AMD Announce Partnership w/ Samsung

Nobu

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Jun 7, 2007
Messages
5,917

Fremunaln

Limp Gawd
Joined
May 3, 2019
Messages
189
Interesting is this like, a possible patent infringement lawsuit that was amicably settled before it hit the courts or public court of opinion, or just a new venture samsung and amd came up with?
 

ChadD

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Feb 8, 2016
Messages
5,152
Interesting is this like, a possible patent infringement lawsuit that was amicably settled before it hit the courts or public court of opinion, or just a new venture samsung and amd came up with?

This is interesting.... around a year ago it was rumored Samsung was working on its own GPUs. Around the time Apple made clear they where dumping imagine and doing their own thing.

So ya the question is....
1) Has Samsung been working AMD for a year already ?
2) Did Samsungs in house design fall apart... so the easy quick fix was to find someone to licence from
3) Did Samsungs in house team step all over AMD patents ?

The first one doesn't seem super likely but perhaps.
The third one also doesn't seem to likely to me... AMD wouldn't have known patents where being infringed and if Samsung knew they where infringing early they would have had time to adjust.
So that perhaps leaves 2.... either Samsungs internal efforts where not going well. Or perhaps they are simply further out then they would like so licencing AMD for the next few years makes sense until their own in house stuff works properly.

Interesting times in the mobile space I guess.
 

Grimlaking

2[H]4U
Joined
May 9, 2006
Messages
3,250
Wow ok Nvidia's Tegra line of Graphics Chips for mobile was just being discussed. I think AMD has some design/engineering chops that Nvidia is missing. Would be interesting to see some green vs red in the mobile space.
 

Uvaman2

2[H]4U
Joined
Jan 4, 2016
Messages
3,143
Still wont give AMD a chip of their own for mobile, but good on them for the licensing fees they will be getting.
 

Uvaman2

2[H]4U
Joined
Jan 4, 2016
Messages
3,143
Wow ok Nvidia's Tegra line of Graphics Chips for mobile was just being discussed. I think AMD has some design/engineering chops that Nvidia is missing. Would be interesting to see some green vs red in the mobile space.
Nah, its just they are scrappy and aggressive.
I think Nividia is sometimes full of themselves... Well I mean they do make billions so there is that.
 

Grimlaking

2[H]4U
Joined
May 9, 2006
Messages
3,250
Nah, its just they are scrappy and aggressive.
I think Nividia is sometimes full of themselves... Well I mean they do make billions so there is that.

AMD had been at this game for a long time before Nvidia was around. Not to say tht Nvidia didn't try.. perhaps they were not willing to license their IP? Who knows what the real reason is here. It could literally be anything.
 

Uvaman2

2[H]4U
Joined
Jan 4, 2016
Messages
3,143
Considering Samsung is one of the largest companies in the world... yea this could be VERY good for AMD.

AMD had been at this game for a long time before Nvidia was around. Not to say tht Nvidia didn't try.. perhaps they were not willing to license their IP? Who knows what the real reason is here. It could literally be anything.
True true.
50 years is ancient for tech, that is for sure.
Its really something as Lisa runs AMD as almost an aggressive start up in someways.

Also, this IP relates to RDNA, it must have some serious low power chops.
 

Nobu

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Jun 7, 2007
Messages
5,917
AMD had been at this game for a long time before Nvidia was around. Not to say tht Nvidia didn't try.. perhaps they were not willing to license their IP? Who knows what the real reason is here. It could literally be anything.
They want to sell their tegra SoC, not license their tech. Samsung has their own SoCs, they just want more powerful graphics tech. In comes AMD, who has experience with custom designs and is willing to license their tech.
 

Snowdog

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Apr 22, 2006
Messages
11,267
They want to sell their tegra SoC, not license their tech. Samsung has their own SoCs, they just want more powerful graphics tech. In comes AMD, who has experience with custom designs and is willing to license their tech.

Don't forget NVidia licensed it's GPU IP to Intel for 1.5 Billion dollars spread over 6 years. If you are willing to pay you can licence NVidia tech.
 
Last edited:

IdiotInCharge

NVIDIA SHILL
Joined
Jun 13, 2003
Messages
14,710
And here I was hoping that Samsung would be helping AMD make their parts efficient enough for mobile use...
 

Derangel

Fully [H]
Joined
Jan 31, 2008
Messages
19,572
Considering Samsung is one of the largest companies in the world... yea this could be VERY good for AMD.

I believe they're still the largest smartphone manufacturer on the planet too. If Samsung puts AMD IP into their Exynos chips it is going to be incredibly lucrative for AMD.

And here I was hoping that Samsung would be helping AMD make their parts efficient enough for mobile use...

Samsung has no reason to do that. They wouldn't want AMD making something to compete with Exynos. It makes more sense for them to license AMD's IP and use it for themselves vs helping AMD make a competing product.
 

IdiotInCharge

NVIDIA SHILL
Joined
Jun 13, 2003
Messages
14,710
Samsung has no reason to do that. They wouldn't want AMD making something to compete with Exynos. It makes more sense for them to license AMD's IP and use it for themselves vs helping AMD make a competing product.

Shoot, I don't think AMD has the chops for phone SoCs- they have the base technology, sure, but phones and tablets are another league entirely from what they currently produce. I'm just talking about getting their discrete GPUs competitive in laptops.
 

illli

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Oct 26, 2005
Messages
1,376
I know back then AMD was struggling, but I wish they were able to somehow hold onto their mobile tech and develop it vs selling it to Qualcomm years back. If they had the resources to push into that market back then, perhaps AMD would be as big as Qualcomm is today.
 

Snowdog

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Apr 22, 2006
Messages
11,267
I know back then AMD was struggling, but I wish they were able to somehow hold onto their mobile tech and develop it vs selling it to Qualcomm years back. If they had the resources to push into that market back then, perhaps AMD would be as big as Qualcomm is today.

AMD tech would have been nothing without Qualcomm's modems, much like NVidias Cellphone chips flopped.

Qualcomm's money is really from cellphone communications technology. They pretty much single handedly developed the first CDMA based cellphone standard, which was adopted as one of the main standards in the USA, and eventually much of the world with W-CDMA developed elsewhere, but still using Qualcomms CDMA patents. They grew fat on CDMA patent revenues.
 

ChadD

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Feb 8, 2016
Messages
5,152
AMD had been at this game for a long time before Nvidia was around. Not to say tht Nvidia didn't try.. perhaps they were not willing to license their IP? Who knows what the real reason is here. It could literally be anything.

A lot of companies detest Nvidia, and that gets around. Nvidia has screwed over so many big players with licence deals... and have a reputation for doing dirty things like picking up small players for no other reason then to sue based on those patents. They have famously burned both MS and Intel costing them billions... so why would a player like Samsung want to get into bed with a company looking to screw you over if it suits them at the time ?

Much like Intel they probably figured it made more sense to Pay AMD for a handful of patents then to end up fighting NV in court over BS patent claims.

Intel licenced AMD GPUs as a short term fix to get rid of NV until they can ship their own GPU bits. I have a feeling Samsungs reasoning is almost exactly the same. Protect yourself from court cases by paying AMD a little bit... until you can launch your own part a few cycles down the line.
 

Snowdog

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Apr 22, 2006
Messages
11,267
Much like Intel they probably figured it made more sense to Pay AMD for a handful of patents then to end up fighting NV in court over BS patent claims.

Intel licenced AMD GPUs as a short term fix to get rid of NV until they can ship their own GPU bits. I have a feeling Samsungs reasoning is almost exactly the same. Protect yourself from court cases by paying AMD a little bit... until you can launch your own part a few cycles down the line.


I think you have that backwards. Intel has licensed all of NVidia GPU patents (at the time of the last payment) for 1.5 Billion total.

I linked the license deal info above.

Where did they license AMD patents? Pretty sure they didn't. There is the implied license of using someones products (AMD GPU chip in Kaby-G) , but that only extends to the products you buy from them, and should automatically be covered by patent exhaustion.

Meanwhile Intel is free to develop new GPUs using NVidia patents because they paid for a license.
 

ChadD

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Feb 8, 2016
Messages
5,152
I think you have that backwards. Intel has licensed all of NVidia GPU patents (at the time of the last payment) for 1.5 Billion total.

I linked the license deal info above.

Where did they license AMD patents? Pretty sure they didn't. There is the implied license of using someones products (AMD GPU chip in Kaby-G) , but that only extends to the products you buy from them, and should automatically be covered by patent exhaustion.

Meanwhile Intel is free to develop new GPUs using NVidia patents because they paid for a license.

You don't remember (or know) the history there. 3DFX had settled a lawsuit with Intel over patents well before they where bought out by NV. You see 3DFX had picked up real3d. Real3Ds roots go back to the US military in the 70s... and Intels early designs used Real3D tech. Intel and 3DFX came to an understanding and that was settled. When NV picked 3DFX up the Intel V 3DFX as no longer settled... NV held them over a barrel for more money. Suing them for infringment of the Real3D patents they now owned.

Long story short... Intel agreed to pay NV billions over years to licence tech INTEL co developed with Real3D. To make it happen NV agreed to stop making chipsets for x86. Which is why they moved to ARM. (the move to ARM after agreeing to get out of the chipset business was like rubbing salt into the wound)

Intel make no mistake HATES NV... and them entering the GPU race of course makes a ton of logical business sense. Having said that a lot of long time Intel execs would love to toast the death of the jack asses over at NV. ;)

As for licencing. AMD where do you think all those intel chips with radeon graphics have been coming from ?
 
Last edited:

Snowdog

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Apr 22, 2006
Messages
11,267
You don't remember (or know) the history there. 3DFX had settled a lawsuit with Intel over patents well before they where bought out by NV. You see 3DFX had picked up real3d. Real3Ds roots go back to the US military in the 70s... and Intels early designs used Real3D tech. Intel and 3DFX came to an understanding and that was settled. When NV picked 3DFX up the Intel V 3DFX as no longer settled... NV held them over a barrel for more money. Suing them for infringment of the Real3D patents they now owned.

Long story short... Intel agreed to pay NV billions over years to licence tech INTEL co developed with Real3D. To make it happen NV agreed to stop making chipsets for x86. Which is why they moved to ARM. (the move to ARM after agreeing to get out of the chipset business was like rubbing salt into the wound)

Intel make no mistake HATES NV... and them entering the GPU race of course makes a ton of logical business sense. Having said that a lot of long time Intel execs would love to toast the death of the jack asses over at NV. ;)

While I remember history, this is an incorrect verison. Intel licenced ALL of NVidia GPU patents, not just some old Read3D tech patents. It includes all the new patents right up until the date of the last payment. It probably even includes license for much of NVidia RT HW, as patents tend to be filed long before product hits the market.


As for licencing. AMD where do you think all those intel chips with radeon graphics have been coming from ?

As I explained above, this was a product purchase. No need for a specific license as it is covered by patent exhaustion.

Plus it's a product practically no one is using, except Intel in a NUC. It's impact is insignificant. It's more a demonstration of EMIB than a beneficial product.
 

ChadD

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Feb 8, 2016
Messages
5,152
While I remember history, this is an incorrect verison. Intel licenced ALL of NVidia GPU patents, not just some old Read3D tech patents. It includes all the new patents right up until the date of the last payment. It probably even includes license for much of NVidia RT HW, as patents tend to be filed long before product hits the market.

Of course they did... imagine your the Intel legal team sitting at a table with a company that is suing you with patents they had nothing to do with. In fact they are suing you with patents you spent 100s of millions co developing with another company just a few years before. It takes balls to sue a company with tech the developed... cause you managed to snag the patents cheap.

Don't get me wrong Intel is the sort of company that probably deserved it. One slim ball company found away to punish another.

Anyway yes of course Intel ensured they had no exposure going forward. As soon as that deal was up... Intel promptly got to work on their own chips, and licenced AMD for the inbetween times. If they loved NV so much they would have re signed for a few years.

Intel and NV agreed to get out of each others business. Is basically what happened... and Intel was not happy about it. (especially when NV tried to side step things and develop tegra)
 

ChadD

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Feb 8, 2016
Messages
5,152
https://www.anandtech.com/show/4122/intel-settles-with-nvidia-more-money-fewer-problems-no-x86

This covers a bunch of the history.... it doesn't mention the Real3D tech. That is also part of it though... Intels earliest IGP work was done with Real3D and NV ended up with those patents via 3DFX. Intel was unhappy with NV on many levels. NV is well known to be a huge PITA to deal with when it comes to licences. If you don't cross all the Ts and dot every i they will find them and skirt deals if it suits them. Intel found that out.
 

ManofGod

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Oct 4, 2007
Messages
12,305
Shoot, I don't think AMD has the chops for phone SoCs- they have the base technology, sure, but phones and tablets are another league entirely from what they currently produce. I'm just talking about getting their discrete GPUs competitive in laptops.

AMD used to be one of the top companies in phone and mobile tech, until they sold it off back in the Hector Ruinez days. Oh well, live and learn, we hope.
 

IdiotInCharge

NVIDIA SHILL
Joined
Jun 13, 2003
Messages
14,710
AMD used to be

...currently...

They gave up on their mobile x86 CPU (Jaguar) as did Intel; that potential market is not likely to come back.

But of course, I'm talking about their current laptop parts, or lack thereof.
 

ChadD

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Feb 8, 2016
Messages
5,152
AMD could still make a comeback in the phone/tablet form factor space.

Its just not a very lucrative market. ARM lets anyone build their chips. Beyond NV being a terrible partner its another reason tegra never really got anywhere. Its hard to compete when any little company can make an ARM chip for the cheapo market... and any big company can make their own. When ARM started licencing their own good enough GPUs to go with for sure that was the end of that.

Having said that AMD does have an ARM version of zen sitting on the shelf. Would be interesting if they where to retool it for low power.

Just a dream though... falls into the same issues. Can't compete on the cheapo end and device manufacturers like Samsung would rather make their own then pay someone else.
 

Uvaman2

2[H]4U
Joined
Jan 4, 2016
Messages
3,143
AMD could still make a comeback in the phone/tablet form factor space.

Its just not a very lucrative market. ARM lets anyone build their chips. Beyond NV being a terrible partner its another reason tegra never really got anywhere. Its hard to compete when any little company can make an ARM chip for the cheapo market... and any big company can make their own. When ARM started licencing their own good enough GPUs to go with for sure that was the end of that.

Having said that AMD does have an ARM version of zen sitting on the shelf. Would be interesting if they where to retool it for low power.

Just a dream though... falls into the same issues. Can't compete on the cheapo end and device manufacturers like Samsung would rather make their own then pay someone else.
I guess they could reboot it for switch 2 or another 3ds version. Or the future nintendo switch phone... Yes yes then I woke up.
Then again this IP deal came seemingly out of nowhere.
 

ChadD

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Feb 8, 2016
Messages
5,152
I guess they could reboot it for switch 2 or another 3ds version. Or the future nintendo switch phone... Yes yes then I woke up.
Then again this IP deal came seemingly out of nowhere.

Well that would be a big F you to NV that's for sure. Imagine a Switch Pro powered by an AMD ArmZenEon chip. lol

I doubt it of course. The ARM Zen they did create was for sure a high performance part, probably not designed to sip power. Still as you say who knows I would not have bet anything on Samsung licencing radeon tech.

Also I have to say.... the Samsung Dex stuff just got a lot more interesting to me perhaps.
 
D

Deleted member 243478

Guest
Why is this even an issue. Apple seem to get by fine with their own silicon baked in graphics
 

Nobu

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Jun 7, 2007
Messages
5,917
Why is this even an issue. Apple seem to get by fine with their own silicon baked in graphics
Because darn near everyone has a cell phone. if Samsung makes something good out of this IP, AMD can expect a lot of exposure. And Samsung may also make chips for other things like infotainment, portable consoles, etc..
 

odditory

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Dec 23, 2007
Messages
6,482
if Samsung makes something good out of this IP, AMD can expect a lot of exposure. And Samsung may also make chips for other things like infotainment, portable consoles, etc..

I don't see why. Being a component supplier doesn't mean much - people dont care what went into the sausage.

There has been this fantasy spoken of that AMD winning the race to the bottom and getting their chips into the consoles for breakeven or close to it, was some big breakthrough, like it would somehow boost their PR creds or create efficiencies and synergies with their desktop GPUs. Didn't happen. And has yet to even produce a blip on their earnings sheet. So they just keep giving away their chips, god knows why. Perhaps some long game that no one else sees.
 
Last edited:

odditory

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Dec 23, 2007
Messages
6,482
Samsung has no reason to do that. They wouldn't want AMD making something to compete with Exynos. It makes more sense for them to license AMD's IP and use it for themselves vs helping AMD make a competing product.
Based on Lisa Su's vague verbage, very unlikely that this partnership is about AMD-produced chips going into Galaxy devices. More like Samsung is hamstrung by Mali GPUs and wants a differentiator - to jump ahead in GPU power. And so they're going to infuse their own GPU design with Radeon tech.

Or.. they already have their own GPU nearing completion and need AMDs licenses to legally be able to do produce it.

Who knows, sounds like at a minimum that royalties paid to ARM for Mali will go bye bye, and AMD becomes new beneficiary of a licensing revenue stream.
 
Last edited:

ChadD

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Feb 8, 2016
Messages
5,152
Because darn near everyone has a cell phone. if Samsung makes something good out of this IP, AMD can expect a lot of exposure. And Samsung may also make chips for other things like infotainment, portable consoles, etc..

Not to mention that Samsung has Dex. The idea of your phone becoming your main computing device even if you need a keyboard isn't crazy.

Going with AMD gpus means they should also be able to run the current AMD backed open source drivers and the open mesa libraries. It may also make it much easier running almost stock Linux distros on Samsung phones. (not that I completely expect Samsung would make that to easy)

Imagine a Samsung phone... with a decent 8 core ARM chip, with a SOC Vega (2200G) level (doesn't seem crazy as this is the updated navi they have licenced). All of a sudden that means Samsung could build a high end Android phone... that can be docked, and via dex run Ubuntu ARM. Granted Steam and games are still likely a no go being ARM based... but who knows.

Personally I believe Dex like devices are the future of computing.... we have already gotten to a point where regular people can do everything they want want on 5 year old PCs. Samsungs phones are mostly an equal to that level of processing power now. Samsung SOC that can easily run standard ARM Linux distros or even a Samsung Dex like distro is interesting.
 

Nobu

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Jun 7, 2007
Messages
5,917
I don't see why. Being a component supplier doesn't mean much - people dont care what went into the sausage.
Fair enough.

There has been this fantasy spoken of that AMD winning the race to the bottom and getting their chips into the consoles for breakeven or close to it, was some big breakthrough, like it would somehow boost their PR creds or create efficiencies and synergies with their desktop GPUs. Didn't happen. And has yet to even produce a blip on their earnings sheet. So they just keep giving away their chips, god knows why. Perhaps some long game that no one else sees.
Alright, you can stop fantasizing now. AMD pays nothing per device that Samsung uses their IP in, and gets paid by Samsung for using it. It may not be much, but I think you're overreacting a bit here.
 
Top