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/Ne [...] wsId=14428

Yousuf Khan

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

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)

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

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

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.

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