• commandar@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      19
      ·
      2 months ago

      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).

    • weew
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      14
      ·
      2 months ago

      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.

      • sunzu2@thebrainbin.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        2 months ago

        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🐸