This site may earn chapter commissions from the links on this page. Terms of use.

Intel CPU wafers

Last calendar week, Intel published a blog post detailing the 39th anniversary of the x86 microarchitecture'southward launch and the various ways the microarchitecture has evolved over the decades, from the appearance of various SIMD (single instruction multiple information) capabilities to advanced encryption and cleaved security hardware security enhancements. For the well-nigh part, it was an unremarkable story for the not-quite-40th-anniversary of what remains i of the nearly important ISAs on the market today.

It wasn't until nearly the end of the post that things turned ugly. In the editorial, Intel Young man Richard A. Uhlig and Intel full general counsel Steven Rodgers write:

Intel carefully protects its x86 innovations, and we do non widely license others to use them… In the early days of our microprocessor business, Intel needed to enforce its patent rights against various companies including United Microelectronics Corporation, Advanced Micro Devices, Cyrix Corporation, Chips and Technologies, Via Technologies, and, most recently, Transmeta Corporation. Enforcement actions have been unnecessary in recent years because other companies take respected Intel's intellectual belongings rights.

Notwithstanding, there have been reports that some companies may try to emulate Intel'southward proprietary x86 ISA without Intel'southward authorization. Emulation is not a new technology, and Transmeta was notably the last company to claim to take produced a compatible x86 processor using emulation ("code morphing") techniques. Intel enforced patents relating to SIMD instruction fix enhancements against Transmeta's x86 implementation fifty-fifty though it used emulation…

Merely time volition tell if new attempts to emulate Intel'southward x86 ISA will meet a dissimilar fate. Intel welcomes lawful competition, and we are confident that Intel'south microprocessors, which have been specifically optimized to implement Intel's x86 ISA for almost iv decades, volition evangelize astonishing experiences, consistency across applications, and a total breadth of consumer offerings, full manageability and It integration for the enterprise. However, we practice not welcome unlawful infringement of our patents, and we fully expect other companies to keep to respect Intel's intellectual holding rights.

This is clearly a shot across the bow of Qualcomm and Microsoft'south plans to introduce Snapdragon 835 hardware in mainstream mobile markets. Historically, Intel has skilful reason to feel confident almost its breast-thumping. On the ane hand, information technology's hilarious to see the company talking upwards its legal deportment against AMD. Intel has generally come out the loser in multiple countries and in the United states of america when information technology attempted to argue AMD had no right to build its ain microprocessors based on the x86 architecture.

x86-graph-2x1

But look at things from Intel's perspective: Its tactics in the early 1990s and mid-2000s substantially limited AMD'south addressable market share. Information technology may have paid a whopping $one.4 billion fine to the European union to settle antitrust claims, but that's peanuts compared with the threat Athlon 64 might have represented to Prescott and Smithfield. And Intel isn't wrong when information technology talks about the myriad other companies that used to agree x86 licenses (or tried to emulate the ISA), but withered on the vine afterward their attempts to compete with Santa Clara failed.

The problem is this: Organization OEMs similar Dell, HP, and Asus aren't in the business of taking chances. When your net margin on hardware is in the two-4 percent range, you tin can't afford bravery. Imagine a hypothetical time to come in which HP shipped a Qualcomm Snapdragon 835 that could run x86 code via emulation, only to be named as a party to a hypothetical lawsuit in which Intel sues Qualcomm and Microsoft for their emulation organisation. Unless one of its 2 partners agrees to indemnify it, there's no way HP would risk a serious lawsuit over the topic.

Asus, Dell, Acer — all of these companies are likely to see the state of affairs similarly. The specter of these kinds of lawsuits has always loomed large over the computer industry. I wouldn't arraign them for Transmeta's issues; Transmeta's lawmaking-morphing arroyo and Efficeon architecture were initially innovative, merely performance wasn't strong and Intel quickly moved to address its ain power weaknesses through the Pentium M and the development of technologies like SpeedStep.

On the other paw, Intel'south threats of lawsuits over VIA Technologies' lack of a P4 bus license were the direct cause of the collapse of VIA'due south P4 motherboard market share. VIA's DDR P4 chipset was a fast and affordable selection when the P4 was stuck between either SDR RAM (which badly crippled the CPU) and extremely expensive RDRAM. Intel wouldn't launch its own DDR chipset for the P4 for more than a year afterwards VIA launched its ain. Only lawsuit threats and licensing disagreements ensured VIA'southward addressable marketplace was minimal.

Does Intel have a case?

The short answer is, we don't know. The long answer is, information technology'll depend on exactly what kind of patents Intel has on its own SIMD extensions. If information technology holds patents that specifies how to emulate SSE/SSE2, rather than just the education sets themselves, Microsoft and Qualcomm could well be found to violate them. Then over again, this also wouldn't be the first time Intel slammed down its foot in a tough-talk brandish that ultimately came to naught. When AMD announced it would spin off GlobalFoundries, Intel initially argued that the deal might run afoul of its own agreements with AMD regarding the utilise of that company'south x86 license. In the end, nothing came of those claims, and GF was spun off while continuing to manufacture x86 chips for AMD.

Much of this will plough on what kind of x86 emulation the Qualcomm Snapdragon 835 really performs and how it performs it. Until nosotros know more than, we can't speculate. Just Intel has every reason to fight this move. Back when information technology looked as if ARM and x86 might slug it out head-to-head across the unabridged market, Intel planned to "win" the fight on performance and efficiency. Only with Intel having withdrawn from the smartphone and tablet space, it's now in the unhappy position of fighting a rearguard action to protect its consumer notebooks and desktops from an encroaching ARM. There accept been cracks in the WinTel alliance since smartphones and tablets began gobbling up marketplace share from the PC industry in 2011, but this kind of court instance could escalate the feud between Microsoft and Intel.