When while trying to cheat they still lose to AMD.
this post was submitted on 24 Oct 2024
57 points (100.0% liked)
PC Gaming
8568 readers
515 users here now
For PC gaming news and discussion. PCGamingWiki
Rules:
- Be Respectful.
- No Spam or Porn.
- No Advertising.
- No Memes.
- No Tech Support.
- No questions about buying/building computers.
- No game suggestions, friend requests, surveys, or begging.
- No Let's Plays, streams, highlight reels/montages, random videos or shorts.
- No off-topic posts/comments, within reason.
- Use the original source, no clickbait titles, no duplicates. (Submissions should be from the original source if possible, unless from paywalled or non-english sources. If the title is clickbait or lacks context you may lightly edit the title.)
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
On a long enough timeline.
In reality, they lost to TSMC as much as anything. That's the real meat of why this case was so important: AMD not being able to gain marketshare meant they couldn't afford to reinvest into R&D. AMD falling behind in fab tech and having to spin off Global Foundries to stay afloat was a near-direct result of Intel's anti-competitive moves back then.
That lag in process tech had ripple effects for years. AMD didn't really start to gain serious marketshare until the one-two punch of Zen and Intel hitting a process wall (while TSMC kept moving).
Yeah, but they've proven cheating pays off. Without it, they would have fallen behind AMD back in 2004 instead of after Zen was released.
They were still pretending to compete baack then...
How much spent on share buy backs since 2004?
How much money noy spend on R&D
The execs should br subject to claw backs.
These parasites just never get any consequences.
But we still provide a lot of state aid them🐸