ATI+AMD confirmed

[Ulfhednar]

Originally posted by: videopho
Well it's time to jettison AMD all together and back I come Intel...

Nvidia fanboyism at its worst.

 

[Wreckage]

Originally posted by: Cooler
If this is a merger then what will be the new name? ATMD?

DAMIT

 

[Fox5]

Originally posted by: Gstanfor
Yuck! what a sad day this is for long-term AMD supporters (I've never owned or sold an Intel cpu and never will), to be saddled with the likes of ATi...

Nice way to reward nvidia too after lending AMD platforms sorely needed credibililty with the nForce chipset ( a huge reason why AMD struggled prior to AthlonXP was to dire chipset situation AMD owners were forced into).

Don't forget nvidia just introduced their business platform, which AMD was in desperate need of as well.

I wonder why AMD chose ATi over NV. NV did really help AMD with nforce chipsets and also with features like SLi. Although AMD would get lots of profit from handheld and such, i dont really see why they selected ATi. Feature wise on chipsets NV dominates. ATi realies alot on 3rd party chips like the SB.

ATI is most likely much cheaper.

 

[Hard Ball]

Originally posted by: apoppin

Originally posted by: Sc4freak
*sigh*. I've just learnt to ignore him.

ignore who?
:Q



great news for ATI + AMD . . . not so good news for nVidia

I wouldn't be surprised if AMD has already come to some type of agreement with NV before this deal came to fruition; either to guarantee a large portion of their chipset market to NV (by allowing NV access to the same set of tech and new uarchitectural information as their own chipset business), or simply yield a certain profitable segment of their chipset/graphics market to NV (such as the business platform). AMD is probably cutting NV a pretty sweet deal as we speak.

Plus Hector Ruiz and Jen-Hsun Huang are reportedly good friends in real life.

Edit: typo

 

[apoppin]

Originally posted by: Hard Ball

Originally posted by: apoppin

Originally posted by: Sc4freak
*sigh*. I've just learnt to ignore him.

ignore who?
:Q



great news for ATI + AMD . . . not so good news for nVidia

I wouldn't be surprised if AMD has already come to some type of agreement with NV before this deal came to fruition; either to guarantee a large portion of their chipset market to NV (by allowing NV access to the same set of tech and new uarchitectural information as their own chipset business), or simply yield a certain profitable segment of their chipset/graphics market to NV (such as the business platform). AMD is probably cutting NV a pretty sweet deal as we speak.

Plus Hector Ruiz and Jen-Hsun Huang are reportedly good friends in real life.

Edit: typo

i doubt it

Anand Lal Shimpi's Weblog - What if AMD/ATI Merged?

The other important thing to consider is that if AMD and ATI merged, a very important market for NVIDIA chipsets would cease to exist forcing NVIDIA to turn to Intel for scraps off the table, which the link above explains would not be a healthy lifestyle choice for NVIDIA.

 

[Future Guy]

Just because AMD is acquiring (buying/merging/whatever) ATI doesn't mean that AMD will give nVidia the boot and stop support. It would be BAD BUSINESS to do so. They would lose out on a lot of money and lose market share by doing so.

 

[apoppin]

Originally posted by: Future Guy
Just because AMD is acquiring (buying/merging/whatever) ATI doesn't mean that AMD will give nVidia the boot and stop support. It would be BAD BUSINESS to do so. They would lose out on a lot of money and lose market share by doing so.

oinly in the short run . . . cutting nVidia completely OUT of the chipset business would be an excellent business move for ATi-AMD.

let me quote Anand . . . again:

The other important thing to consider is that if AMD and ATI merged, a very important market for NVIDIA chipsets would cease to exist forcing NVIDIA to turn to Intel for scraps off the table, which the link above explains would not be a healthy lifestyle choice for NVIDIA.

Strategically it makes sense, if GPUs are becoming more CPU-like with each generation then there may come a time where either a CPU company drives a GPU company out of business, or vice versa. By combining talents early, you create a company that would be very well prepared for the convergence of the CPU/GPU.

Don't look at the idea of a merger as AMD having a closer chipset partner, but imagine what else could come from it.

Imagine a Socket-AM2 GPU, with incredibly low latency access to a Socket-AM2 CPU. A huge strength of just about any gaming console (see: PS3) is the extremely high bandwidth, low latency interconnect that exists between the CPU and GPU.

Imagine a stripped down graphics core stuck on a Athlon 64 processor die, all of the sudden integrated graphics wouldn't be so terrible. Taking this "what-if" even further, it may just make Intel produce better integrated graphics solutions. And that would make my good friend Mark Rein quite happy

But more importantly, imagine a GPU company that was no longer fabless. If ATI were able to gain a manufacturing advantage over NVIDIA you'd be able to see more transistors, clocked higher and running cooler in ATI GPUs than NVIDIA at any given product cycle.

edit
imagine the R680 running cool on .65nm while nVidia struggles to shrink their big die.
:Q

 

[Gstanfor]

Originally posted by: Fox5

Originally posted by: Gstanfor
Yuck! what a sad day this is for long-term AMD supporters (I've never owned or sold an Intel cpu and never will), to be saddled with the likes of ATi...

Nice way to reward nvidia too after lending AMD platforms sorely needed credibililty with the nForce chipset ( a huge reason why AMD struggled prior to AthlonXP was to dire chipset situation AMD owners were forced into).

Don't forget nvidia just introduced their business platform, which AMD was in desperate need of as well.

I wonder why AMD chose ATi over NV. NV did really help AMD with nforce chipsets and also with features like SLi. Although AMD would get lots of profit from handheld and such, i dont really see why they selected ATi. Feature wise on chipsets NV dominates. ATi realies alot on 3rd party chips like the SB.

ATI is most likely much cheaper.

Yes, their business platform is built around nForce motherboards IIRC...

 

[skooma]

Originally posted by: apoppin
But more importantly, imagine a GPU company that was no longer fabless. If ATI were able to gain a manufacturing advantage over NVIDIA you'd be able to see more transistors, clocked higher and running cooler in ATI GPUs than NVIDIA at any given product cycle.

edit
imagine the R680 running cool on .65nm while nVidia struggles to shrink their big die.
:Q


[/quote]
:music: Imagine all the people... :music:

Lennon's utopia didn't come true either :laugh:

 

[nitromullet]

Yeah, if they plan on this working out ATI/AMD better figure out how to make chipset that competes with nForce really soon. If it wasn't for nForce, I think I would have quit buying AMD after my experiences with KT400.

 

[Hard Ball]

Originally posted by: apoppin

Originally posted by: Future Guy
Just because AMD is acquiring (buying/merging/whatever) ATI doesn't mean that AMD will give nVidia the boot and stop support. It would be BAD BUSINESS to do so. They would lose out on a lot of money and lose market share by doing so.

oinly in the short run . . . cutting nVidia completely OUT of the chipset business would be an excellent business move for ATi-AMD.

let me quote Anand . . . again:

The other important thing to consider is that if AMD and ATI merged, a very important market for NVIDIA chipsets would cease to exist forcing NVIDIA to turn to Intel for scraps off the table, which the link above explains would not be a healthy lifestyle choice for NVIDIA.

Strategically it makes sense, if GPUs are becoming more CPU-like with each generation then there may come a time where either a CPU company drives a GPU company out of business, or vice versa. By combining talents early, you create a company that would be very well prepared for the convergence of the CPU/GPU.

Don't look at the idea of a merger as AMD having a closer chipset partner, but imagine what else could come from it.

Imagine a Socket-AM2 GPU, with incredibly low latency access to a Socket-AM2 CPU. A huge strength of just about any gaming console (see: PS3) is the extremely high bandwidth, low latency interconnect that exists between the CPU and GPU.

Imagine a stripped down graphics core stuck on a Athlon 64 processor die, all of the sudden integrated graphics wouldn't be so terrible. Taking this "what-if" even further, it may just make Intel produce better integrated graphics solutions. And that would make my good friend Mark Rein quite happy

But more importantly, imagine a GPU company that was no longer fabless. If ATI were able to gain a manufacturing advantage over NVIDIA you'd be able to see more transistors, clocked higher and running cooler in ATI GPUs than NVIDIA at any given product cycle.

edit
imagine the R680 running cool on .65nm while nVidia struggles to shrink their big die.
:Q

Couldn't disagree more.

If AMD-ATI merger does take place (looking more likely by the minute), whatever the combined company does, you can be certain that NV will get a nice, fat slice of the pie from the market of the new merged company.

--AMD is at least inclined to keep the business platform for the forseeable future, certainly in the next 3-4 years. (remember "stable platform image")

--It is very likely that the new combined company will be very strong in integrated graphics; but may well leave most of the discrete graphics and enthusiast chipset business to NV. It's looking like that AMD is planning on working graphics solution either an AM3 socket compatible graphics chip, or a graphics core in the MCM. But there are still much to be gained by using discrete, low latency graphics memory, instead of using address space from the NUMA pool; so I think that given the new company would focus on integrated solutions, and integrated solutions would get much more competitive with low-mid end graphics (something like X1300/X1400 market), high end graphics performance will still be discrete. And it's even not too far fetched that, AMD may just cut a deal with NV, and leave the highest end of the market entirely to NV, while taking most of the lower end graphics, as these move into integrated, NUMA enabled form.

--AMD's Torrenza intitiative is barely 6 weeks old in the making; and NV is a tier one partner for that. And we will likely see AMD sharing much of Torrenza, and certainly coherent HTT, with NV. So NV would be able to do very well should there be HTX forms of next gen graphics cards; and Torrenza certainly will not shut out partners from a CPU-socket solution for a GPU. And this would allow NV to benefit from any coprocessor business with AMD platforms in the long run.

--AMD will heavily rely on NV in the launch of 4x4, and in the future launch of 8x8; so NV is still an extremely important player in high end platforms, both business and enthusiast; for AMD. These are coincidentally some of the highest margin areas in the business.

I honestly don't see how NV could lose with this merger. They only have things to gain.

 

[apoppin]

Originally posted by: skooma

Originally posted by: apoppin
But more importantly, imagine a GPU company that was no longer fabless. If ATI were able to gain a manufacturing advantage over NVIDIA you'd be able to see more transistors, clocked higher and running cooler in ATI GPUs than NVIDIA at any given product cycle.

edit
imagine the R680 running cool on .65nm while nVidia struggles to shrink their big die.
:Q

:music: Imagine all the people... :music:

Lennon's utopia didn't come true either :laugh:[/quote]

it is nvidia's worst nightmare

. . . Lennon's utopia



EDIT: and to you guys that "couldn't disagree more" . . . take it up with Anand . .. it's his scenario.

 

[skooma]

Originally posted by: apoppin
EDIT: and to you guys that "couldn't disagree more" . . . take it up with Anand . .. it's his scenario.

But your wet dream

 

[apoppin]

Originally posted by: skooma

Originally posted by: apoppin
EDIT: and to you guys that "couldn't disagree more" . . . take it up with Anand . .. it's his scenario.

But your wet dream

you mean that 'little .65 nm' barb aimed at nVidia fans?

. . .

that was mine.

you'll see

and not 'my wet dream' . . . or i'd buy stock in both ATi/AMD if i really cared.

 

[Hard Ball]

Dont think of this merger as AMD taking an NV competitor under the wings.

But rather think of this as NV and its strong partner AMD, together eliminating the major competitor of NV on high end graphics and chipset business; while leaving AMD to pursue robust integrated technologies.

If you take look at the situation: AMD is NOT interested in discrete graphics solutions. So aside from the generation already in development; I think that you will see ATI solutions (R700 and beyond) to be geared towards CPU-socket compatible, Torrenza oriented (HTX, etc), and also of course, integrated solutions on the CPU die (where the K8L NB is).

In about a year or so, if this merger goes through, you may not even be able to buy a high end GPU from ATI, without an HTX slot. And socket solution for GPUs is not idea for the high end, especially you are talking about only the bandwidth of run of the mill DRAM. The amount of GDDR3/4 that you can pack on a CPU package simply won't be enough for high end gaming. And again, AMD is NOT interested in discrete graphics solutions; and the purpose for purchasing ATI would be to forge better integrated solutions and get much more robust support for Torrenza; and eventually integrate some geometry processing technologies into future generations of CPUs.

You will likely see more competition from the low to mid end for NV on AMD platforms, since that is obviously the area that AMD is focusing on. But NV will see LESS competition on the high end, the most profitable segments; especially the enthusiast market with 4x4 and 8x8 and such.

 

[apoppin]

the high end is NOT where the gfx companies make the lion share of their money. . . .

and the rest of your 'analyis' is just as flawed.

and i have only one thing to say as i sign off - "You'll see"

peace and aloha

 

[skooma]

Originally posted by: apoppin
you mean that 'little .65 nm' barb aimed at nVidia fans?

. . .

that was mine.

you'll see

And thats the worst thing about you. You always want to try to look for NV's downfall. Or "aim barbs" at them. Of course, you always say you're no fan boy :laugh:

Pathetic.

ati/amd is not a good thing for anyone but ati/amd, and I'm not sure its so good for them.

"you'll see"

:thumbsdown:

 

[5150Joker]

I'm against this merger. A CPU company taking over a GPU focused company can only mean bad things for the future of high end graphics chip releases from ATi. AMD would probably relegate ATi's top engineers to other platforms it considers important and leave ATi with a handful of engineers to produce mediocre midrange graphics cards. No thanks.

 

[imported_Crusader]

Originally posted by: apoppin
you mean that 'little .65 nm' barb aimed at nVidia fans?

. . .

that was mine.

you'll see

You arent aiming barbs.. you are merely delusional.

AMD is buying ATI.. this will benefit AMD's business more than ATIs. Thats the point to the purchase.

Do you work in the corporate world? I'm guessing you dont. I work for a large American firm that has been in business for 170 years. We've never been bought out, and we buy many others out.
In the vast majority of cases (including this one where AMD needs its own platform/integrated/technologies from ATI), a corporate buyout is to boost the BUYERS (AMD) core competencies. They are trying to get ready for Intel.. not preparing to go head on with Nvidia :disgust:
If the company being purchased has additional assets to expand AMDs, that'd be great (and undoutably be considered in the decision).. but the main decision is going to be based off of what ATI can do for AMD.

No executive sits around thinking "hmmm what business can we purchase that will boost them above their competitors.. oh yeah lets go help out ATI versus Nvidia... this will please fanboy #1 Amoppin!"
ATI MIGHT benefit on their high end, but I wouldnt assume thats the default scenario. :roll:

 

[Polish3d]

Originally posted by: gersson
NO!!!!!

Man just when I was hoping for a high end RD600 Core2Duo Mobo

I know same here. I literally have my C2D 6600 ordered and ram already arrived and just waiting to make a decision on a motherboard

 

[Polish3d]

Originally posted by: 5150Joker
I'm against this merger. A CPU company taking over a GPU focused company can only mean bad things for the future of high end graphics chip releases from ATi. AMD would probably relegate ATi's top engineers to other platforms it considers important and leave ATi with a handful of engineers to produce mediocre midrange graphics cards. No thanks.

Yeah, but if they don't keep advancing in the high end GPU market, they'll lose the ability to make console chips.


E5 years anyway

 

[xtreme26]

Originally posted by: Crusader
Nice. Now an American firm will own ATI. Thats great news for the USA, as profits will come back here.

:roll:

 

[thilanliyan]

Originally posted by: xtreme26

Originally posted by: Crusader
Nice. Now an American firm will own ATI. Thats great news for the USA, as profits will come back here.

:roll:

 

[sandorski]

Great potential for AMD, ATI's future is somewhat an unknown, but I doubt it'll get out of the standalone card market yet. Speaking of Video cards, perhaps the future of them is seriously in doubt? ATI may have seen the writing on the wall and got out early.

Nvidia must be seriously pondering their future right about now. I'm sure the video card market has at least 3 years left in it, but if the ATI/AMD merger begins producing Integrated Solutions that are equivalent to Nvidia's standalone cards, Nvidia will need to make a major shift. This would be even more important if Intel manages to produce a decent Intergated Video solution. I have the feeling though that Nvidia will soon be talking with Intel. Intel needs some Video Tech, Nvidia needs some future security.

If an ATI/AMD merger brings about a PC Platform that is superior overall with Intel's, not only will AMD secure Marketshare despite a weaker(as of now) CPU, but I think it will force intel to take over Nvidia just to compete. In 5-10 years we might all be using Intel or AMD Consoles!

 

[Hard Ball]

Originally posted by: sandorski
Great potential for AMD, ATI's future is somewhat an unknown, but I doubt it'll get out of the standalone card market yet. Speaking of Video cards, perhaps the future of them is seriously in doubt? ATI may have seen the writing on the wall and got out early.

Yes, we need to understand that the potential acquistion, first and foremost, serves to garner important technologies which are important for future CPU uarchitectures for AMD; in things such as high bandwidth memory controller, ASMP, highly parallel architectural design; and also critical areas of engineering expertise.

Secondarily, AMD would do this to enhance and accelerate the development of Torrenza and HTT infrastructure in the industry, as well as the development of co-processors. This will also include integrated graphics solutions which are possibly MCM or even on die. And this will result in a much higher level of platform integration and diversification, when it comes time for Direct Connect 2.0 in 07, then 3.0 at some point in 08-09.

Anything else, such as high end discrete graphics, console deals, or embedded components, are icing on the cake; but these certainly are not going to be the focus of the combined company in the future, if the merger comes to fruition.

Nvidia must be seriously pondering their future right about now. I'm sure the video card market has at least 3 years left in it, but if the ATI/AMD merger begins producing Integrated Solutions that are equivalent to Nvidia's standalone cards, Nvidia will need to make a major shift.

High end graphics solutions will be discrete for a while to come, in the form of PCIE, HTX, or an mobo socket compatible coprocessor. Integration into a CPU MCM or die is not likely going to produce state of the art graphics performance in the forseeable future. So essentially, 3 years down the road; this deal will leave NV as the sole producer of high end graphis (barring the entrance of another player, such as Intel, which has been rumoured).

This would be even more important if Intel manages to produce a decent Intergated Video solution. I have the feeling though that Nvidia will soon be talking with Intel. Intel needs some Video Tech, Nvidia needs some future security.

Intel doesn't really need NV, since it already has a robust integrated graphics program. And the only reason that they havn't gone discrete is that they havn't had the need to commit the resources. If CPUs were to take on more geometry processing in the future, they certainly will have the expertise to do so, with or without outside help (unlike AMD). And if they really acquire a graphics company, that means redundancy in their company structure, which must be consolidated; and that would mean losing some of their original investment in purchasing the graphics firm. And especially with the leaner and meaner model and Otellini is espousing; it would be hard to see them make a large acquisition that would be a distraction from their main objective.

If an ATI/AMD merger brings about a PC Platform that is superior overall with Intel's, not only will AMD secure Marketshare despite a weaker(as of now) CPU, but I think it will force intel to take over Nvidia just to compete. In 5-10 years we might all be using Intel or AMD Consoles!

Intel, not really. I think IBM is a much more likely company to acquire Nvidia in the near future, if they were to decide to more fully dive into the console components market.