zen with 128 Doopsies". Aren´t there any bigger problems like corrupt politicians or banks voiding money that does no even exist yet?
I call trolling on that one. Case closed.
Nah, AMD should patent the Names "thingamajig" and "Doohickey" This way, Zen is a 128 thingamajig doochickey
Is this a new / recent law suite?
Or is this allready old stuff?
Strangely it's new, but I think it will become history very quickly. Hopefully the guy who started the case will find that its cost him a lot more than a single FX 8350...
Hmm okay, thats kinda weird because we allready know how Buldozer is build up for years.
And we also know how they technically work.
The matter of fact is, i´m not sure if this law suite would stand.
Because of the simple reason, that an OS does not see the physical diffrence between a core or a thread.
Which basicly means, that an OS basicly handle's a FX8350 as an 8 threaded cpu.
Actually in the suit it states that all legal fees etc should be paid by AMD.........WTF
Hold, trolls get paid now? I do not want to live anymore...
Isn't that like a rule, that all fees and stuff gets payed by the loosing side? But this is still basically nothing... So we have "amd, pay us so we can sue your ass"?
I wonder if NVIDIA is somehow funding this, they seem to like corporate espionage when it comes to AMD for some reason... If AMD goes under, I still refuse to support NVIDIA (and I still think AMD suck ass at making drivers!)