That is just right. Airc, IBM would'nt buy Intel's processor for the IBM
PC unless Intel had multiple sources. This was to ensure supply to IBM if
Intel's plants were overridden by bugs, damages by an infusion of dust (or
aluminum powder.....;-)). AMD at least (and I think Seimens and NEC as
well) was contracted to produce the 8088 cpu. AMD was given all info
needed to clone the chips.
This relationship continued through the 80286 and 80386 processors, but
became very strained as AMD was making 386's cheaper and imho better than
the intel products by modifying the Intel designs. Intel and AMD ended up
in court over the 80486 chip ; intel claiming that the contract between it
and AMD did not include information or production of this CPU. AMD was
eventually forced to produce a 'clean room' 80486 design but because of
the delays caused by the litigation they had plenty of time to do it.
AMD continued to produce 80486 cpus in quantity but these chips contained
no Intel proprietary knowlege. (Err.. Having a good look at the intel
design docs probably didn't hurt AMD's clean-room effort......)
Since those times, Intel and AMD have had a sort of blood feud.
Regards,
Jeff
In <JLEBINJBAPPJLDFMNJENGEPEDIAA.rhblakeman_at_kih.net>, on 12/14/01
at 04:45 PM, "Russ Blakeman" <rhblakeman_at_kih.net> said:
>Matter of fact AMD was subcontracted at one point to MAKE processors for
>Intel, when demands were up and they couldn't meet market requirements -
>and many of the AMD made Intel branded chips are better than many of the
>Intel ones. I don't remember if it was the 386 era or 486 though.
--
-----------------------------------------------------------
Jeffrey S. Worley
Asheville, NC USA
828-6984887
UberTechnoid_at_Home.com
-----------------------------------------------------------
Received on Sat Dec 15 2001 - 16:24:19 GMT