"To understand the game, you have to go back to Intel and AMD's cross-licensing agreement on X86 processors. Although some terms of the deal are strictly confidential, it's widely known that somewhere in the mountain of legal paperwork is a clause stating AMD can only outsource a certain percentage of processor manufacturing to other firms (around 20 per cent)."

"Widely known" without a reference or link is quite possibly Intel FUD. AMD apparently has the problem of using a non-standard process, IBM's SOI. They should be out of the fab business themselves entirely given AMD's size. The only license text on-line is heavily redacted but apparently provides for outsourcing without limitation. The idea that Abu Dhabi would invest so many billions without having a lawyer to read AMD licenses is bizarre. Intel being found guilty of abuse of dominance, if it is, compromises its ability to damage AMD through license enforcement actions as well.

The gradually shutting down economies around the world would seem more of a hazzard. The economy of the world needs realigning without grossly excess US debt accumulation fueling and distorting it. Also according to reviews so far, Windows 7 doesn't need a more ambitious PC than Vista and won't occasion the wave of PC replacements that previous Windows versions did in Wintel's heyday. That's a game changer for all in the PC business. Inq's writer might speculate on that. Or, with the US a falling star should the world's kids start learning Mandarin instead of English?

x64 is derived from (or an extension of) x86. So if Intel don't renew the x86 licensing, I think AMD won't be able to manufacture x64 as well.

If Intel cut off AMD from 86bit, It be 64 bit computing for AMD. Intel would be cut from 64 bit. Every one who needs a 64 bit processor go to AMD and Intel would stuck on 86x, left to rot. They could try and come up with a 64 bit design, but the Ititanic has already sunk!

AFAIK Intel can't drop cross-licensing unless it wants to give up 64-bit computing.

With only Intel making x86 chips, they would be shooting themselves in the foot.
AMD would go to another architecture, like an advanced ARM based chip, and Intels monopoly would fall, very hard.

I think you've got it backwards. It's not AMD that's holding the winning cards here, it's intel. IMO, the only reason that intel has not gone all out in the past to crush AMD, was the thereat of Antitrust. With AMD's actions, not to mention shooting their big mouths off all over the globe, that reason no longer exists.

Like you said, the EU ball can't be stopped now, and being found guilty, would mean fines to the EU, not AMD. AMD would still have to sue, and intel will mostlikely tie it up in the courts, until AMD and their Arab friends either run out of money, or quit.

And you can forget about any x86 license renewal. No, I'm not detecting any desire at intel to do any negotiating at all. As far as I can tell, intel management is pissed off, and with the anti-trust steamroller unable to be stopped, and the insults they've taken from ole Hector the last few years, IMO, intel'sonly goal now, is to slowly squeeze AMD, inflicting as much financial pain on them as possible, until they suffocate.

Done deal.

I always love INQ's combination of facts, intrigue & writing style. What a change has occurred at AMD from their July 2006 Conference Call - where Ruiz called Intel's chips "pathetic" and other management acted drunk with their success. How does INQ factor in Intel's apparent willingness - even encouragement - for that famous License Agreement to be publicly disclosed? For example, is there some business weakness/exposure that might put off the Dubai investors? Or, are there certain terms that show Intel to be a benevolent dictator and not the viciously "unfair" competitor? Come on INQ, help us.

I spend an hour on a comment and still stuff it up. In the last sentence, read "while *enjoying* alignment" [with China's love for MIPS] in the long term. Alchemy might've been a useful bit of strategery!

Looks like this is the public form of the current agreement: http://contracts.corporate.findlaw.com/agreements/amd/intel.license.2001.01.01.html They would expect to renegotiate in 2011 anyway. Based on the definitions in the agreement, the whole reorg does seem a little distasteful, but it's probably worth more to Intel to negotiate in good faith, maintain the x86 duopoly and keep up royalties than to torpedo AMD and immediately face the hardships of a monopoly position - while AMD would be kind of screwed absent the deal. But If AMD becomes a design shop for TFC and TFC takes over "production, sales, leases or other dispositions of *****", is AMD contemplating cutting royalties to a trickle under the current agreement? ... Meanwhile, AMD does have a better hand than just a friendly regulatory environment; *if* someone complains, Abu Dhabi has the option of picking up the rest of AMD and making good on ownership stakes "within sixty (60) days after receiving written notice . . ." Or, if Intel chooses the nuclear option and Abu Dhabi is patient, they can even cede the desktop, put out a high-performance MIPS design, and remain competitive in servers and HPC while alignment with moves in certain growing markets (China) in the long term.

what if Intel aren't guilty at all??? You haven't considered that possibility. There's a small chance that they aren't guilty and if that's really the case, it makes all the above arguments invalid. And what if Intel just decided to pay the fine to AMD and not renew the license? If you say AMD has nothing to gain from continuing the suit other than a small payout, then Intel has nothing to lose other than an even smaller payout IMO (for them). So this might not go as anticipated.

Isn't it a bit absurd to say that AMD has nothing to gain from the lawsuit other than a small payout? What about the idea that this may allow them to compete on equal ground? Wasn't the whole point that even when AMD had a significantly better product (athlon in 2005, 2006) they still couldn't increase their market share that much because of Intel's practices? I think AMD has a lot to gain if they can keep Intel competing honestly.

someone's been spending way too much time watching the EPT...