Skip to main content

FTC Sues Intel for Antitrust Violations

Intel Core i5 processor package
Image used with permission by copyright holder

Chipmakers AMD and Intel may come to a private agreement last month to end litigation between them, but that doesn’t mean Intel is off the hook with the Feds: today the United States Federal Trade Commission announced it is suing Intel for abusing its position in the marketplace engage in anticompetitive behavior and stifle competition.

“Intel has engaged in a deliberate campaign to hamstring competitive threats to its monopoly,” said FTC Competition Bureau Director Richard A. Feinstein, in a statement. “It’s been running roughshod over the principles of fair play and the laws protecting competition on the merits. The Commission’s action today seeks to remedy the damage that Intel has done to competition, innovation, and, ultimately, the American consumer.”

The FTC alleges that Intel used a carrot-and-stick approach with computer makers to ensure its chips were in the vast majority of computers they made, and leveraged its position in the market to force computer maker to agree to restrictive and exclusive deals that ensured rival chips never gained a significant foothold in the CPU market. According to the FTC, one result is that consumers were denied the benefits of true marketplace competition, including lower prices and CPUs that were potentially superior to Intel’s offerings.

Get your weekly teardown of the tech behind PC gaming
Check your inbox!

In addition to alleging Intel forced computer makers to exclusively or predominantly use Intel CPUs, the FTC also alleges Intel redesigned compilers to inhibit software performance on competitors’ chips, then told its customers the performance differences were due to the superiority of its chip designs. The FTC is also alleging that Intel is abusing its position in the CPU marketplace to stifle competition in the graphics market: Intel and graphics developer Nvidia are currently engaged in a bitter war of words—and intellectual property lawsuits—regarding licenses necessary for Nvidia to developer third-party graphics systems for the latest generation of Intel processors. The FTC warns that there is a “dangerous probability” Intel’s methods will enable it to extend its CPU monopoly into the graphics market.

The FTC seeks to have Intel barred from using threats, bundled prices, and exclusive deals to hamper competition or manipulate CPU and CPU prices. The agency may also seek an order barring Intel from “unreasonably excluding or inhibiting” sales of competitors’ CPU and GPU products, or distributing software or other products that impair (or appear to impair) the performance of competitors’ chips.

Many of the FTC’s allegations against Intel are eerily similar to complaints pursued for years by rival chipmaker AMD, which sued Intel for anticompetitive practices in the U.S., the European Union, Japan, and South Korea—until Intel agreed to pay AMD $1.25 billion to drop all the cases. However, the FTC’s action is considerably broader as well, extending both into compilers and the GPU market.

For its part, Intel maintains that it has not engaged in any anticompetitive behavior, and characterizes the FTC’s case as “misguided.”

“Intel has competed fairly and lawfully,” the company wrote in a statement. “Its actions have benefitted consumers. The highly competitive microprocessor industry, of which Intel is a key part, has kept innovation robust and prices declining at a faster rate than any other industry.”

Intel also accuses the FTC of trying to create new rules and regulations with the case, rather than enforcing existing law. The company maintains the FTC’s new rules would ultimately harm consumers through higher prices and reduced microprocessor innovation.

Editors' Recommendations

Geoff Duncan
Former Digital Trends Contributor
Geoff Duncan writes, programs, edits, plays music, and delights in making software misbehave. He's probably the only member…
AMD finally has a strategy to beat Nvidia’s DLSS
Frank Azor presenting at AMD's RDNA 3 launch event.

AMD's FidelityFX Super Resolution 3 (FSR 3) has had an uphill climb so far, but things might get better in 2024. According to a statement from the company's chief technology officer, this year will be a big one for AMD in terms of AI -- and this doesn't just mean large-scale AI, but also upscaling. Are we going to see some major changes in AMD's next-gen RDNA 4 graphics cards?

The tantalizing bit of information comes from Mark Papermaster, AMD CTO, who was a guest on the No Priors Podcast. At the very end of the interview, Papermaster gave a few hints as to what's on AMD's agenda for 2024. It's all about AI, and no surprise -- Nvidia has adopted the same approach.

Read more
Nvidia is reportedly ‘worried that it’s missing the boat’
Steam Deck over a pink background.

Nvidia and AMD trade blows when it comes to making some of the best graphics cards, but there's one area where AMD obliterates Nvidia: gaming handhelds. The booming market of portable gaming PCs largely belongs to AMD right now. However, that might soon change, as it seems that Nvidia is gearing up to ensure that its chips power next-gen handhelds -- but there are a few obstacles to consider before such a device can ever be made.

AMD really went all-in on gaming handhelds at just the right time. From the Steam Deck to the Asus ROG Ally, the portable PCs that bridge the gap between a computer and a console are all the rage right now, and they're almost exclusively powered by AMD APUs. There are a couple of Intel Core Ultra-based handhelds on the way, such as the MSI Claw, but so far, AMD dominates. Nvidia is completely absent, and it's safe to say it's missing out on a huge opportunity.

Read more
Microsoft might end one of the most annoying GPU wars
Three RTX 4080 cards sitting on a pink background.

The never-ending battle between AMD, Nvidia, and Intel doesn't just involve their graphics cards -- it also stretches to their respective upscaling solutions. It's not all about performance, either, but also the number of games that support them. Microsoft aims to streamline and unify these upscalers, making it easier for game devs to add support for every GPU vendor.

The main issue with having three different upscaling solutions lies not just in how well they all perform in relation to each other (although that's pretty interesting, too), but in how many games can support them. After all, what's the point in DLSS, FSR, and XeSS, if they're not available in too many games? This is where Microsoft's new API, dubbed DirectSR, might come in handy.

Read more