nVidia to bury another compeditor?

[apoppin]

Originally posted by: taltamir
http://en.expreview.com/?p=64

The 8800GT 256MB is out... and AMD got served hardcore! Well, AMD will probably slash prices to match, further lowering their profits, further diminishing their budget for future research and development.

You gotta remember that AMD can *now* do to nvidia what intel did to them ...
-they can slash prices because they do not depend on their GPUs to make their real money ... they stand or fall with Barcelona, the much bigger moneymaker.
AMD has a clear path and a "vision" with their Fusion ... they are quite certain they don't need to spend what intel does on R&D to compete. They *never* did and have beat intel several times.

Nvidia isn't the small player.. it has 19B in market cap vs 5B for AMD.

you're dreaming ...

AMD has succeeded in surviving this year - a very amazing accomplishment - and they are not only intact, they have Barcelona and they have the midrange GPU market. Letsee ... what has nvidia done in the Last 12 months since 8800GTX ultra:
... nothing but a hurried-to-market GT and orders they are struggling to fill.

 

[superbooga]

Apoppin, the cold hard truth is that NVIDIA can buy AMD, as long as the FTC allows it. I'm not the one who brought this up, it was an Wall Street analyst.

The market cap figures are correct. NVDA is at $33.63 with about 550 million shares. AMD is at $8.91 has about the same number of shares.

 

[apoppin]

Originally posted by: superbooga
Apoppin, the cold hard truth is that NVIDIA can buy AMD, as long as the FTC allows it. I'm not the one who brought this up, it was an Wall Street analyst.

The market cap figures are correct. NVDA is at $33.63 with about 550 million shares. AMD is at $8.91 has about the same number of shares.

again ... keep dreaming ... nvidia is too cash-poor [period] ... the FTC wouldn't give a crap in the current political climate

 

[taltamir]

oh yes, amd doesn't need money to get new tech. Its enough for them to have "vision". which everyone knows intel and nvidia do not.

And AMD not depending on their video cards sales? video cards sales are the ONLY profitable venture in which AMD is engaged, they are loosing money on EVERYTHING else.

Basically AMD is betting on fusion being totally awesome and profitable, trying to survive until then... who knows, maybe it would be. But until and unless it is then they are in trouble. They have enough assets that they could eat to survive up to fusion, but it will leave them in a position where unless it is an instant and tremendous success they will have to fold. And thats a very risky maneuver. That is, IF they can survive until then.

 

[superbooga]

Originally posted by: apoppin

Originally posted by: superbooga
Apoppin, the cold hard truth is that NVIDIA can buy AMD, as long as the FTC allows it. I'm not the one who brought this up, it was an Wall Street analyst.

The market cap figures are correct. NVDA is at $33.63 with about 550 million shares. AMD is at $8.91 has about the same number of shares.

again ... keep dreaming ... nvidia is too cash-poor [period] ... the FTC wouldn't give a crap in the current political climate

You don't need that much cash when the difference in market cap is that big. When AMD bought ATI, AMD's market cap was $8.84B, ATI's was $4.2B, and AMD had $2.53B in cash. Relatively speaking, Nvidia is in a far better position to buy AMD than AMD was when buying ATI.

Perhaps you don't understand how important the market cap is. When your market cap is that low, the public value of the company is low. Basically investors think you are barely above worthless. The only reason investors hold on is the hope that AMD will find a buyer. Are they shopping for a buyer? 99% certain. No matter how much pride you have for the company and its products, if you're under intense pressure from investors, you ABSOLUTELY MUST DO SOMETHING. Downsize. Find a buyer.

The board of directors and executives could care less about pride. It's all about pleasing investors so your personal increases, at the expense of employees. Piss off investors and you lose your fortune. If Nvidia offered to buy AMD, AMD's stock would double. Think of how much money the executives would make. Greed > Pride.

 

[taltamir]

Originally posted by: superboogaGreed > Pride.

Or rather, Greed > Pride for anyone who has lots of money and is in the board of directors... if pride was higher then they wouldn't be there, they would be the show business or something like that.

Excellent analysis of the situation superbooga

 

[BladeVenom]

Originally posted by: taltamir
http://en.expreview.com/?p=64

The 8800GT 256MB is out... and AMD got served hardcore! Well, AMD will probably slash prices to match, further lowering their profits, further diminishing their budget for future research and development.

You're completely ignoring the manufacturing costs. The ATI GPU has less transistors than their previous card, and is made with a 55nm process for a 192 square mm size. The Nvidia chip is using more transistors, only using a 65nm process, and is 324 square mm. AMD is going to be getting a lot more GPUs per wafer and hence a much less expensive GPU. Nvidia might be the ones on the losing end of a price war.

 

[Spike]

Really dumb question here as I don't understand the concept of market cap but how would a company with roughly 4 billion in assets (nVidia) buy a company with 13 billion in assets (AMD)?

 

[apoppin]

Originally posted by: superbooga

Originally posted by: apoppin

Originally posted by: superbooga
Apoppin, the cold hard truth is that NVIDIA can buy AMD, as long as the FTC allows it. I'm not the one who brought this up, it was an Wall Street analyst.

The market cap figures are correct. NVDA is at $33.63 with about 550 million shares. AMD is at $8.91 has about the same number of shares.

again ... keep dreaming ... nvidia is too cash-poor [period] ... the FTC wouldn't give a crap in the current political climate

You don't need that much cash when the difference in market cap is that big. When AMD bought ATI, AMD's market cap was $8.84B, ATI's was $4.2B, and AMD had $2.53B in cash. Relatively speaking, Nvidia is in a far better position to buy AMD than AMD was when buying ATI.

Perhaps you don't understand how important the market cap is. When your market cap is that low, the public value of the company is low. Basically investors think you are barely above worthless. The only reason investors hold on is the hope that AMD will find a buyer. Are they shopping for a buyer? 99% certain. No matter how much pride you have for the company and its products, if you're under intense pressure from investors, you ABSOLUTELY MUST DO SOMETHING. Downsize. Find a buyer.

The board of directors and executives could care less about pride. It's all about pleasing investors so your personal increases, at the expense of employees. Piss off investors and you lose your fortune. If Nvidia offered to buy AMD, AMD's stock would double. Think of how much money the executives would make. Greed > Pride.

Perhaps you don't understand

nvidia will *never* offer to buy AMD ... talk about "pride" ... and arrogance .. and greed.


Secondly, ATi approached AMD with a view to a merger ... it was not hostile as nvidia's attempt to "bury" AMD would be. AMD has set itself up so that nvidia cannot "buy" them without crippling themselves.

It is fine with me that you don't think AMD will survive ... i might have agreed with you a few months ago ... but i think they will do fine ... now ... with Barcelona .. and Fusion.

 

[coldpower27]

Originally posted by: BladeVenom

Originally posted by: taltamir
http://en.expreview.com/?p=64

The 8800GT 256MB is out... and AMD got served hardcore! Well, AMD will probably slash prices to match, further lowering their profits, further diminishing their budget for future research and development.

You're completely ignoring the manufacturing costs. The ATI GPU has less transistors than their previous card, and is made with a 55nm process for a 192 square mm size. The Nvidia chip is using more transistors, only using a 65nm process, and is 324 square mm. AMD is going to be getting a lot more GPUs per wafer and hence a much less expensive GPU. Nvidia might be the ones on the losing end of a price war.

The tables have reversed here, this time it's ATI having the more economical to produce GPU vs Nvidia, vs back in the 7900 vs X19xxx Series cards. We also have the same situation where the bigger GPU is the more powerful one, with 1 key difference, they are on differing process node, if Nvidia needs to compete on cost they need to wait till they themselves can shift over to the 55nm which will help matters some.

There is also the fact that Nvidia have been profitable for the past long while, so a price war for them may not be that bad as they have a "warchest" built up.

 

[superbooga]

Originally posted by: apoppin

Originally posted by: superbooga

Originally posted by: apoppin

Originally posted by: superbooga
Apoppin, the cold hard truth is that NVIDIA can buy AMD, as long as the FTC allows it. I'm not the one who brought this up, it was an Wall Street analyst.

The market cap figures are correct. NVDA is at $33.63 with about 550 million shares. AMD is at $8.91 has about the same number of shares.

again ... keep dreaming ... nvidia is too cash-poor [period] ... the FTC wouldn't give a crap in the current political climate

You don't need that much cash when the difference in market cap is that big. When AMD bought ATI, AMD's market cap was $8.84B, ATI's was $4.2B, and AMD had $2.53B in cash. Relatively speaking, Nvidia is in a far better position to buy AMD than AMD was when buying ATI.

Perhaps you don't understand how important the market cap is. When your market cap is that low, the public value of the company is low. Basically investors think you are barely above worthless. The only reason investors hold on is the hope that AMD will find a buyer. Are they shopping for a buyer? 99% certain. No matter how much pride you have for the company and its products, if you're under intense pressure from investors, you ABSOLUTELY MUST DO SOMETHING. Downsize. Find a buyer.

The board of directors and executives could care less about pride. It's all about pleasing investors so your personal increases, at the expense of employees. Piss off investors and you lose your fortune. If Nvidia offered to buy AMD, AMD's stock would double. Think of how much money the executives would make. Greed > Pride.

Perhaps you don't understand

nvidia will *never* offer to buy AMD ... talk about "pride" ... and arrogance .. and greed.


Secondly, ATi approached AMD with a view to a merger ... it was not hostile as nvidia's attempt to "bury" AMD would be. AMD has set itself up so that nvidia cannot "buy" them without crippling themselves.

You're right about nvidia not *wanting* to buy AMD. But *could* they? Easily. *Would* AMD let them? Of course, board of directors and executives are probably praying for this.

 

[Zap]

Originally posted by: taltamir
Anyone remember how 3dfx was THE video card manfucaturer? And then some upstart nvidia kicked its arse to kingdom come until it went bankrupt...

3DFx did that to themselves. First, they got too greedy and bought out STB Systems, who was one of their major card makers. This pissed off all the other card makers who placed more emphasis on making Nvidia cards as a result. Second, for whatever reason they were slow in modernizing their architecture. 256x256 pixel textures anyone? 16 bit "oh, but 18 bit internal" color anyone? Then of course the late-to-market chips powering the 4xxx and 5xxx series, and of course they went kaput before the 6xxx series came to market. While Nvidia was working on faster chips, 3DFx was working on trying to figure out how to glue more chips together.

I think ATI's story is a bit better. They went from being yet another 2D Windows Accelerator manufacturer to having competitive products. Plus, they went from making their own cards to allowing other companies to make cards using their chips.

 

[Wreckage]

Originally posted by: apoppin

nonsense

it *appears* - now, December '07 - that the acquisition was the very best thing for both companies
--AMD's only *profitable* division this quarter is ATi
:Q

Where did you get that the ATI "brand" is profitable? They have been losing significant marketshare. While NVIDIA has it's first Billion Dollar Quater.
http://www.vnunet.com/crn/news...r-yearly-sales-3695416

and their strategy of stealing the midrange from nvidia was brilliant

Again where did you get this? No financial numbers have shown this and benchmarks have certainly not shown this.

-screw the high end ... nvidia is just now learning their mistake and is copying AMD's strategy with their unprepared GT

Unprepared? It's outperforming the 3800. Hell, you can read the forums to see it's outselling it

What they also didn't realize - in their 3dfx-esque arrogance - is that many people are glad to support AMD/ATi just to not buy a card from nvidia ... i did not realize they have real fans and supporters who really want them to succeed.

I still don't see where you are pulling this from. AMD has been bleeding money since they bough ATI. ATI's products have been routinely getting crushed and their market share has been shrinking.

i think AMD and intel are both going to bury nvidia IF they don't get their heads out of their ass and stop with their GTX-overpriced - take it-or-leave-it attitude - once-a-year bullsh!t.

It's the best card out there. You should be more upset at the turd AMD served up.

MS has to pay AMD for each GPU - or does MS make them themselves?

MS paid for the chip design, but they are not paying on every chip. They won't make that mistake again.

nvidia is the small player now

NVIDIA is the largest player in the discrete GPU market now. With record profits.
http://money.cnn.com/news/news.../AQTH16408112007-1.htm

You gotta remember that AMD can *now* do to nvidia what intel did to them ..

You mean give them money? Intel has a cross licensing deal with NVIDIA. NVIDIA get chipsets while Intel gets GPU help. If anything NVIDIA made the just to Intel at the perfect moment.

again ... keep dreaming ... nvidia is too cash-poor [period]

Please read the link regarding RECORD SALES. Also AMD had to take out a loan to buy ATI LOL!

Secondly, ATi approached AMD with a view to a merger

There was no "merger". ATI was bought. Their HQ in Canada was closed and many of their employees were canned. Their website was removed. Their chipsets were renamed. They are just a brand name now.

ATI died in the same way 3DFX did. They screwed up, their value dropped and they got removed from the market by a bigger company. I am a big fan of AMD and I think buying ATI was the biggest mistake they ever made. They are in serious trouble right now.

Here's to hoping NVIDIA does buy AMD. However, it won't happen. NVIDIA does not need AMD. In fact right now it would only be an anchor.

 

[taltamir]

what does market share have to do with profits? for example, selling less products at higher profit means making more money but loosing market share.

 

[Wreckage]

Originally posted by: taltamir
what does market share have to do with profits? for example, selling less products at higher profit means making more money but loosing market share.

Which company is doing this?

 

[taltamir]

Isn't AMD making more money on each 38xx card sold they they did on the previous gen? Even if they are loosing market share on video cards they could still be making more money then before...

That being said I don't know if they are gaining market share or not, I was speaking mostly hypothetically, countering the argument that market share = profits.

 

[CPA]

Originally posted by: taltamir
Yea times ARE changing.. for example nvidia just managed to break 1 billion dollars profit...
A company is about making money, and nvidia makes lots and lots of money... more money = ability to buy companies (like say, buying via for a x86 license), equipment (build another fab?), and hire researchers (lets develop an even BETTER product)...

OMG, please stop! Nvidia has not, nor has ever, made $1B in profit in any year. Do you even know what profit is? do you realize that their last fiscal year, ending January 31st 2007 they had NEGATIVE cash flow? You say it's money, money, money, but when you look at their actual net income ($448M) and then adjust for cash flows they had more money go out of the company than come in! Please read a Financial Statement or two before posting next time. pretty please.

That said, Nvidia is still a very financially strong company. They have no LT debt and plenty of cash on hand. But, it does not behoov them to have ATI(AMD) collapse because the Feds would be on them like white on rice.

EDIT: After rereading your post, I think you are referring to Gross Profit, in which case you are correct. But that should not be your basis for income sufficiency. EBITDA should be. It also looks like you did do some research in your subsequent posts, so I apologize for the harsh words.

 

[taltamir]

After making over 1 billion in gross profit they nearly DOUBLED their RnD investure...

So yea I think it matters more then their reported "net profit" when net profit does not include money spent on RnD... in fact they made 1.3 billion in gross profit. And spent less then 0.3 billion on administrative costs (which SHOULD be taken into account actually)... So their net profit NOT including research expenditure is still over 1 billion dollars.

 

[Auric]

Originally posted by: Wreckage

ATI died in the same way 3DFX did. They screwed up, their value dropped and they got removed from the market by a bigger company.

:roll: Nominated for most misinformed (if not delusional) VC&G post of the year.

 

[CPA]

Originally posted by: taltamir
After making over 1 billion in gross profit they nearly DOUBLED their RnD investure...

So yea I think it matters more then their reported "net profit" when net profit does not include money spent on RnD... in fact they made 1.3 billion in gross profit. And spent less then 0.3 billion on administrative costs (which SHOULD be taken into account actually)... So their net profit NOT including research expenditure is still over 1 billion dollars.

Why would you exclude R&D. It could be easily argued that the result of the increase in revenues is directly related to R&D increase and, therefore, should not be excluded. And Net profit does not exlude money spent on RnD. Perhaps, that's not what you meant.

 

[Wreckage]

Originally posted by: Auric

Originally posted by: Wreckage

ATI died in the same way 3DFX did. They screwed up, their value dropped and they got removed from the market by a bigger company.

:roll: Nominated for most misinformed (if not delusional) VC&G post of the year.

Care to actually post an opinion as to why you disagree with my statement.


Are you saying ATI is still a company on it's own? Are you saying they were doing really well when AMD swallowed them whole? What are you saying?

 

[apoppin]

Originally posted by: Wreckage

Originally posted by: apoppin

nonsense

it *appears* - now, December '07 - that the acquisition was the very best thing for both companies
--AMD's only *profitable* division this quarter is ATi
:Q

Where did you get that the ATI "brand" is profitable? They have been losing significant marketshare. While NVIDIA has it's first Billion Dollar Quater.
http://www.vnunet.com/crn/news...r-yearly-sales-3695416

A billion dollar quarter is NOT a billion dollars' PROFIT.

... and ATi is not mentioned in your link at all; *overall* there is no doubt AMD is losing to intel; but then they just have Barcelona for the last 2 months and are just *now* preparing their desktop chip. In fact, they just realized their biggest mistake and are bringing K-8 "back" to their roadmap.. .
http://www.dailytech.com/AMD+R...oadmap/article9899.htm
We haven't seen *any* sales figures for this quarter - this one with Barcelona and HD3XX0

... and their strategy of stealing the midrange from nvidia was brilliant

Again where did you get this? No financial numbers have shown this and benchmarks have certainly not shown this.

Same place you get stuff ... i made it up
:roll:
http://www.fudzilla.com/index....view&id=4530&Itemid=34

We learned that DAAMIT has sold as much as 125,000 chips in the last three weeks since it launched, but the market still yearns and demands more.

... seriously, we are seeing some outstanding - if unconfirmed - sales figures for the first 3 weeks since their new GPU was released; and nothing to do with benchmarks whatsoever.

-screw the high end ... nvidia is just now learning their mistake and is copying AMD's strategy with their unprepared GT

Unprepared? It's outperforming the 3800. Hell, you can read the forums to see it's outselling it

Only unprepared as they are completely and hopelessly behind in filling orders .... it is not good to keep the customer waiting and they know it; some have jumped ship to get the *available* and @MSRP slightly slower Radeon alternative

What they also didn't realize - in their 3dfx-esque arrogance - is that many people are glad to support AMD/ATi just to not buy a card from nvidia ... i did not realize they have real fans and supporters who really want them to succeed.

I still don't see where you are pulling this from. AMD has been bleeding money since they bough ATI. ATI's products have been routinely getting crushed and their market share has been shrinking.[/quote]

Getting crushed by what? The 2900xt competes with the old GTS, was cheaper and had a better game-bundle'; the new 3870 competes with the GT at a lower price-point and it remains to be seen what AMD's high-end will be like to compete with the Ultra's replacement.

i think AMD and intel are both going to bury nvidia IF they don't get their heads out of their ass and stop with their GTX-overpriced - take it-or-leave-it attitude - once-a-year bullsh!t.

It's the best card out there. You should be more upset at the turd AMD served up.

[/quote]

The Ultra is old news ... it is well over a year old and there is *nothing* from nvidia to replace it; the people who have one are generally dying to upgrade. It is also very expensive in its price-performance costs. AMD served up a upper-midrange video card that was just as much a "turd" as a GTS-640

MS has to pay AMD for each GPU - or does MS make them themselves?

MS paid for the chip design, but they are not paying on every chip. They won't make that mistake again.

Please find that link for me, if you can.

nvidia is the small player now

NVIDIA is the largest player in the discrete GPU market now. With record profits.
http://money.cnn.com/news/news.../AQTH16408112007-1.htm

If AMD and intel have their way, there will be *no discrete GPU market* in ten years

You gotta remember that AMD can *now* do to nvidia what intel did to them ..

You mean give them money? Intel has a cross licensing deal with NVIDIA. NVIDIA get chipsets while Intel gets GPU help. If anything NVIDIA made the just to Intel at the perfect moment. [/quote]
nvidia *had* to ...
... and 'no', i meant engage in a price war. The 3XX0 series is a lot cheaper to produce.

again ... keep dreaming ... nvidia is too cash-poor [period]

Please read the link regarding RECORD SALES. Also AMD had to take out a loan to buy ATI LOL![/quote]

One good year is nothing. Let's see them repeat it for the next two. nvidia has no cash to buy AMD - they would need a huge loan also

Secondly, ATi approached AMD with a view to a merger

There was no "merger". ATI was bought. Their HQ in Canada was closed and many of their employees were canned. Their website was removed. Their chipsets were renamed. They are just a brand name now.

ATI died in the same way 3DFX did. They screwed up, their value dropped and they got removed from the market by a bigger company. I am a big fan of AMD and I think buying ATI was the biggest mistake they ever made. They are in serious trouble right now.

Here's to hoping NVIDIA does buy AMD. However, it won't happen. NVIDIA does not need AMD. In fact right now it would only be an anchor.

[/quote]


read your history ... ATi approached AMD. They called it a "merger" - i said "acquisition" in all of my earlier posts; Yes , ATi is *gone* ... i have said this many times over the last year - they have been assimilated by AMD who's stated future is FUSION ... even the ATi logo is getting smaller.

i am not a fan of AMD, but looking - now - i think buying ATi will be recognized as the "turning point" for both companies ... their salvation in the merge [or acquisition]. Getting rid of ATi's marketing and redundant jobs was necessary.

Finally - *agreed* nvidia does not need AMD ... it would destroy them as they could not integrate well with them

am i done with the EDITs? Yep.

 

[Zap]

Originally posted by: Wreckage

Originally posted by: Auric

Originally posted by: Wreckage
ATI died in the same way 3DFX did. They screwed up, their value dropped and they got removed from the market by a bigger company.

:roll: Nominated for most misinformed (if not delusional) VC&G post of the year.

Are you saying ATI is still a company on it's own? Are you saying they were doing really well when AMD swallowed them whole? What are you saying?

ATI was still viable when AMD came in. They may not have had a huge bankroll, nor the most competitive product, but they weren't down for the count. If AMD didn't get them (and nobody else either) they would still be around to this day.

3DFx was pretty much dead and had filed bankruptcy when Nvidia swooped in and bought out what they wanted from it.

 

[BladeVenom]

Originally posted by: Wreckage

and their strategy of stealing the midrange from nvidia was brilliant

Again where did you get this? No financial numbers have shown this and benchmarks have certainly not shown this.

The 3850 slaughter the 8600GTS in the midrange. They are also shipping in huge numbers, "AMD to ship half a million RV670s." Just look around and you can see that the 3850 is in stock at most places.

 

[taltamir]

no, the 3850 slaughters the 8600GTS in the LOW end... and doesn't compete with it price wise (its a medium-low card vs very low card)...

The 8800GT 256MB beats the 3870 in EVERY benchmark below 1680x1050... and beats it in some benchmarks at resolutions as high as 1920x1200...

And the GT 256MB is cheaper to boot.