Both ATI and Nvidia are markets too small for Intel tastes. Nvidia gets only 200MM of operating profits per quarter, while AMD should be in the red if we exclude the console chips. Why would Intel burn billions in acquiring the two companies when they can potentially make much more chasing bigger markets, like mobile?
Because mobile is where intel could best use better, more efficient igpu performance to compete with ARM. But like I said, it is a moot point that has already been beaten to death in an earlier forum. Regulatory agencies are just not going to let it happen.
QFT. If Intel acquired AMD, it would have to pour as much money as necessary to make sure it did NOT go bankrupt, which would be a lot more than AMD is "worth" to Intel.I think the general opinion is that Intel don't see any need to buy AMD, and keeping AMD alive is the only way to avoid more lawsuits and new monopoly surveillance against Intel.
Because mobile is where intel could best use better, more efficient igpu performance to compete with ARM. But like I said, it is a moot point that has already been beaten to death in an earlier forum. Regulatory agencies are just not going to let it happen.
Agreed. But Intel Capital sold more than 50% of the Imgtec stocks they had last June, so I guess that means they are not interested in buying them.I think Intel would be better served by buying PowerVR.
Again, Intel could have, but did not, buy ATI. What's change?
that was 2006, almost 10 years ago. Things change.
1. Their lack of graphics performance is becoming more of an issue for them
2. They have discovered that graphics is hard and that their own attempts aren't going as well as they liked
In case you've forgotten, Larrabee was announced in 2008.
Doh.
QFT. If Intel acquired AMD, it would have to pour as much money as necessary to make sure it did NOT go bankrupt, which would be a lot more than AMD is "worth" to Intel.
You confuse 2 different design teams.
Traditional IGP and the usage of x86 cores with software rendering. And larabee is now the Xeon Phi generating revenue and with high margins.
You have supplied no edvidence that IGP performance is an issue. On the other hand all sales and marketshare suggests its fine.
You mean besides the fact that AMD APU graphics substantially outperform them at a significant process node disadvantage?
You are confusing 'lack of an alternative' with 'everything is great'
Just because Intel's CPU cores are so much better, no other alternative is viable. Yet.
But Intel is showing tremendous weakness in this area and weakness = opportunity for its competitors.
How is AMDs sales with this graphics advantage?
You never provided any edvidence that the IGP wasnt good enough.
Now you just talk about wishful futures.
Do you deny that better performance is a selling feature? That people can find ways to use better performance?
It's not good enough simply because its competitors are so much better.
Right now if you want to make an 'ultrabook' class device there is literally no other option. But as soon as the competitors arrive with good enough cpu performance and greatly superior graphics performance, watch OEMs jump ship.
You think Intel's competitors will never a competitive CPU core?
That is what I call wishful thinking
Its you claiming it isnt good enough, that Apple is unhappy and so on. Yet you havent provided anything to show for it.
If you can't see how Apple has been pushing Intel on graphics, you haven't been paying attention. Apple is the reason Intel cobbled together Crystalwell. Intel's (lack of) graphics power is why Apple hasn't been able to do a retina Macbook Air. From the very beginning of their relationship, Apple has been demanding Intel improve their graphics.
As far as proof that their graphics isn't good enough, I have given it to you repeatedly:
- AMD's APU graphics are substantially better than Intel's
Do you deny this?
'Not good enough' is always relative to your competition, because if your competition can do it better, then people will go with them.
Saying AMD igpu is better does not mean Intel's is not good enough, especially for the vast majority of users. You keep saying how awful intels igp is, and how wonderful AMDs is, and how important igpu is, yet Intel had record revenues, while AMD barely manages to stay afloat, and that not from their cpu business, but consoles, and has steadily lost cpu marketshare. Your reasoning simply does not add up.
If you want to make a case about your point. Then link the places that says so with Apple and others. Else its just you saying it. And I think thats where the problem lies. Your personal view on it.
Most PC OEMs appear to have gone the opposite route - choosing NVIDIAs low-end discrete graphics over Intels Iris Pro. The two end up being fairly similar in cost (with Intel getting the slight edge it seems). With NVIDIA you can get better performance, while Intel should deliver somewhat lower power consumption and an obvious reduction in board area. I suspect Iris Pro probably came in a bit slower than even Apple expected, but given that Apple asked Intel to build the thing it probably felt a bit compelled to use it somewhere. Plus theres the whole believing in the strategy aspect of all of this. If Apple could shift most of its designs exclusively to processor graphics, it would actually be able to realize board and power savings which would have an impact on industrial design. Were just not there yet. Whether we ever get there depends on just how aggressive Intel is on the graphics front.
Just because AMDs or nVidias GPUs are better doesnt mean it really matters in the big picture.
Yet Apple added an nVidia GPU with their Iris Pro parts.
Performance/watt is the single most important metric. And nobody is going to sacrifice that.
Then CPU performance and so on. You may discover that graphics performance is relatively long down the wishlist for OEMs.
Quite possibly the most controversial aspect of the new MacBook Air is its CPU performance. Just as it has in the past, Apple made a conscious decision to forego improving CPU performance this generation in lieu of delivering better battery life, GPU performance and overall experience.