TheGreatGrapeApe
Champion
- Feb 18, 2003
- 20,043
- 0
- 50,960
Funny thing is that now that nVidia's chipset market has disolved an they only have a minority presence in SOC/Mobile solutions (although among the most interesting offering) there probably isn't the same regulatory barriers for intel to acquire nVidia now, however as already mentioned, there's alot of bad blood there, so I think intel would rather seen nV die and then pick at the pieces than acquire them now, and JHH wouldn't ever want to be owned by intel and would likely prefer going under instead even if that wasn't in the best interest of investors (which would likely result in a legal action to push him out if that happened).
Needless to say the answer to the original question is no, however that may change over time, which is something that wasn't possible about a year and a half ago.
Needless to say the answer to the original question is no, however that may change over time, which is something that wasn't possible about a year and a half ago.
TheGreatGrapeApe
Champion
- Feb 18, 2003
- 20,043
- 0
- 50,960
Yeah that's what everyone was hoping for from ATi+intel , and then ATi+AMD, but even thought the later came true the GPU on the latest AMD process didn't happen until the Fab spun of into it's own company and thus it's like AMD being build on Chartered, which is what they (and nV have done before). But still a full-fledged GPU on a mature and well ahead of the competition intel FAB would be great... which is kinda what people hoped for from Larrabee, but oh well... to dream the impossible dream... 
New to the graphics arena, eh n00b?
ATi's generation was ahead of nV prior to the merge, and many times before that, both go back and forth and have for a long time. It had nothing to do with AMD, in fact if anything AMD's woes held ATi back, and also delayed trying to fix R600 sooner. AMD added nothing to ATi and if anything acted like a boat-anchor on them. [:thegreatgrapeape:5]
New to the graphics arena, eh n00b?
ATi's generation was ahead of nV prior to the merge, and many times before that, both go back and forth and have for a long time. It had nothing to do with AMD, in fact if anything AMD's woes held ATi back, and also delayed trying to fix R600 sooner. AMD added nothing to ATi and if anything acted like a boat-anchor on them. [:thegreatgrapeape:5]
strangestranger
Splendid
- Jan 31, 2006
- 4,675
- 0
- 22,860
Because you are one.
Just go look up the old toms charts from years back to see how mistaken you are.
Also, funds from AMD?
Oh and I agree with intel not wanting nvidia, some of their IP maybe but not the baggage of the company.
Just go look up the old toms charts from years back to see how mistaken you are.
Also, funds from AMD?
Oh and I agree with intel not wanting nvidia, some of their IP maybe but not the baggage of the company.
TheGreatGrapeApe
Champion
- Feb 18, 2003
- 20,043
- 0
- 50,960
As SS mentioned because you are one. [:grahamlv:3]
Your follow-up statement proves you know even less about the situation, you've got the funding equation backwards.
Why do you n00bz think I would hold my tongue about your revisionism just because I'm a Mod? Or that it has anything to do with me challenging your statement. Can't defend your position so you decide to bring my role of Mod in for sympathy?
Seriously spend some time researching next time before you share your ignorance with the crowd, or else go somewhere else if you don't like it.
rofl_my_waffle
Distinguished
- Feb 20, 2010
- 972
- 0
- 19,160
I think I should help clarify something here.
AMD merged with ATI despite the company takes on the AMD logo, ATI shareholders simply got AMD shares. So ownership of the company just got merged together not a buy out.
Second, since they are the same company right now. Their financial statements are the same. It isn't like AMD has to give money to ATI. They share the same pool of money and management would naturally allocated money to projects that are most profitable to maximize shareholder equity. Their funds are gained from retained earnings and corporate loans just like any other company.
AMD merged with ATI despite the company takes on the AMD logo, ATI shareholders simply got AMD shares. So ownership of the company just got merged together not a buy out.
Second, since they are the same company right now. Their financial statements are the same. It isn't like AMD has to give money to ATI. They share the same pool of money and management would naturally allocated money to projects that are most profitable to maximize shareholder equity. Their funds are gained from retained earnings and corporate loans just like any other company.
TheGreatGrapeApe
Champion
- Feb 18, 2003
- 20,043
- 0
- 50,960
However they still have divisions of which GPU/ATi is one, which are still reported different in the Quarterly and Annual report so no their financial statements are not the same, unlike even nV (which lumps them together more) AMD still differentiates the revenue, and GPU has been profitable for a long time, CPU only recently.
So aside from the naming semantics, the point is even if he's speaking in the traditional sense of the various divisions it's not like traditional AMD had much of anything to do with traditional ATi segment's success, especially since they took their growing chipset market and tanked it by tieing it to the sinking CPU boat-anchor and hurt their GPU intel add-in market initially.
So aside from the naming semantics, the point is even if he's speaking in the traditional sense of the various divisions it's not like traditional AMD had much of anything to do with traditional ATi segment's success, especially since they took their growing chipset market and tanked it by tieing it to the sinking CPU boat-anchor and hurt their GPU intel add-in market initially.
notty22
Distinguished
- Oct 8, 2009
- 2,958
- 0
- 21,160
Here is one account of how ATI has evolved since merging with AMD.
It looks to me from the results , that ATI has prospered and at least made good internal decisions since the merging.
http://alienbabeltech.com/main/?p=5726
It looks to me from the results , that ATI has prospered and at least made good internal decisions since the merging.
http://alienbabeltech.com/main/?p=5726
TheGreatGrapeApe
Champion
- Feb 18, 2003
- 20,043
- 0
- 50,960
That article has nothing to do with ATi within AMD, it just shows that their roadmap (which was laid out about 1-2 years before AMD acquired them) was sound to keep up with the competition, not what could've been had they not been tied to AMD's debt load and slow management.
That article doesn't do anything to look at the organization and development within AMD, let alone the money/resource. It looks to be written by someone who has little knowledge of the industry other than Wiki, especially his misunderstanding of DX10, let alone anything more complex.
Better insight would've been Anand's article, and even that doesn't tell the whole story, and little about what we talked about above other than to show your article has nothing to do with ATi+AMD;
http://www.anandtech.com/show/2679/3
The RV770 was planned out long before AMD was even an idea, so that's not it, heck back then the rumour was ATi+intel and AMD+nV.
The story about the last few years likely won't come out for a few more years, and it's unlikely they will be positive with all the lay-offs and cutbacks at AMD that gutted so much of them. Everyone though AMD would offer a whole new bunch of benefits (their own fab, dev relations [both games and Linux],full system options for people like Apple,Dell,etc.) and nowhere near that was ever delivered, heck even the one few boost, Linux support, is just a small improvement, and in a small market with less influence on sales.
That article doesn't do anything to look at the organization and development within AMD, let alone the money/resource. It looks to be written by someone who has little knowledge of the industry other than Wiki, especially his misunderstanding of DX10, let alone anything more complex.
Better insight would've been Anand's article, and even that doesn't tell the whole story, and little about what we talked about above other than to show your article has nothing to do with ATi+AMD;
http://www.anandtech.com/show/2679/3
The RV770 was planned out long before AMD was even an idea, so that's not it, heck back then the rumour was ATi+intel and AMD+nV.
The story about the last few years likely won't come out for a few more years, and it's unlikely they will be positive with all the lay-offs and cutbacks at AMD that gutted so much of them. Everyone though AMD would offer a whole new bunch of benefits (their own fab, dev relations [both games and Linux],full system options for people like Apple,Dell,etc.) and nowhere near that was ever delivered, heck even the one few boost, Linux support, is just a small improvement, and in a small market with less influence on sales.
notty22
Distinguished
- Oct 8, 2009
- 2,958
- 0
- 21,160
Yawn
edited
You get hostile and contemptuous towards almost any comment about ATI, unless its riddled with excuses(your p.o.v, of which NOBODY, will ever get right
) for this or that. There is a history for ATI, whether theres more behind every generation or not, you can still see a history of a company from a resource such as Wikipedia.
edited
You get hostile and contemptuous towards almost any comment about ATI, unless its riddled with excuses(your p.o.v, of which NOBODY, will ever get right
) for this or that. There is a history for ATI, whether theres more behind every generation or not, you can still see a history of a company from a resource such as Wikipedia.
TheGreatGrapeApe
Champion
- Feb 18, 2003
- 20,043
- 0
- 50,960
Yeah that's what I thought of your link, and that you actually though for a second that it was relevant, showing again your lack of understanding of the industry, just like in the Fermi delay thread.
TheGreatGrapeApe
Champion
- Feb 18, 2003
- 20,043
- 0
- 50,960
Nice edit to expand on your previous one word reply, which showed more of the true nature of your contributions. 
No I get hostile towards yours and other's ignorance as if GPU history is 2 years old and there is only one participant.
Which is exactly why people like you won't understand it, because you think articles like the one you posted are in any way insightful. The Anand article is insightful, the other one is a summary from someone who doesn't understand it, let alone remember the history. I notice you didn't pick up on the DX10 error, probably because you wouldn't be able to figure it out without severe prodding.
That's my problem, with people thinking it's about Red vs Green, when there have been far more players that those two, and neither is the 'chosen one', and they both have only led from time to time. Most of you can't even imagine a time when there was no nVidia, so it's not surprising you don't understand how stupid some of your statements are, just like in the Fermi thread.
You think I favour ATi, I don't, if anything I prefer another company; but I don't suffer fools lightly and there are more nVidiots out there than FanATics so I clash with them more especially after launches, that may change if ATi ever increase their market share enough, but you never know.
For now, just try sticking to trying to disprove what I wrote, not just saying I'm biased as if that counters the facts in Anand's article that showed your article to be worthless in the discussion.
Simple enough? [:grahamlv:3]
No I get hostile towards yours and other's ignorance as if GPU history is 2 years old and there is only one participant.
Which is exactly why people like you won't understand it, because you think articles like the one you posted are in any way insightful. The Anand article is insightful, the other one is a summary from someone who doesn't understand it, let alone remember the history. I notice you didn't pick up on the DX10 error, probably because you wouldn't be able to figure it out without severe prodding.
That's my problem, with people thinking it's about Red vs Green, when there have been far more players that those two, and neither is the 'chosen one', and they both have only led from time to time. Most of you can't even imagine a time when there was no nVidia, so it's not surprising you don't understand how stupid some of your statements are, just like in the Fermi thread.
You think I favour ATi, I don't, if anything I prefer another company; but I don't suffer fools lightly and there are more nVidiots out there than FanATics so I clash with them more especially after launches, that may change if ATi ever increase their market share enough, but you never know.
For now, just try sticking to trying to disprove what I wrote, not just saying I'm biased as if that counters the facts in Anand's article that showed your article to be worthless in the discussion.
Simple enough? [:grahamlv:3]
TheViper
Distinguished
- Nov 26, 2006
- 2,120
- 0
- 20,160
When one cannot hold his ground or directly attack the concept, they tend to hide their inadequacies by redirecting the context from the concept to the messenger.
In other words, you guys are wrong and can't man up enough to admit it while the Saturday morning cartoon character handily deconstructs your arguments with all the grace of a wrecking ball.
In other words, you guys are wrong and can't man up enough to admit it while the Saturday morning cartoon character handily deconstructs your arguments with all the grace of a wrecking ball.
lostandwandering
Splendid
- Dec 5, 2006
- 3,538
- 0
- 22,960
That statement isn't entirely true though. R600 (the 2900 series) was a big push for AMD and ATI and it was the first release after the merger. R600 was big, power hungry, underperformed and was late to the market. That's not exactly a step in the right direction. However, subsequent releases have certainly gotten better.
TheGreatGrapeApe
Champion
- Feb 18, 2003
- 20,043
- 0
- 50,960
So what supporting evidence do you provide to this hypothesis?
Their loss of their chipset sales and OEM/ODM sales directly related to the new relationship with intel? Their loss of market share only recently starting to return but still far from pre-AMD? The lowering of their R&D budget? The selling off of their successful mobile & entertainment parts to help AMD avoid bankruptcy just at a time those two segments are growing in the computing world?
For some unknown reason? Really? Yeah, I guess I didn't explain it clearly enough.
You still think the ATi/graphics division got funds from traditional AMD activities to make graphic cards and not vice versa?
TRENDING THREADS
-
-
News Windows 11 will reportedly display a watermark if your PC does not support AI requirements- Started by Admin
- Replies: 4
-
Question r9 390 a good budget option since rx 580s are overpriced?- Started by jordanbuilds1
- Replies: 3
-
-
Question a boot loop for IBM x3550 m4 but it immediately turns off
- Started by abdus1
- Replies: 2
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram