Doesn't ATI have profits >> nvidia?

Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.ati (More info?)

Doug wrote:
> I had always thought ATI was a huge company in terms of graphics solutions
> for PC's, Macs etc. Doesn't ATI have much larger profits than Nvidia? ATI
> doesn't even really need the high-end gaming/graphics card market to survive
> right?
>


Nope. Most of their business is video chipsets for OEM equipment...

Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.ati (More info?)

Nowadays nVidia is shipping just as many chipsets to OEMs. Revenues tend to
fluctuate depending on the release schedule, but in general ATi and nVidia
can be considered equal size.

The high-end market represents about 1% of each company's total volume.
Neither ATi nor nVidia need it to survive in the short term. It's all an
image thing. The X800XT is needed to sell boatloads of X300 cards, because
people recognize the Radeon name. Incidentally, image is created by the
marketing machine and online/magazine reviews, meaning ATi *doesn't actually
have to deliver the high end cards to store shelves*, hence the supply
shortages.

BTW, more PCs are powered by Intel onboard video than all others combined;
it's a matter of perspective.

--
"War is the continuation of politics by other means.
It can therefore be said that politics is war without
bloodshed while war is politics with bloodshed."


"Doug" <pigdos@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:A3aJe.3281$fJ1.1510@newssvr13.news.prodigy.com...
>I had always thought ATI was a huge company in terms of graphics solutions
>for PC's, Macs etc. Doesn't ATI have much larger profits than Nvidia? ATI
>doesn't even really need the high-end gaming/graphics card market to
>survive right?
>
> --
> there is no .sig
>