Intel fined: Cheating ******* - HotUKDeals
We use cookie files to improve site functionality and personalisation. By continuing to use HotUKDeals, you accept our cookie and privacy policy.
Get the HotUKDeals app free at Google Play

Search Error

An error occurred when searching, please try again!

Login / Sign UpSubmit

Intel fined: Cheating *******

£0.00 @
By offering secret rebate to manufacturers for exclusive use of their chips in PC. I wish Intel is fined out of it existence. Read More
saayinla Avatar
8y, 1m agoPosted 8 years, 1 month ago
By offering secret rebate to manufacturers for exclusive use of their chips in PC.

I wish Intel is fined out of it existence.
Tags:
saayinla Avatar
8y, 1m agoPosted 8 years, 1 month ago
Options

All Comments

(13) Jump to unreadPost a comment
Comments/page:
#1
European Union regulators levied a record 1.06 billion-euro ($1.45 billion) fine against Intel Corp., the world’s biggest computer-chip maker, and ordered the company to stop using illegal rebates to thwart competitors.
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=a22oQQl0woQI&refer=home
#2
Which is why I use AMD :)
#3
AMD for me
#4
I wish Intel is fined out of it existence.


TBH if we didn't have at least 2 big boys when it came to processors and processing power, we'd have no competition and thus probably go back on ourselves at least a couple of years, if not more.
#5
intel for me
Probably because of this
banned#6
emasu
TBH if we didn't have at least 2 big boys when it came to processors and processing power, we'd have no competition and thus probably go back on ourselves at least a couple of years, if not more.


AMD for me

btw this statistic is absolutely shocking

"Last year, Intel made 80.5% of all the microprocessors in PCs, while AMD made 12%. "
#7
lumoruk
AMD for me

btw this statistic is absolutely shocking

"Last year, Intel made 80.5% of all the microprocessors in PCs, while AMD made 12%. "


why is it shocking?
#8
thing is, the whole point of this is to recognise that without competition we as consumers suffer and the big question is if the businesses were swapped would amd have done the same?
banned#9
Cluffy321
why is it shocking?


AMD is intel's main competitor but only managed 12% of the market because of Intel's anti competitive behaviour :?
#10
lumoruk
AMD is intel's main competitor but only managed 12% of the market because of Intel's anti competitive behaviour :?


oh right i got that just wasnt as shocked
#11
Whenever i've built a system i've used AMD for price. Tbh though, they suck compared to Intel. Saying that though i'm still running an Athlon Barton chip that handles Vista quite well. Not bad for something about 5 years old :lol:
#12
lumoruk
AMD is intel's main competitor but only managed 12% of the market because of Intel's anti competitive behaviour :?


Plus the fact they make far better processors - since the introduction of the Pentium-m their mobile processors have been far better than anything AMD can offer, Core Duo was solid while Core 2 Quad brought quad core to the masses, Atom has had mass market success in netbooks and for desktop performance the Core i7 is untouchable. The best AMD can do is compete with some of the older Core 2 Quads.

AMD were on top for a good while with the AMD64's but they've not been able to produce anything particularly good since then. While Intel have engaged in anti-competitive practices (more during their netburst days) most of the reason for AMD having such a small marketshare now is they underestimated Intel and failed to capitalise on the success of the AMD64.

I'll go with whatever processor is better for my needs, I did have a few AMD64 systems previously but right now it's all Intel as each of the processors is better than its AMD counterpart (if it even has one)

John
#13
Johnmcl7
Plus the fact they make far better processors - since the introduction of the Pentium-m their mobile processors have been far better than anything AMD can offer, Core Duo was solid while Core 2 Quad brought quad core to the masses, Atom has had mass market success in netbooks and for desktop performance the Core i7 is untouchable. The best AMD can do is compete with some of the older Core 2 Quads.

AMD were on top for a good while with the AMD64's but they've not been able to produce anything particularly good since then. While Intel have engaged in anti-competitive practices (more during their netburst days) most of the reason for AMD having such a small marketshare now is they underestimated Intel and failed to capitalise on the success of the AMD64.

I'll go with whatever processor is better for my needs, I did have a few AMD64 systems previously but right now it's all Intel as each of the processors is better than its AMD counterpart (if it even has one)

John


you are missing a point big time here.
the alleged offenses started well before c2d and c2q.
The reason intel was able to actually survive the onslaught from the original athlons and x64athlons where it would have sold very few of its p3 and early p4 chips was down to these nasty practices.
These dubious business techniques gave them time and money to come up with the c2d capability.
Without these practices it may well have been amd that came up with similar architecture to the c2d as they would have had a lot more income to spend on r&d.
This may have resulted in a much closer match for the c2d driving intel to get it's i7s down to street level much sooner, don't even try to justify what intel have done because if you have bought cpu's recently you have lost out as well.

Post a Comment

You don't need an account to leave a comment. Just enter your email address. We'll keep it private.

...OR log in with your social account

...OR comment using your social account

Thanks for your comment! Keep it up!
We just need to have a quick look and it will be live soon.
The community is happy to hear your opinion! Keep contributing!