ATI (GPU maker) to be bought by a CPU maker?

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.video,comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips (More info?)

Rumours are that both AMD and Intel are interested in ATI, along with
Broadcom and TI.

ATI Shares Rally Sparks Takeover Rumours
http://www.cdrinfo.com/Sections/News/Details.aspx?NewsId=14428

Yousuf Khan
12 answers Last reply
More about maker bought maker
  1. Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.video,comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips (More info?)

    Yousuf Khan wrote:

    > Rumours are that both AMD and Intel are interested in ATI, along with
    > Broadcom and TI.
    >
    > ATI Shares Rally Sparks Takeover Rumours
    > http://www.cdrinfo.com/Sections/News/Details.aspx?NewsId=14428

    Not sure which of those might lead to an improvement. I suspect that Intel
    would kick butt on the driver team, where a good butt-kicking is badly
    needed, but that would also further consolidate their monopoly. If
    Broadcom goes true to form the driver situation would get worse, I don't
    recall AMD shipping much that needs drivers, and I'm surprised that TI
    wants back into the graphics chip market.

    An ideal situation might be for Intel to buy them, put some professional
    management in place, and then be forced to divest.

    > Yousuf Khan

    --
    --John
    to email, dial "usenet" and validate
    (was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)
  2. Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.video,comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips (More info?)

    On 11 Jul 2005 09:16:11 -0700, "Yousuf Khan" <yjkhan@gmail.com> wrote:

    >Rumours are that both AMD and Intel are interested in ATI, along with
    >Broadcom and TI.
    >
    >ATI Shares Rally Sparks Takeover Rumours
    >http://www.cdrinfo.com/Sections/News/Details.aspx?NewsId=14428
    >
    > Yousuf Khan


    If Intel buys them, kiss off any overclocking. They'll probably lock the
    GPU.

    --
    Pat
  3. Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.video,comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips (More info?)

    On Mon, 11 Jul 2005 21:30:01 -0700, Pat <pk@primenet.com> wrote:

    >On 11 Jul 2005 09:16:11 -0700, "Yousuf Khan" <yjkhan@gmail.com> wrote:
    >
    >>Rumours are that both AMD and Intel are interested in ATI, along with
    >>Broadcom and TI.
    >>
    >>ATI Shares Rally Sparks Takeover Rumours
    >>http://www.cdrinfo.com/Sections/News/Details.aspx?NewsId=14428
    >>
    >> Yousuf Khan
    >
    >
    >If Intel buys them, kiss off any overclocking. They'll probably lock the
    >GPU.

    Isn't overclocking ATI GPUs all unofficial anyway? It's not in the ATI
    Control Panel, like it is with nVidia and the 3rd party stuff is kinda
    flakey too.

    --
    Rgds, George Macdonald
  4. Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.video,comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips (More info?)

    George Macdonald wrote:

    > On Mon, 11 Jul 2005 21:30:01 -0700, Pat <pk@primenet.com> wrote:
    >
    >>On 11 Jul 2005 09:16:11 -0700, "Yousuf Khan" <yjkhan@gmail.com> wrote:
    >>
    >>>Rumours are that both AMD and Intel are interested in ATI, along with
    >>>Broadcom and TI.
    >>>
    >>>ATI Shares Rally Sparks Takeover Rumours
    >>>http://www.cdrinfo.com/Sections/News/Details.aspx?NewsId=14428
    >>>
    >>> Yousuf Khan
    >>
    >>
    >>If Intel buys them, kiss off any overclocking. They'll probably lock the
    >>GPU.
    >
    > Isn't overclocking ATI GPUs all unofficial anyway? It's not in the ATI
    > Control Panel, like it is with nVidia and the 3rd party stuff is kinda
    > flakey too.

    There was limited overclocking in the control panel for the XT boards for a
    while, but it has since been removed I understand.

    Intel though has been locking their chips down pretty thoroughly. AMD's
    policy with the 32-bit Athlons was to ship unlocked for the first few
    months then lock them down--I don't know if the 64s are locked.
    >

    --
    --John
    to email, dial "usenet" and validate
    (was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)
  5. Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.video,comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips (More info?)

    On 7/11/2005 12:16, Yousuf Khan wrote:
    > Rumours are that both AMD and Intel are interested in ATI

    ....and Intel thought their anti-trust worries were bad now! Isn't it true
    that Intel ships more video chipsets then everyone else combined (or
    something close to that)?

    OTOH, if AMD bought them it could send Intel reeling even further...

    ~Jason

    --
  6. Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.video,comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips (More info?)

    Jason Gurtz wrote:
    > On 7/11/2005 12:16, Yousuf Khan wrote:
    > > Rumours are that both AMD and Intel are interested in ATI
    >
    > ...and Intel thought their anti-trust worries were bad now! Isn't it true
    > that Intel ships more video chipsets then everyone else combined (or
    > something close to that)?
    >
    > OTOH, if AMD bought them it could send Intel reeling even further...

    If AMD bought them, that would be the end of ATI's Intel chipset
    license. And you might even find that all of a sudden ATI video cards
    are suddenly incompatible with Intel chipsets.

    I'd say the only safe choice of suitor is TI. Intel hates both AMD and
    Broadcom.

    Yousuf Khan
  7. Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.video,comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips (More info?)

    Yousuf Khan wrote:

    >If AMD bought them, that would be the end of ATI's Intel chipset
    >license. And you might even find that all of a sudden ATI video cards
    >are suddenly incompatible with Intel chipsets.

    Oh, come on now. Video cards go into open-standard slots.
  8. Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.video,comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips (More info?)

    chrisv wrote:
    > Yousuf Khan wrote:
    >
    >
    >>If AMD bought them, that would be the end of ATI's Intel chipset
    >>license. And you might even find that all of a sudden ATI video cards
    >>are suddenly incompatible with Intel chipsets.
    >
    >
    > Oh, come on now. Video cards go into open-standard slots.
    >

    I am talking about little niggling problems that destroy the reputation
    of a company's products. Think VIA vs. Creative Labs products. :-)

    Yousuf Khan
  9. Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.video,comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips (More info?)

    On Tue, 12 Jul 2005 14:29:19 -0400, Jason Gurtz <ask@NOmeSPAM.where>
    wrote:

    >On 7/11/2005 12:16, Yousuf Khan wrote:
    >> Rumours are that both AMD and Intel are interested in ATI
    >
    >...and Intel thought their anti-trust worries were bad now! Isn't it true
    >that Intel ships more video chipsets then everyone else combined (or
    >something close to that)?

    Last numbers I heard had Intel's share of graphics chips at about
    35-40% with ATI and nVidia both ranging from about 20-25% and the
    remaining 10% being made up of a variety of other companies (VIA and
    SiS are the biggest, mainly with integrated graphics on low-end
    systems). I don't think Intel has ever managed to get more than 50%
    of the graphics chipset market, but they definitely are the #1 vendor
    of graphics chips on a per-unit basis. On a dollar basis, my guess is
    that nVidia is #1, since Intel's graphics chips are all integrated
    ones and mostly sell for very low prices.

    >OTOH, if AMD bought them it could send Intel reeling even further...

    I really doubt that AMD would buy out ATI, it would involve spending a
    lot of money to get into a business with high costs and high risks and
    all the while it could piss off one of their key partners (nVidia).
    Intel doesn't seem too likely either IMO, they've tried their hand at
    buying out a video card maker and found that really they could only
    succeed in the integrated market. I doubt that they're up for attempt
    number 2 at the high-end add-in graphics market just yet, given that
    their first attempt failed pretty badly.

    The only company mentioned that seems at all like a good potential
    match to me is Broadcom. They've got a more diverse portfolio of
    computer-related chipsets, reasonably good alliances with some major
    manufacturers (though their relationship with Intel is strained to say
    the least) and they've got the money for such a buyout. Still I
    wouldn't hold my breath on this one, it all seems to have started from
    some off-hand comments by some analyst.

    -------------
    Tony Hill
    hilla <underscore> 20 <at> yahoo <dot> ca
  10. Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.video,comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips (More info?)

    Yousuf Khan wrote:

    >chrisv wrote:
    >>
    >> Yousuf Khan wrote:
    >>>
    >>>If AMD bought them, that would be the end of ATI's Intel chipset
    >>>license. And you might even find that all of a sudden ATI video cards
    >>>are suddenly incompatible with Intel chipsets.
    >>
    >> Oh, come on now. Video cards go into open-standard slots.
    >
    >I am talking about little niggling problems that destroy the reputation
    >of a company's products. Think VIA vs. Creative Labs products. :-)

    I think Creative created their own problems.
  11. Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.video,comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips (More info?)

    On Thu, 14 Jul 2005 08:16:13 -0500, chrisv wrote:

    > Yousuf Khan wrote:
    >
    >>chrisv wrote:
    >>>
    >>> Yousuf Khan wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>>If AMD bought them, that would be the end of ATI's Intel chipset
    >>>>license. And you might even find that all of a sudden ATI video cards
    >>>>are suddenly incompatible with Intel chipsets.
    >>>
    >>> Oh, come on now. Video cards go into open-standard slots.
    >>
    >>I am talking about little niggling problems that destroy the reputation
    >>of a company's products. Think VIA vs. Creative Labs products. :-)
    >
    > I think Creative created their own problems.

    Intentionally through "creative" interpretation of the specs. I wouldn't
    buy a CL product on a bet! Do they even matter anymore?

    --
    Keith
  12. Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.video,comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips (More info?)

    Tony Hill wrote:
    > On Tue, 12 Jul 2005 14:29:19 -0400, Jason Gurtz <ask@NOmeSPAM.where>
    > wrote:
    >
    > >On 7/11/2005 12:16, Yousuf Khan wrote:
    > >> Rumours are that both AMD and Intel are interested in ATI
    > >
    > >...and Intel thought their anti-trust worries were bad now! Isn't it true
    > >that Intel ships more video chipsets then everyone else combined (or
    > >something close to that)?
    >
    > Last numbers I heard had Intel's share of graphics chips at about
    > 35-40% with ATI and nVidia both ranging from about 20-25% and the
    > remaining 10% being made up of a variety of other companies (VIA and
    > SiS are the biggest, mainly with integrated graphics on low-end
    > systems). I don't think Intel has ever managed to get more than 50%
    > of the graphics chipset market, but they definitely are the #1 vendor
    > of graphics chips on a per-unit basis. On a dollar basis, my guess is
    > that nVidia is #1, since Intel's graphics chips are all integrated
    > ones and mostly sell for very low prices.
    >
    > >OTOH, if AMD bought them it could send Intel reeling even further...
    >
    > I really doubt that AMD would buy out ATI, it would involve spending a
    > lot of money to get into a business with high costs and high risks and
    > all the while it could piss off one of their key partners (nVidia).

    That's forgetting about the fact that AMD's cashflow situation is
    precarious at best. Honestly, they should be paying down their debt
    rather than buying companies...although the fact that the EU throws
    money at their doorstop might alter that a little bit.

    > Intel doesn't seem too likely either IMO, they've tried their hand at
    > buying out a video card maker and found that really they could only
    > succeed in the integrated market. I doubt that they're up for attempt
    > number 2 at the high-end add-in graphics market just yet, given that
    > their first attempt failed pretty badly.

    Yes, and it's quite obvious that add-in video cards today are like the
    RISCs of 10 years ago...

    Except that there are a hell of a lot more gamers than users that
    require RISCs.

    > The only company mentioned that seems at all like a good potential
    > match to me is Broadcom. They've got a more diverse portfolio of
    > computer-related chipsets, reasonably good alliances with some major
    > manufacturers (though their relationship with Intel is strained to say
    > the least) and they've got the money for such a buyout. Still I
    > wouldn't hold my breath on this one, it all seems to have started from
    > some off-hand comments by some analyst.

    I don't see what advantage that would be for either of them, also I
    don't know what BCOM's financial situation is like. OTOH, TI probably
    has enough money and cash flow to swallow ATI and not blink...

    David
Ask a new question

Read More

CPUs Hardware IBM ATI Product