MiddleOfTheRoad
Golden Member
- Aug 6, 2014
- 1,123
- 5
- 0
Anyone remember those "Why buy a 32-bit PlayStation for $299 when you can buy a 64-bit Jaguar for $149" ads from the 90s? If AMD ran any adverts like those, implying that their cores were directly comparable to (and by implication, superior to) Intel's, then they might be in some amount of trouble (albeit probably nothing major). Otherwise, I don't expect this'll go anywhere.
Yeah and Atari didn't get sued -- when their 64 bit marketing campaign was a much larger disaster by comparison.
ExtremeTech already called this lawsuit out as total garbage, rightfully so.
http://www.extremetech.com/extreme/...lse-bulldozer-chip-marketing-is-without-merit
To quote them:
If the writeup at Legalnewsline.com is remotely accurate, the lawsuit is utterly without technical merit. The suit supposedly alleges that because Bulldozer shares certain core resources, the cores can no longer work independently and the chip is no longer capable of performing eight instructions simultaneously. If that’s the hook Dickey is hoping to hang his lawsuit on, he picked a bad one. While it’s true that AMD shared core resources within Bulldozer, the chip doesn’t work the way Dickey alleges it does.
Last edited: