is there Any alternative Processor makers except Intel and AMD?

[cool.dx.rip]

Just want to know is not there any alternative processor makers brand except INTEL AND AMD?i wonder how can be only two companies can run on business in this BIG market.Are we consumers are bound to choose between them?

 

[sm625]

VIA Technologies, part of Formosa Plastics Group, has an x86 license and produces some alternatives, mainly atom alternatives. Performance per watt is lacking.

 

[Cogman]

Plenty,

IBM, nVidia, Broadcom, Texas Instruments, Microchip, Samsung, Apple.

Of course, most of these companies make either embedded processors or high end server processors and not necessarily desktop processors. Honestly, the desktop/laptop market is just too small for more than a couple of players.

Now, there are only 3 x86 options mainly due to patent issues. Only 3 (MAYBE 4, IBM may have the ability to manufacture an x86 processor, they just haven't) companies have the necessary legal backing to make x86 processors. (Well, at least x86 processors with semi-modern instructions like SSE and MMX)

 

[GRAFiZ]

Well, way back in the day you could go Cyrix M series. They made Pentium II clones that ran up to 266mhz. At a whopping 3.5v! lololol

I owned one for a while, an MII-233 that I overclocked to 266mhz. It eventually caught fire (serious), burnt a bunch of mosfets off my motherboard.

I believe National Semiconductor was the parent company.

Sadly, they no longer exist.

 

[schmuckley]

VIA

 

[crashtestdummy]

Just want to know is not there any alternative processor makers brand except INTEL AND AMD?i wonder how can be only two companies can run on business in this BIG market.Are we consumers are bound to choose between them?

It has to do with x86 licensing. Intel, not surprisingly, is hesitant to grant new licenses to it's architecture design. As a result, AMD and VIA are the only companies currently making PC-type x86 processors, and VIA isn't a serious player.

ARM-based architectures made by Qualcomm, Nvidia, Samsung, Apple, and others currently dominate the tablet and phone space, which is the long-term future of consumer PC use. Intel's hegemony in the desktop space is becoming increasingly irrelevant.

 

[FwFred]

Just want to know is not there any alternative processor makers brand except INTEL AND AMD?i wonder how can be only two companies can run on business in this BIG market.Are we consumers are bound to choose between them?

You mean for high performance desktop? Looking at the computing market in general, Intel has no shortage of competition.

 

[tweakboy]

Yes buy a Cyrix. Just had a nasty flashback...

 

[Exophase]

Well, way back in the day you could go Cyrix M series. They made Pentium II clones that ran up to 266mhz. At a whopping 3.5v! lololol

I owned one for a while, an MII-233 that I overclocked to 266mhz. It eventually caught fire (serious), burnt a bunch of mosfets off my motherboard.

I believe National Semiconductor was the parent company.

Sadly, they no longer exist.

They were bought by VIA and VIA incorporated Cyrix and Centaur (another CPU company they bought) design properties into their later processors.

Cyrix M was no Pentium II clone, it was a totally different uarch. Several players at this time were competing for the budget PC segment but they were stamped out by AMD's K6-2 and Intel's Celeron.

 

[jhu]

It has to do with x86 licensing. Intel, not surprisingly, is hesitant to grant new licenses to it's architecture design. As a result, AMD and VIA are the only companies currently making PC-type x86 processors, and VIA isn't a serious player.

More specifically, it's patents of certain x86 instruction implementations. An ISA isn't patentable. How specific instructions are implemented are though. So that means a company can now implement a Pentium-compatible CPU right now and Intel would have no legal standing to stop them since all patents that pertain to the original Pentium have expired.

 

[Cogman]

More specifically, it's patents of certain x86 instruction implementations. An ISA isn't patentable. How specific instructions are implemented are though. So that means a company can now implement a Pentium-compatible CPU right now and Intel would have no legal standing to stop them since all patents that pertain to the original Pentium have expired.

Which, btw, highlights the problem with patents in the tech industry. I don't think they should be done away with, but 20 years is just too big of a gap. I think tech patents should be shortened to 5 years.

 

[Phynaz]

At 5 years there's a very good chance the patent would expire before the inventor got a product to market.

 

[Cogman]

At 5 years there's a very good chance the patent would expire before the inventor got a product to market.

5 years in the tech industry? 5 years ago Nehalem was released.

5 years ago and 4g was first starting to roll out

5 years ago 802.11g was the fastest wifi available

The tech industry moves fast, so why should it be encumbered by patents that last longer than many tech companies survive?

If you have a tech company and you can't get something new out in 5 years, chances are you won't have a tech company for very long.

 

[GRAFiZ]

They were bought by VIA and VIA incorporated Cyrix and Centaur (another CPU company they bought) design properties into their later processors.

Cyrix M was no Pentium II clone, it was a totally different uarch. Several players at this time were competing for the budget PC segment but they were stamped out by AMD's K6-2 and Intel's Celeron.

Ah, thats right... I remember VIA.

Also, I had always been under the impression it was a PII clone, in that it's performance wasn't too far off.

I remember upgrading to a PII-400mhz and being blown away by the performance difference. But hell, back then I overclocked the PII-400 to 450mhz and even that provided a huge increase in performance.

*I guess I'm an old man now*

 

[Exophase]

5 years in the tech industry? 5 years ago Conroe was released. That was the era of SSE3 and SSSE3. 6 years before that, and the original SSE was a brand new thing.

7 years ago Conroe was released 5 years ago was Nehalem.

 

[Cogman]

7 years ago Conroe was released 5 years ago was Nehalem.

gah... I can't maths Thanks. Hopefully the point isn't lost in my inability to subtract.

 

[Exophase]

gah... I can't maths Thanks. Hopefully the point isn't lost in my inability to subtract.

Not at all. It always amazes me when people talk about things that'll happen in the tech industry something like 10+ years in the future. It's also amazing to think of how many more changes we could end up living through.

 

[Phynaz]

5 years in the tech industry? 5 years ago Nehalem was released.

5 years ago and 4g was first starting to roll out

5 years ago 802.11g was the fastest wifi available

The tech industry moves fast, so why should it be encumbered by patents that last longer than many tech companies survive?

If you have a tech company and you can't get something new out in 5 years, chances are you won't have a tech company for very long.

You're confusing product with research. The basic research that enabled Nehalem to become a product took much longer than the 5 years. If the patents expired and all that research was freely available Nehalem wouldn't have existed. Why invest a few billion dollars if your competitors are given free access to all your work?

Same thing with 4g, it was probably in the lab for a decade.

Or let's use something more current: Intel's FinFET transistors. I'll bet they have been working on them for a dozen years. Once they had them designed it may have taken them 5 years to productize them. A 5 year patent means everybody gets them from Intel before they can even put a product out.

 

[Matt1970]

Well, way back in the day you could go Cyrix M series. They made Pentium II clones that ran up to 266mhz. At a whopping 3.5v! lololol

I owned one for a while, an MII-233 that I overclocked to 266mhz. It eventually caught fire (serious), burnt a bunch of mosfets off my motherboard.

I believe National Semiconductor was the parent company.

Sadly, they no longer exist.

I am sad they no longer exists too. I made a lot of money off those processors going bad. Cyrix was to the computer industry what the Ford Pinto was to rear end collisions.

 

[AnitaPeterson]

A Chinese Loongson, perhaps (assuming that they add full x86 instruction support, not just emulation)?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loongson

 

[amitkher]

You're confusing product with research. The basic research that enabled Nehalem to become a product took much longer than the 5 years. If the patents expired and all that research was freely available Nehalem wouldn't have existed. Why invest a few billion dollars if your competitors are given free access to all your work?

Same thing with 4g, it was probably in the lab for a decade.

Or let's use something more current: Intel's FinFET transistors. I'll bet they have been working on them for a dozen years. Once they had them designed it may have taken them 5 years to productize them. A 5 year patent means everybody gets them from Intel before they can even put a product out.

You're confusing the purpose of trade secrets with that of patents. Before release, most product research can survive in trade secret form. After release, there is a chance of reverse engineering, so patent might be the easier way out.

 

[Zodiark1593]

It has to do with x86 licensing. Intel, not surprisingly, is hesitant to grant new licenses to it's architecture design. As a result, AMD and VIA are the only companies currently making PC-type x86 processors, and VIA isn't a serious player.

ARM-based architectures made by Qualcomm, Nvidia, Samsung, Apple, and others currently dominate the tablet and phone space, which is the long-term future of consumer PC use. Intel's hegemony in the desktop space is becoming increasingly irrelevant.

A tablet is no direct substitute for a high performance desktop when actual work is being done.

In that segment though, its only Intel or AMD.

 

[86waterpumper]

I still have my 6x86 166+ system and it still runs windows 98 Mine was actually labeled IBM instead of cyrix. I think cyrix designed this chip and ibm manufactured it. I have it o/c to 150 mhz woohoo

 

[ShintaiDK]

I still have my 6x86 166+ system and it still runs windows 98 Mine was actually labeled IBM instead of cyrix. I think cyrix designed this chip and ibm manufactured it. I have it o/c to 150 mhz woohoo

Those chips was terrible. Specially in Quake due to their poor FPU performance

 

[crashtestdummy]

A tablet is no direct substitute for a high performance desktop when actual work is being done.

In that segment though, its only Intel or AMD.

Absolutely, but what fraction of the market is that, really? I'd wager that the majority of consumers only use tablets or PCs for consumption.

Desktops will always have a place as a tool for business, technology, and media creation, but the actual number of people who do those things is probably less than a third (and I'm being generous) of the American population. Furthermore, of those that do use the computer as a tool, the vast majority aren't doing processor-intensive tasks, and could easily have survived with a computer from a decade ago. As a result, it will be the phone/tablet market that drives technological development in the future, and whether Intel has a stranglehold on the desktop market will be less important to most consumers.