Beta

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

cancel ×

364 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Bad for Environment--Bad for Intel--Great for User (5, Interesting)

eldavojohn (898314) | more than 5 years ago | (#24861207)

I'm not an expert but I would guess that a shift to Chinese made chips will be harder on the environment since Chinese pollution laws are generally more lax. Also, if it is pushed by the government, I'm sure they're willing to overlook things. I believe corruption is rife in the People's Republic of China. This is very bad for Intel (and probably AMD, why not?) since there will be a much more cheaply made multi-core CPU available on the market.

Great for the end consumer, however. Possibly even really really good for me as a United States citizen as Intel/AMD will be forced to drop prices to compete in the world market.

Also, there's the 'patriotic' view of this and the fact that the U.S. owes China dearly as a trade partner. Import import import import and export nothing. This would be further propagating that, thus hurting the dollar a tiny bit more.

Oh well, such are the intricacies of world economics.

Re:Bad for Environment--Bad for Intel--Great for U (5, Funny)

tha_mink (518151) | more than 5 years ago | (#24861305)

This is very bad for Intel (and probably AMD, why not?) since there will be a much more cheaply made multi-core CPU available on the market.

I guess we'll see about that. I did find, however, the best quote ever from TFA

"The decision makers and [Chinese] IT community have come to realize that CPUs [central processing units] are important."

Um...yeah.

Looks cheap. (2, Informative)

Ethanol-fueled (1125189) | more than 5 years ago | (#24861315)

Kinda looks [technologyreview.com] like a Cyrix. We won't be seeing any all-Chinese Alienware boxen anytime soon.

The funny thing is that they're made in China by a Swiss company, then rebranded Chinese. Ya'd think that they'd want to do it the other way around. Must be a national pride thing -- China's motto is "Ours is crappier than yours, but we have so much damn more of it!"

Re:Looks cheap. (4, Funny)

exley (221867) | more than 5 years ago | (#24861751)

The funny thing is that they're made in China by a Swiss company, then rebranded Chinese. Ya'd think that they'd want to do it the other way around.

So you mean... Made in Switzerland by a Chinese company, then re-branded Swiss?

Re:Looks cheap. (4, Insightful)

exley (221867) | more than 5 years ago | (#24861889)

Also, they are being manufactured by ST Microelectronics, which is a French/Italian company (French + Italian = Swiss?).

This isn't quite "re-branding" either... The Chinese designed the chips, but since the developers do not have semiconductor fabs of their own (a very expensive investment), they contract out the actual manufacturing. This is very common for companies to do; companies like IBM or TSMC will manufacture chips designed by other companies but it's not considered a re-branding.

Bad for Environment--Bad for Intel--Bad for User (5, Interesting)

sethstorm (512897) | more than 5 years ago | (#24861385)

Transmeta has tried, Godson has already tried, and both have yet to make a dent. It's just another knockoff that will not take off.

Like a lot of things from China, reliability will be suspect, not to mention any willful patent infringement.

Re:Bad for Environment--Bad for Intel--Bad for Use (5, Insightful)

Otter (3800) | more than 5 years ago | (#24861641)

Four or five years ago there was all this buzz about the Chinese Dragon CPU (based on the old Soviet Elbrus) that was going to combine with Red Flag Linux to destroy Wintel. Heard from them recently? The CPU fanboys don't understand that it's not about designing chips; it's about designing chips you can then make.

Re:Bad for Environment--Bad for Intel--Bad for Use (5, Informative)

ByOhTek (1181381) | more than 5 years ago | (#24861919)

Actually, from the article, I think this is the dragon cpu (dragonchip in the article)

And it is being produced.

It also makes the VIA processors look like incredible speed demons.

So the problem isn't being able to make them, but being able to make them /not suck/.

Re:Bad for Environment--Bad for Intel--Great for U (1)

Vancorps (746090) | more than 5 years ago | (#24861393)

The U.S. exports to China as well. Buick [msn.com] has a very strong presence with GM Reintroducing cars into China after they have halted production in the U.S.

Hardly balanced but China needs the U.S. as bad as the U.S. needs China. This alone will probably keep the peace.

Re:Bad for Environment--Bad for Intel--Great for U (4, Insightful)

ShieldW0lf (601553) | more than 5 years ago | (#24861555)

Hardly balanced but China needs the U.S. as bad as the U.S. needs China. This alone will probably keep the peace.

Why does China need the US again? I must have forgotten.

Re:Bad for Environment--Bad for Intel--Great for U (5, Insightful)

Vancorps (746090) | more than 5 years ago | (#24861659)

The U.S. is China's largest buyer. They wouldn't be where they are without all that money flowing that way. If China were to collapse the U.S. economy which is something they could do right now then they would lose a lot of business devastating their own economy in the process. This nearly happened to the U.S. when Japan's market collapsed.

Re:Bad for Environment--Bad for Intel--Great for U (0, Flamebait)

ShieldW0lf (601553) | more than 5 years ago | (#24861899)

If the Chinese government dumped the goods that were made for export into the ocean, they wouldn't have any less for themselves. They don't get anything in exchange for the US currency. It means nothing. China knows they're not getting anything back from the US, not now, not in the future. They keep going they way they are because it's a way to keep the citizens busy so they won't make trouble.

American money is like Air Miles.

Re:Bad for Environment--Bad for Intel--Great for U (5, Funny)

Divebus (860563) | more than 5 years ago | (#24861467)

Maybe now the Chinese will stop trying to hack my servers because they're already inside.

Re:Bad for Environment--Bad for Intel--Great for U (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24861865)

Wow, I imagine these chinese cpu's will have the feature to explode simultaneously at a signal coming from a satellite, hence the name.

Re:Bad for Environment--Bad for Intel--Great for U (1)

BitZtream (692029) | more than 5 years ago | (#24861895)

Much like pharmacuticals companies, just because Intel has to charge less in other countries, doesn't mean they have to charge less here.

All they have to do is figure out some law that prevents the Chinese from importing the chips to the US ... say, lack of meeting enviromental standards.

Re:Bad for Environment--Bad for Intel--Great for U (4, Insightful)

dominator (61418) | more than 5 years ago | (#24861971)

Also, there's the 'patriotic' view of this and the fact that the U.S. owes China dearly as a trade partner. Import import import import and export nothing. This would be further propagating that, thus hurting the dollar a tiny bit more.

Hardly. The US exports $1.15 trillion of goods and services per year. It's true that the US imports $700bln more than it exports. Exports recently rose sharply when the dollar's value was relatively depressed versus European and Asian currencies.

If China would more aggressively re-circulate the $1.5 trillion in reserves it's holding rather than hoarding dollars, the dollar's value would fall relative to the Yuan (which is being artificially under-valued, which China can due to its massive currency reserves). This would make Chinese imports more expensive and US exports less expensive. But then, China's export-driven economy wouldn't be growing at an insane 11% per year.

The current trade imbalance is as much China's "fault" as it is the US'. Maybe things aren't so unilaterally bad. There's some truth in the old saying that "if you owe the bank $100, you have a problem. If you owe the bank $1 million, the bank has a problem."

FIRST POST (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24861215)

FIRST POST

Whew... (4, Funny)

Bragador (1036480) | more than 5 years ago | (#24861239)

At least nobody said it was a threat to AMD.

Re:Whew... (1)

Pat Attack (1353585) | more than 5 years ago | (#24861337)

Nobody said it was a threat to AMD because AMD is not worth mentioning.

Re:Whew... (5, Interesting)

avandesande (143899) | more than 5 years ago | (#24861671)

Actually the first thing that popped in my mind was 'why don't they just buy AMD'
AMD has really good technology but extremely poor financials... the Chinese could turn them around.

Re:Whew... (1)

Ilgaz (86384) | more than 5 years ago | (#24861717)

AMD would lose every single Govt. and Big American company contract the day they do such deal with Chinese govt. Don't forget "AMD gets support from human rights abusers!" trolls too, millions of them, amateur or professional.

If you think the cold war is over, think again. They just changed how they fight with which instruments :)

Re:Whew... (2, Funny)

oldspewey (1303305) | more than 5 years ago | (#24861749)

... or just invade Taiwan and take over VIA.

Re:Whew... (1)

Bragador (1036480) | more than 5 years ago | (#24861771)

This is actually not a bad idea now that you mention it. Maybe it's linked to "chinese pride" or something like that.

They would have access to AMD's technology and could develop their special processor for their own country on the side.

Oxymoron (3, Funny)

arizwebfoot (1228544) | more than 5 years ago | (#24861257)

Wouldn't the term "Chinese Intel" be an oxymoron.

-- Would this CPU be 16 years old or 14?

Re:Oxymoron (1)

Pat Attack (1353585) | more than 5 years ago | (#24861429)

The CPU was 14 years old until just before the announcement, when the documentation for it suddenly changed to show it's "real" age.

No, but it will have interesting behavior (4, Funny)

sethstorm (512897) | more than 5 years ago | (#24861525)

Should it be told to return 16, it will return 16 even if the result is 14. Consider it the Olympic Calculation Extension.
Attempting to write Tibet, Democracy, or anything the PRC deems harmful(via microcode updates) destroys the unit.

(Oxymoron (Score:-1, Troll))

Hrm. I guess the mods have a defective sense of humor here.
Supporters of China incoming in ...3...2...1...

Easy Answer: (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24861263)

No.

Why x86-compatible? (4, Interesting)

pipatron (966506) | more than 5 years ago | (#24861267)

I wonder why they are working on making this CPU x86-compatible. If they want to be really "free" from the western IT-world they don't have to care about running Windows, and when they don't have to care about that, they can just adopt gcc, the rest of GNU and Linux to run natively on their own instruction set.

Of course it must be... (5, Funny)

John3 (85454) | more than 5 years ago | (#24861307)

It's gonna have to be x86-compatible to run all those counterfeit copies of Windows.

Re:Of course it must be... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24861451)

The Transmeta Crusoe only emulated x86.

Re:Why x86-compatible? (2, Informative)

Ilgaz (86384) | more than 5 years ago | (#24861351)

Even in real (before Gorbachov) communist era, USSR was shipping 8086 compatible chips as far as I searched.

Guess what? They care about Windows, DirectX and millions of x86 centric developers. China has always been a realistic country and even Russia couldn't dare to ship a non x86 small chip. Their mainframes were also DEC/S360 etc. clones. There is even a DEC chip saying "Steal from the best" when looked under electron microscope ;)

DEC Chip's Message (5, Insightful)

kdawson (3715) (1344097) | more than 5 years ago | (#24861935)

Even in real (before Gorbachov) communist era, USSR was shipping 8086 compatible chips as far as I searched.

Guess what? They care about Windows, DirectX and millions of x86 centric developers. China has always been a realistic country and even Russia couldn't dare to ship a non x86 small chip. Their mainframes were also DEC/S360 etc. clones. There is even a DEC chip saying "Steal from the best" when looked under electron microscope ;)

Indeed there was: http://micro.magnet.fsu.edu/creatures/pages/russians.html [fsu.edu]

Why x86-compatible? - for Tinfoil caps of course (1)

WinPimp2K (301497) | more than 5 years ago | (#24861397)

Probably because they will want to sell it outside of China at some point. Especially if it supports a few extra "undocumented" instructions to make cyberwarfare and espionage a bit easier for them.

And of course, x-86 compatiblity allows leverage of existing code bases too.

they have the new Intel masks (1)

peter303 (12292) | more than 5 years ago | (#24861595)

Sometimes before the new Intel chip has even made it to market. Just like new Hollywood movies. Read up on Chinese Silicon Valley business intelligence.

Re:Why x86-compatible? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24861745)

Why - because they will kick Intels and AMD's ass.Not today,not tomorrow but in 10 years you'll better watch it.

This is a government enterprise in a country full of cheap to free labour and the government can make anybody they want to buy boxes based on those CPU's.
Subsidised by he government,too.

This is like GPL software with billions of $$$ back it up and customers that have to buy it or else.
Whoever is working at AMD or Intel better looks out for another line of work.

And no - the consumer won't get shit of this because a consumer that doesn't have a job anymore won't have money to spend :-)

Re:Why x86-compatible? (1)

houstonbofh (602064) | more than 5 years ago | (#24861875)

This is like GPL software with billions of $$$ back it up and customers that have to buy it or else. Whoever is working at AMD or Intel better looks out for another line of work.

Yep. Forcing people to buy something, regardless of quality, always results in the best product.

Re:Why x86-compatible? (3, Informative)

Hal_Porter (817932) | more than 5 years ago | (#24861795)

It's not x86 compatible. It's a MIPS64 clone. According to this, they'll use binary translation and extra instructions to run x86 binaries.

http://www.pldesignline.com/news/210201111 [pldesignline.com]

Both the four- and eight-core versions of the Godson-3 are implemented at 65 nm, with clock speed of 1GHz. The design features a distributed, scalable architecture with reconfigurable CPU core and L2 cache. The devices are designed for low power consumption - the four-core draws 10w while the eight -core draws 20w, according to Xu's presentation. The designs utilize MIPS64 cores with more than 200 additional instructions for X86 binary translation and media acceleration.

Problem is it's unlicensed, so they would most likely be sued for patent infringement if they sell it outside China.

http://www.mdronline.com/watch/watch_Issue.asp?Volname=Issue+%23072505&on=1 [mdronline.com]

In December 2003, Advanced Micro Devices and BLX IC Design announced a relationship and opened the AMD/BLX Computing Client Development Center in Beijing. BLX IC Design is creating reference designs for thin clients and other computing products using AMD and BLX IC Design processors. The first two products are thin clients powered by AMDâ(TM)s MIPS32 - compatible Alchemy Au1500 processor and BLX IC Design's Godson-1. The creators of the Godson-1 say its architecture is "MIPS-like" - a description that annoys MIPS Technologies, which doesnâ(TM)t authorize the Godson architecture or license any intellectual property to ICT or BLX IC Design. AMD, which is a MIPS licensee, says it encourages BLX IC Design and MIPS to resolve their licensing issues.

Lexra tried to sell unlicensed MIPS clones and was effectively shutdown by lawsuits. As this Lexra guy puts it -

http://jonahprobell.com/lexra.html [jonahprobell.com]

It has been interesting to watch as the Chinese company, BLX, has made and sold powerful processors in China that execute MIPS-based instruction sets. BLX is legally and morally clear of violating MIPS Technologies' patents. BLX has chosen not to pay anything to MIPS Technologies while a host of American companies with their own powerful MIPS instruction set processors pay large sums of money to MIPS Technologies for the privilege of not being hassled by lawsuits. After its experience with Lexra MIPS Technologies changed all of its 32-bit cores to ue its new MIPS32 instruction set which extends the MIPS-I instruction set to include other features patented by MIPS Technologies. This is similar to Intel's addition of the MMX instruction set extensions to Pentium III in order to prevent AMD from building compatible processors.

Re:Why x86-compatible? (4, Insightful)

MBGMorden (803437) | more than 5 years ago | (#24861835)

It's not x86 compatible. It's a MIPS64 clone. According to this, they'll use binary translation and extra instructions to run x86 binaries.

Somehow I don't think you understand what compatible means. If you plug x86 code into this chip and it works, then it's x86 compatible. The specifics of how all that happens once those instructions flow into the silicon is irrelevant for this particular discussion.

Re:Why x86-compatible? DUH! (1)

Nom du Keyboard (633989) | more than 5 years ago | (#24861881)

I wonder why they are working on making this CPU x86-compatible.

Because you can't steal Windows software if your processor doesn't have the x86 instruction set.

Divine! (5, Funny)

zonex (1155201) | more than 5 years ago | (#24861281)

"Godson"... The new Jesus chip?

Re:Divine! (5, Funny)

Das Modell (969371) | more than 5 years ago | (#24861403)

Well... the Bible didn't specifically say that he'd do the second coming in human form, did it?

Re:Divine! (3, Funny)

morgan_greywolf (835522) | more than 5 years ago | (#24861589)

The Bible didn't specifically say that Jesus wouldn't be arriving on an ELE-producing asteroid flipping the entire planet the bird now did it?

Pffft.

Re:Divine! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24861729)

CPU die for our sins!

Re:Divine! (1)

_Sprocket_ (42527) | more than 5 years ago | (#24861507)

You can have your Personal Computer. I have a Personal Jesus.

Which makes you wonder. Will it work in the marketplace?

"Hi. I'm a PC."

"And I'm a Son of God."

Re:Divine! (1)

Dancindan84 (1056246) | more than 5 years ago | (#24861915)

I bet it passes the Turing test.

Will it be a threat to Intel? (2, Insightful)

Ilgaz (86384) | more than 5 years ago | (#24861291)

Speaking from PowerPC 970 MP, Quad G5 Mac which has very good FSB specs and way modern compared to CISC stuff, I can easily say "No".

Once you don't support x86 instruction set, you aren't a threat to Intel at all.

It doesn't support, pass. Sorry to sound negative but it is the truth.

If Intel could be threatened by a non x86 chip, Motorola/IBM/Apple could have achieved it. You see what happened, SJobs and Apple became number 1 Intel fan.

About performance and watt usage? There is still a huge company named FreeScale you know ;)

Re:Will it be a threat to Intel? (2, Informative)

sl0ppy (454532) | more than 5 years ago | (#24861453)

on x86 compatibility from TFA:

This latest chip will also be fundamentally different from those made before. Neither Godson-1 nor -2 is compatible with Intel's so-called x86 architecture, meaning that most commercial software will not run on them. But engineers have added 200 additional instructions to Godson-3 to simulate an x86 chip, which allows Godson-3 to run more software, including the Windows operating system. And because the chip architecture is only simulated, there is no need to obtain a license from Intel.

on watt usage from TFA:

The four-core Godson-3 will consume 10 watts of power, and the eight-core chip will consume 20 watts, says Xu.

so, yes, it will be x86 compatible.

Re:Will it be a threat to Intel? (2, Informative)

Ilgaz (86384) | more than 5 years ago | (#24861585)

Quoting Apple community who got sick of FreeScale's (G4 era) non shipping announcements and watt/mhz claims say: "Lets see the actual silicon chip and measure it".

When its shipped, Freescale will be at very interesting watt powers (as they are concentrated) and Intel will be at SSE something level. Intel and AMD has a sharing agreement and MS is very close friend of Intel that has lead to "Wintel" term. Emulating the CPU? Ask Linus how well it went.

I have seen some great promises not happening at all or wasn't delivering the promise. Especially x86 market. Today's fashion is Watts and number of cores, it was Mhz way back then.

Take a look at a 9 years old story:
http://slashdot.org/articles/99/02/19/1543222.shtml [slashdot.org]

Re:Will it be a threat to Intel? (1)

sl0ppy (454532) | more than 5 years ago | (#24861645)

agreed, but the answers to your assertions were in TFA.

an intel spokesperson also goes on record saying that the performance is likely to be only 80% of a comparable intel chip. until these are in the hands of testers, it's still all fairly moot.

but, to completely discount a chip because it is not x86 compatible, when the biggest change appears to be that they bolted x86 compatibility on is just silly.

Re:Will it be a threat to Intel? COULD BE! (1)

Nom du Keyboard (633989) | more than 5 years ago | (#24861937)

Once you don't support x86 instruction set, you aren't a threat to Intel at all.

Intel patents cover far more than the instruction set. The whole reason for so much cross-licensing in the industry is that a whole pile of patents are involved in a single modern CPU chip. If China uses Intel patents (say for floating point computation, or an effective front-side bus, or even chip packaging) to market a competing CPU, ever socket filled by that CPU is one more displaced Intel chip. The x86 instruction set is only one small piece of the puzzle.

US Export Laws Helps This Project (4, Interesting)

darkmeridian (119044) | more than 5 years ago | (#24861299)

According to the article, "Federal laws also prohibit the export of state-of-the-art microprocessors from the United States to China, meaning that microchips shipped to China are usually a few generations behind the newest ones in the West." Thus, a native Chinese microprocessor project does not need to be state-of-the-art. It just has to be good enough to compete with the older stuff from Intel and AMD. Once the Chinese build up their own knowledge base in microprocessor design, then nationalism and Communism will help foist it upon their populace as they demand computers. It'll be interesting to see how this dovetails with any effort to create Red Flag Linux to move away from the Wintel-opoly.

Re:US Export Laws Helps This Project (1)

Osurak (1013927) | more than 5 years ago | (#24861435)

According to the article, "Federal laws also prohibit the export of state-of-the-art microprocessors from the United States to China, meaning that microchips shipped to China are usually a few generations behind the newest ones in the West."

Side question: how does this apply to things (ie. CPUs, other hardware) produced overseas? Does this mean that the really high-end stuff is all manufactured locally? Or do they dodge the issue by opening manufacturing facilities in other countries in the region?

Re:US Export Laws Helps This Project (1)

roc97007 (608802) | more than 5 years ago | (#24861789)

> It'll be interesting to see how this dovetails with any effort to create Red Flag Linux to move away from the Wintel-opoly.

Except they don't need to move away from the Wintel-opoly. The cost of Windows in China is essentially the cost of media.

When Windows is free, there's not much motivation to explore alternatives.

Re:US Export Laws Helps This Project (1)

mckorr (1274964) | more than 5 years ago | (#24861819)

So a European country buys the state-of-the-art processors from us, and then they sell them to China. Trade restrictions only work if everyone has the same ones.

Re:US Export Laws Helps This Project (2, Informative)

TimothyDavis (1124707) | more than 5 years ago | (#24861929)

You realize that most US PCs are either designed and manufactured in China and Taiwan?

Obligatory (3, Interesting)

Oxy the moron (770724) | more than 5 years ago | (#24861313)

Can it run Linux? ;)

I think this will be interesting to watch. It's not like this is the very first challenger to Intel's market. So far none have really succeeded (AMD being the exception, but they aren't exactly considered the czar of the processor world at the moment) aside from niche markets. My guess is that this will be another company that will find its niche and settle for it. Intel just always seems to avoid losing "King of the Hill" status time and time again.

Re:Obligatory (1)

ratboy666 (104074) | more than 5 years ago | (#24861709)

Yes, it runs Linux. That would be its "preferred" mode.

4 core (10 watt) or 8 core (20 watt) CPU, MIPS 64 bit architecture, with special instructions to assist in translating x86 instructions.

Re:Obligatory-ONLY BECAUSE... (1)

Nom du Keyboard (633989) | more than 5 years ago | (#24861965)

Intel just always seems to avoid losing "King of the Hill" status time and time again.

Only because we keep insisting on having the fastest processors available to run Microsoft Office, check e-mail, and browse the web.

We've heard of this before... (1)

sethstorm (512897) | more than 5 years ago | (#24861323)

Well, here's their history according to Google [google.com]

What about the dragon chip? (0)

jandrese (485) | more than 5 years ago | (#24861329)

There are already Chinese made knockoff ia86 processors. They're all slow and crappy, although cheap. They have not been a major threat to Intel or AMD yet, and until we see some hard numbers on this new one, I'm not writing any obits for the mainstream processor industry.

If Intel does feel threatened then... (1)

just_another_sean (919159) | more than 5 years ago | (#24861373)

...you can bet they will jump on this at their earliest opportunity:

"...Metzger adds that the inner workings of the chip, known as its instruction set, have not yet been disclosed, making it difficult to know if or how any x86 patents may have been breeched."

Intel may be able to put up a roadblock or two over this.

Part of China's reasoning behind this has to do with US export laws concerning microprocessors. From TFA:

"Federal laws also prohibit the export of state-of-the-art microprocessors from the United States to China, meaning that microchips shipped to China are usually a few generations behind the newest ones in the West."

So if (when?) Intel does lose business because of this it will be interesting to see if it becomes another canonical example of how federal regulation hurts US businesses and the US economy.

Re:If Intel does feel threatened then... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24861955)

> Intel may be able to put up a roadblock or two over this.

A roadblock?

Do you honestly think China cares about Intel patents? They have no reason not to treat this just like they do Windows IP: "You want us to crack down on pirated Vista? Uh, ok... we'll get right on that. Any day now."

DEFEND CHINA! (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24861381)

Trotskyists stand for the unconditional military defense of the Chinese deformed workers state against imperialist counterrevolution! For workers political revolution and soviet democracy in China, for new October socialist revolutions worldwide! Defeat the imperialist war drive against China!

Re:DEFEND CHINA! (0, Redundant)

Hal_Porter (817932) | more than 5 years ago | (#24861445)

Trotskyists stand for the unconditional military defense of the Chinese deformed workers state against imperialist counterrevolution! For workers political revolution and soviet democracy in China, for new October socialist revolutions worldwide! Defeat the imperialist war drive against China!

Thank you for giving us the benefit of your views.

Answer: No (1)

jgarra23 (1109651) | more than 5 years ago | (#24861387)

Just like Chinese cars pose no threat to Honda or Toyota or GM (they have bigger fish to fry) or BMW.

China's "sayonara" MS, Intel (2, Insightful)

harvey the nerd (582806) | more than 5 years ago | (#24861419)

Except for servers, hard core gamers and maybe very HDTV, once you get off MS' latest core consuming software, who cares about the last 20% of performance? At 2.5 watts per processor core, of which 1-2 cores should run most individual PCs just fine (f--- Vista), who cares an extra $200-$400 about "Intel inside"? Chinese business, students and academia should do just fine.

Re:China's "sayonara" MS, Intel (1)

Ilgaz (86384) | more than 5 years ago | (#24861675)

If almost 90% of Intel Mac gaming community dynamically (online) divides their boot partition to run Windows games at highest possible compatibility and speed, games and performance really matters.

Also remember they are running/booting to some bad copy of MacOS which has several issues on Apple Mac hardware.

Don't forget HDTV, even 1080p on PCs are really taking off and it is not trivial task to decode h264/AVC, years ago, it wasn't big deal but today people expect their computer to realtime compress and enhance their video while capturing it. (Video Cam).

Re:China's "sayonara" MS, Intel (1)

Etrias (1121031) | more than 5 years ago | (#24861735)

I would say this is a less threat to Intel/AMD, but Microsoft should be very, very worried. The last thing that MS would like to see is a vastly expanding economic power with all of the children raised on PCs built to run Linux.

Here's where I base this from TFA:

Loongson chips already power some personal computers and servers on the Chinese market, which come with the Linux operating system and other open-source software. "They use a lot of open-source software because it's free," says Halfhill. "The Chinese government wants to get as many PCs into schools and as many workplaces as they can."

Re:China's "sayonara" MS, Intel (4, Informative)

Culture20 (968837) | more than 5 years ago | (#24861783)

Asian language pedantry: Sayonara is Japanese.  You're looking for Zai Jian. 再 見

Re:China's "sayonara" MS, Intel (1)

the_humeister (922869) | more than 5 years ago | (#24861825)

Except they'll be saying "zai-jian" since presumably the Chinese would be statistically more likely to speak Mandarin rather than Japanese...

Stats (1)

Icegryphon (715550) | more than 5 years ago | (#24861425)

It is all about the Stats. How many Flops using Lapack?

Too good to be true? (1)

halsver (885120) | more than 5 years ago | (#24861427)

FTFA
"This latest chip will also be fundamentally different from those made before. Neither Godson-1 nor -2 is compatible with Intel's so-called x86 architecture, meaning that most commercial software will not run on them. But engineers have added 200 additional instructions to Godson-3 to simulate an x86 chip, which allows Godson-3 to run more software, including the Windows operating system. And because the chip architecture is only simulated, there is no need to obtain a license from Intel."

I was wondering how they managed to build something that would not infringe on anyone's patents. I however would guess that Intel and AMD Engineers are looking closely at this chip, any single patent violation and I see both companies jumping on this company and preventing its sale in as many countries as possible.

The emulation would seem to keep it out of the main competition between AMD and Intel, however it seems the next move is to a Chinese OS... Time to brush up on my Mandarin!

Re:Too good to be true? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24861611)

We all know that chinese people care a lot about US patent and copyright system.

Dear China: +1, Interesting (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24861441)

"to bring personal computing to majority of Chinese people"

Please send Godson-3 to U.S.S.A. so majority of U.S.S.A
proletariat can have personal computing".

Thank you.

P.S.: Don't sell U.S. Treasury bonds yet. Wait until John
McSame is elected, then SELL.

Thanks a lot.

Cordially,
Philboyd Studge

Question (1)

MyLongNickName (822545) | more than 5 years ago | (#24861455)

I am not sure my facts are straight, and would like someone to clarify.

The U.S. is part of several trade organizations. These organizations generally frown on the government helping a business out like this, right? We have wide open trade with China. The Chinese government tilts the field in their business' favor by manipulating the currency, and directly funding projects like this.

Why the hell do we put up with this?

Re:Question (1)

morgan_greywolf (835522) | more than 5 years ago | (#24861685)

Why the hell do we put up with this?

All you need to ask is: who is getting wealthy from this situation? Think about it for a minute.

And now you know the answer to your question.

Re:Question (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24861813)

Because we are stupid from the top down!.

The proof is in your question.

A threat? Doubt it. (2, Interesting)

merreborn (853723) | more than 5 years ago | (#24861477)

Their current chip [wikipedia.org] is basically a pentium 3, without the x86 instruction set. It comes in 500 mhz to 1.2 ghz flavors.

They're even less of a threat than Via and Cyrix were.

A threat? Not anytime soon. (2, Insightful)

sjbe (173966) | more than 5 years ago | (#24861511)

Will it pose a threat to Intel? In the short run absolutely not. It will require a truly massive investment, Intel isn't standing still, and the biggest problem is getting enough engineering talent. Furthermore just producing the chip isn't enough, there have to be boards to plug it into, software written to support the chip/boards, etc. True China is producing a lot of engineers but that by itself is entirely insufficient.

Long term - who knows? Talent can be developed/bought/hired, secrets learned/stolen, R&D can leapfrog, etc. It will be very difficult to displace Intel but it certainly isn't impossible. Andy Grove [wikipedia.org] would probably be the first to admit that.

Made in China... finally officially (1)

ilovesymbian (1341639) | more than 5 years ago | (#24861517)

Wasn't everything or almost everything made in China? Open up any computer and you'll see "Made in China" or Taiwan or Hong Kong.

Well at least now, you have official "Made in China" CPU manufacturers.

But all said and done, official Chinese counterparts are no match to the American or Japanese versions. Look at the Chinese "iphone" or cars, no way I'm getting one of those.

Re:Made in China... finally officially (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24861833)

Designed, manufactured, shipped, and profited by China.

I have to go or I'll late for my Wal*mart shift. I need the money so I can buy food.

Sincerely,

An out of work US chip designer.

Re:Made in China... finally officially (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24861883)

Actually most CPUs and RAM are made in Malaysia, Thailand, and the Philipines.

For those that are going to say "x86 compatible" (0)

ratboy666 (104074) | more than 5 years ago | (#24861529)

It isn't. It is a MIPS derivative design, running Linux (normally). Just like Godson and Godson-2. Not Windows. There may be "ip infringement", but I think the designers are being careful.

Re:For those that are going to say "x86 compatible (2, Insightful)

the_humeister (922869) | more than 5 years ago | (#24861793)

Please read the article, page 2:

But engineers have added 200 additional instructions to Godson-3 to simulate an x86 chip, which allows Godson-3 to run more software, including the Windows operating system. And because the chip architecture is only simulated, there is no need to obtain a license from Intel.

Threat to Intel? What about freedom? (0, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24861573)

One has to wonder... will a chip brought to you by the makers of the Great Firewall be benign, or a serious threat to human freedom [metagovernment.org] .

Re:Threat to Intel? What about freedom? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24861761)

In Communist China, computer operates you.

The death of x86 (1)

David Gerard (12369) | more than 5 years ago | (#24861577)

Godson is a MIPS-compatible. We've already seen one MIPS-based Linux netbook. And guess what, Linux is identical on MIPS and x86!

Any MIPS or ARM at a given price point will run cooler and faster than x86. All x86 processors are RISC with an instruction converter front end, but that's still enough of a liability to make the first sentence true.

End game: Netbooks with ARM or MIPS spread upward to desktops and servers with ARM or MIPS. x86 finally fades away of software that doesn't care. All hail.

In China: probable (1)

Das_Forscher (1308385) | more than 5 years ago | (#24861597)

If its government funded they will probably push it using the controlled media. If they can get the Chinese to believe they freed the Tibetians from a unjust system they shouldn't have a problem with this.

I'm not worried. (2, Informative)

jd (1658) | more than 5 years ago | (#24861609)

I don't care who makes the processor - let's face it, most chips in US computers are made in Asian countries anyway - all I need is for it to work well. I doubt the Chinese are doing anything radical (that's not generally their style), which is a pity because current chip designs are going down a dead-end and it'll take a radical shift to solve many of the issues to do with parallelism, increasing abstraction in programming languages, and increasing demand for highly robust software. Serious efforts into such radicalizing of technology can be seen with the IBM Cell design (which isn't going anywhere, at the moment) and could be seen in the Transmeta Crusoe and the Inmos Transputer, and the Manchester AMULET was ingenious enough, but pretty much everything else in the CPU world is based on stale ideas and stagnant approaches. Good for backwards compatibility at the binary level, lousy for long-term potential.

About time (1)

Stephen Ma (163056) | more than 5 years ago | (#24861637)

The Loongson-3 uses the MIPS instruction set. It's about time the world started breaking free from the awful x86 architecture. I know there is some x86 emulation in the -3, but I'm really hoping that the primary architecture for now and the future will be MIPS.

And 10 watts is damned good for a 4-core chip, especially for a 65 nm process.

To INTEL... (1)

BitterOldGUy (1330491) | more than 5 years ago | (#24861639)

Remember all those R&D jobs you sent overseas because you couldn't find any "qualified" candidates here in the US?

Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahah! Suck it!

Just wait for some errors... (5, Funny)

Tangamandapiano (1087091) | more than 5 years ago | (#24861689)

hello.c:
--
#include <stdio.h>

int main(void)
{
    char* msg = "Tibet Free!";
    printf(msg);
}
--
$ gcc hello.c
$ ./hello
Segmentation fault.
$

Chinese OS Censorship? (3, Interesting)

Aereus (1042228) | more than 5 years ago | (#24861733)

It seems the next logical step for them will be to develop a Chinese-grown OS and "strongly frown upon" use of Windows at home. (While at the same time having their OS support Windows apps) That way they can have the OS report any "dangerous behavior" by default, and roll out any patches or refresh a new "blocking list" daily....

drop dependency on what? (1)

SMOKEING (1176111) | more than 5 years ago | (#24861777)

Neither Godson-1 nor -2 is compatible with Intel's so-called x86 architecture, meaning that most commercial software will not run on them. But engineers have added 200 additional instructions to Godson-3 to simulate an x86 chip, which allows Godson-3 to run more software, including the Windows operating system

They are a bunch of dolts if they go to such great length to become independent from Intel, only to invite dependency on MicroSoft.

If so, it is understandable (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24861801)

All the American and EU companies that have brought their factories there have allowed their patents and trade secrets to be stolen. If China does this, well, it is understandable. They have been stealing for decades.

speed and software (1)

TheSHAD0W (258774) | more than 5 years ago | (#24861807)

For this chip to enter the US market, it needs two things:

(1) Speed. Depending on how fast it is, considering how much US CPUs have ramped up, we may wind up emulating their CPU in software for the few things we'd need to run.

(2) Software. Without a killer app that people in the US *have* to have, there's no reason for machines based on that CPU to come here. I can see it, though; some game that gets popular in China and becomes a grass-roots hit here.

We'll see how much infrastructure the chip requires. US introduction may range from something like the Mac Mini to a PCI-Express card to run stuff on our current consoles. (Can you say, HUGE security risk? ;-)

Indications of Any Trouble;Negative (1)

flyneye (84093) | more than 5 years ago | (#24861827)

"Will this pose any threat to Intel?"

          If the quality of the Chinese crap we buy at Wal~Mart is any indication,then Intel shouldn't lose any sleep.Chinese industry is based on the largest profit margin it can muster while beating competitors.Use LOWEST cost to manufacture so you can beat out the others and still make a profit.
Wouldn't surprise me to find the processors made of paper,plastic and recycled twist ties.

History: Hanxin DSPs Chip Fraud Case? (1)

mirth (38671) | more than 5 years ago | (#24861829)

This story reminded me of an unrelated chip fraud case a FreeScale DSP chip was simply sanded down to remove the logos and rebadged as a Chinese invention.

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/05/15/technology/15fraud.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hanxin
http://www.itworld.com/060515chipfraud

Isn't it ironic?? (1)

vistahator (1330955) | more than 5 years ago | (#24861959)

That as the chinos strive to imitate us more and more, it's the US who is becoming more like them.

Does the WTO even matter anymore (1)

antifoidulus (807088) | more than 5 years ago | (#24861983)

Seriously, every single government in the world is pretty much making its own company and then trying to export the product abroad(where it devours private industry because private industry doesn't have the infinite pockets of governments). The WTO(of which China is a member), was supposed to stop such shenanigans, but it seems pretty much unable to do anything anymore. China has its various industries, the EU has Airbus, the US Boeing as well as others, the Japanese government has always had a heavy hand in industry, the list goes on. Why even bother to have a WTO anymore?
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?
or Connect with...

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>