Intel patents associated with key products?

I am conducting research for an article and am trying to identify
patents associated with key Intel products:

- iAPX-432 family of chips and system 86/330 integrated microcomputer
system (both introduced way back in 1981)

- the 216A (a 64k RAM)

- 386, 486, and Pentium Pro processors

- 440BX chipset.

Any ideas?

On Mon, 23 Jun 2003 19:17:49 -0400, ian wrote:

> I am conducting research for an article and am trying to identify
> patents associated with key Intel products:
>
> - iAPX-432 family of chips and system 86/330 integrated microcomputer
> system (both introduced way back in 1981)
>
> - the 216A (a 64k RAM)
>
> - 386, 486, and Pentium Pro processors
>
> - 440BX chipset.
>
> Any ideas?


An interesting event is when the courts nullified one of intel's
microprocessor patents (IIRC, the 2-level page table arrangement
of the 80386) which allowed the now-defunct x86 clone companies
to compete. AFAIK (and I may be !!WRONG!!), the patent was
perfectly valid but the courts believed intel was abusing
the patent to build a monopoly and so decided to nullify it.

"Barnaby Jones" <> wrote in message
newsyMJa.62039$ thlink.net...
> On Mon, 23 Jun 2003 19:17:49 -0400, ian wrote:
>
> > I am conducting research for an article and am trying to identify
> > patents associated with key Intel products:
> >
> > - iAPX-432 family of chips and system 86/330 integrated microcomputer
> > system (both introduced way back in 1981)
> >
> > - the 216A (a 64k RAM)
> >
> > - 386, 486, and Pentium Pro processors
> >
> > - 440BX chipset.
> >
> > Any ideas?
>
>
> An interesting event is when the courts nullified one of intel's
> microprocessor patents (IIRC, the 2-level page table arrangement
> of the 80386) which allowed the now-defunct x86 clone companies
> to compete. AFAIK (and I may be !!WRONG!!), the patent was
> perfectly valid but the courts believed intel was abusing
> the patent to build a monopoly and so decided to nullify it.

As far as I know, two level page tables are the most common kind, unless I
misunderstand the definition of two level page table. There seem to be
plenty of patents issued for what should otherwise be prior art or obvious
designs.

-- glen