AMD To Stop Production Of 486, 586 & K6 Chips

Mr X writes "Here is a clip from an email I got from Versalogic (my company's supplier of embedded PC/104 Motherboards): Dear VersaLogic Customer: This letter is being sent to alert you to an important change in the long-term availability of several VersaLogic products. Please read it carefully. AMD, the supplier of CPU chips that are used on many of our products, has notified us that they plan to re-tool the production line that currently produces 486, 586 and K6 CPU chips. AMD needs to use their Fab 25 facility to produce a different line of products and will stop production on these CPU chips on June 28, 2002 ...... As recently as October 2000 they announced new processors (the K6-2E+ and K6-IIIE+) and assured us of their continuing long-term support for the embedded market." I've gotten a couple of these e-mails - full text of the e-mail is pasted below. At first glance, it seemed unsurprising with the faster chips, but this will have an impact on the embedded market.

Dear VersaLogic Customer:

This letter is being sent to alert you to an important change in the long-term availability of several VersaLogic products. Please read it carefully.

AMD, the supplier of CPU chips that are used on many of our products, has notified us that they plan to re-tool the production line that currently produces 486, 586 and K6 CPU chips. AMD needs to use their Fab 25 facility to produce a different line of products and will stop production on these CPU chips on June 28, 2002. The CPU chips produced by this facility are used in our VSBC-2, VSBC-6, VSBC-7, Panther, VL-686-2, and VL-586-1 products.

This decision by AMD, with whom we have worked closely for many years, is a major blow to the embedded computer market. It is very surprising that their long-standing dedication to the embedded market has taken such an abrupt turn. As recently as October 2000 they announced new processors (the K6-2E+ and K6-IIIE+) and assured us of their continuing long-term support for the embedded market.

Please note that this decision by AMD does not mean that they will immediately halt production or that these CPU chips will be in short supply. Normal production of these chips is scheduled to continue through June 2002. Last-time-buy orders can be placed in June for delivery of the chips in late 2002 and early 2003.

VersaLogic management has been hearing rumors of this possible change (various versions of it) over the last few months and has been working closely with AMD to avoid this radical change in their direction. We prepared for the possibility that their decision would ultimately be to issue an end-of-life notice. Now that the decision has been made, our focus will be on assisting our customers with planning and migration issues over the next 12-24 months.

Although this change is not immediate, each customer must look at the long term impact that this announcement will have on their product usage. In some cases this will mean placing an end-of-life purchase order with VersaLogic to continue delivery of the current product even after the AMD chips have been discontinued. For others it may involve qualifying new products, or using Intel Tillamook versions of our current products, for the current application. Tillamook versions of most impacted products will be available before year end. For further information please see the roadmap and migration information on our web site at http://www.versalogic.com/support/rdmp/rdmp.asp or contact us directly at [e-mail].

Again, this change is not immediate, but planning steps should be taken now to assure a smooth transition in the future. We stand ready to support you as needed to make this transition as easy and painless as possible. "

Re:486 still in production?

[CptLogic]

I would imagine this is the reason AMD have packed it in. The revenue stream from low end embedded x86 processors is likely to be significantly lower than if they used the facility to churn out top end chips while they have the ascendency in market share. Make hay while the sun shines, and all that. looking at www.amd.com reveals: http://www.amd.com/news/corppr/21111.html "When it announced first quarter results on April 18, AMD projected that second quarter sales could decline by as much as 10 percent. " OK, now where's the rot, and where's it not? "Today the company said that, despite continuing weak PC market conditions and very aggressive pricing by Intel Corporation, the company achieved record unit sales of AMD Athlon(TM) processors, record unit sales of AMD Duron(TM) processors, and record aggregate PC processor unit sales, demonstrating the breadth, strength and competitiveness of its PC processor product line." OK, It's not in the high end PC processor market, that's looking good... Let's skip a week ahead, in the actual Q2 reports: "Weakness in the communications and networking sectors continues to impact the company's foundry services and other IC products, and the company projects that these revenues will continue to decline in the third quarter." So it looks like they've decided to cut their losses here and apply the resources to making what's selling best, and grabbing the headlines. Chris.

Re:486 still in production?

[Bobo the Space Chimp]

It's exactly for that reason: the price.

If you put in more horsepower than you need, you're wasting millions of dollars across hundreds of thousands of units. Across millions of units, its worth it to have engineers shave out a few pennies here and there.

Re:486 still in production?

[Jaysyn]

And (in applications where it matters) they produce much less heat.

Jaysyn

Re:I think . . .

[Transwarp Conduit]

Why not use a Z80 derivative? Good question - primarily, it's because there are tradeoffs to consider. An embedded 8-bit MCU (such as a PIC or a Z80 system) is great for low-level, real-time hardware control, especially when your user I/O doesn't need to be more complicated than a ten-key pad and a 2-line LCD display. However, in applications (such as scientific equipment, for instance) where your user needs to be able to navigate a full 640x480 graphics display, enter complex alphanumeric data, then export megabytes of raw data to a desktop PC for in-depth analysis, a 386/486-based PC running DOS or Linux offers you a much easier development environment.

Re:I think . . .

[demigod2k]

. . . that is is important for companies to phase out their old product lines in favor of newer, more usable technologies. It is hard for the consumers, as they are the party who must then buy the new things, but in the long run it is quite good for the industry.

That might be an ok view in the home-PC market, but the point was that this move affects the embedded market. The goal of that market is smaller, cheaper, lower power. One motivation to use the 486 might be extremely low engineering costs. Vendors like AmPro (among others) will sell a single-board PC; that might be a good solution if lots of existing code and hardware can be used to save engineering time. Although Megatouch XL uses fancier hardware today, a few years ago many of the bartop touch-screen poker games were using those older 486 processors.

I agree, the AMD 486 disappearing probably really doesn't hurt anything except the x86 embedded market which is fairly small anyway. 68k, MPC8xx, or especially 8051 disappearing would be more devastating (and foolish since they generate tons of sales). However, since theres no reason to change, except the parts going out of production, change really isn't "for the best"

Embedded applications need single-purpose, low-cost, low-power, fast time-to-market, small-footprint solutions. If the 486 is able to run that dishwasher or microwave effectively, your "out with the old in with the new" attitude will only pass on added cost to the consumer.

Re:486 still in production?

[Nelson]

I think there are still companies making and selling tons of 386 based processors. I know Intel was making 386ex processors as recently as 18 months ago, they may still be doing it.

If you're doing something like controlling a VCR, a sprinkler system, TV channel changer, a thermostat, a stereo, or numerous other tasks a processor like that might be a bit too powerful. Zilog and others are still making bank off of 8bit processors.

I'm not sure how much this will matter, there are more than a few companies making cheap x86 clones and hopefully what will happen is pentium class chips will fill in the low end and become cheaper but AMD is making a statement about where they see their growth and future profit coming from. AMD also made a solid performing clone, you could count in Intel matching performance from their parts which was nice for some "embedded tasks" but it is definitely a split, on one hand they are making the fastest desktop CPU in the world and on the other they're trying to sell CPUs for pennies.

With all the embedded linux stuff going on and all the talk I've been expecting more internet appliances, more CPUs in more things, more smart toys and devices. Now that the economy is slipping a little that stuff may have to wait and this could be AMDs way of weathering the storm if they think people won't have as much disposable income for high priced electronic toys.

I think . . .

[Wire Tap]

. . . that is is important for companies to phase out their old product lines in favor of newer, more usable technologies. It is hard for the consumers, as they are the party who must then buy the new things, but in the long run it is quite good for the industry. Without the phase out of, let's say ISA (tantamount to the 486 with regard to speed, etc) we would not have the faster, better, and cheaper products we have today. The old standards get in the way of the new, and for that reason alone should they be phased out. Of course, change is difficult, but often for the best.

Re:This is a lot more important than it seems.

[mad_clown]

Err, well it seems to me, by reading alot of these posts, that everyone thinks that AMD is "ditching the embedded market" altogether and is "going to let Intel have the embedded systems market, so they can focus on the main consumer market".

I don't think that's the case at all... The K6IIE+ and the K6IIIE+ are going to be AMD's new embedded solutions (denoted by the "E"), and it says so in the article. As embedded devices become more and more complex, I think there'll be a greater demand for more powerful processors to run them. I think AMD is just thinking ahead, and the fact that they're gonna keep on making older processors until June 2002 says that they're not just jumping ship. I don't think AMD has ANY intention of giving away ANY market to Intel... they are competitors, after all. Not to mention that in the long run, it's probably easier and cheaper for them to fab K6-2/3 processors than the old stuff.

55 postings and the points still missing.

[Multics]

typical of /. ...

What this says is AMD's old product lines are not making enough money compared to reutilizing their us$1,000,000,000++ fabrication facility for newer devices. They apparently have decided that a non-slashdot concept called Return on Investment is maximized if they phase out the old lines.

There are few companies in the world that can caugh up the $1,200,000,000 to $1,400,000,000 to build a new fab manufacturing building and AMD obviously wants to do this as infrequently as possible.

Too bad! The AMD K6 line was practically what braught AMD back from the edge of extinction and allowed them to produce the very competitive follow-ons.

-- Multics

Re:I think . . .

[sopuli]

These old processors are used in applications that you do not want to fail (medical, industrial, etc.). The embedded applications in which they are used often have a long history of incremental (hardware) improvements, having to reengineer such applications is a big step backwards. In addition the newer processors have more pins, which makes the package and PCB more complex and thus more expensive, bigger and less reliable. And if the power consumption goes up you may have to redesign the whole cooling system too.

New technology is great because it enables you to do things that were not feasible before, but using a K6 where a 486 will do is just a waste of resources.

Z80 & Z80A still in production

[ackthpt]

I still see Z80 and Z80A CPU's in embedded circuits .. and people are carping on about how magnificent it is that the PC turned only 20...

Re:486 still in production?

[ozbird]

Probably because they're fast enough to do the task required for many embedded applications, and they require significantly less power than a Pentium class chip.

Absolutely. I own a Garmin II+ GPS receiver, which is powered by an Intel 386EX processor - an unglamourous CPU, but one that does the job very nicely. Similarly my Palm III is powered by 16MHz Dragonball processor (68000 derivative) - nothing special these days, but serious grunt 10-15 years ago.

I may be showing my age here, but I first started computing at around 10 years of age on Z80 boxes (TRS-80/System-80: where 48k RAM and lowercase displays were a luxury!) I am still amazed at how good some of the software was on such limited hardware. Conversely, I see how crap some of the current software is and think "WTF"?!)

Competitions like the Perl obfuscated code contest are cool, but I'd like to see some contents based upon the best program than can be squeezed into an "antique" box like the TRS-80 Model I - that would really separate the hackers from the script kiddies...