Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Is Nvidia owned by Intel?

Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Share
June 17, 2010 12:21:23 PM

Is Nvidia owned by Intel much like ATI is owned by AMD?

More about : nvidia owned intel

a b Î Nvidia
June 17, 2010 12:32:49 PM

No,ATI is owned by AMD.Intel and Nvidia work separately
m
0
l
June 17, 2010 4:22:09 PM

Intel wouldn't mind if NVIDIA died. Heck, they're in a bitter lawsuit right now...
m
0
l
Related resources
a b Î Nvidia
June 17, 2010 4:50:21 PM

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.
m
0
l
June 17, 2010 9:55:26 PM

diffently no and i heard that nvidia will stop making products compatible with intel cpu
m
0
l
June 17, 2010 9:56:01 PM

Would be nice if they teamed up though some insane combis :) 
m
0
l
June 18, 2010 8:40:24 PM

No love lost between Intel and Nvidia
m
0
l
June 18, 2010 8:44:31 PM

Well ATI and AMD turned out ok, it was the first time ATI pulled ahead so Nvidia and Intel would bring something very tasty imo.
m
0
l
a b Î Nvidia
June 19, 2010 9:18:45 AM

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... :love: 

weehamish said:
Well ATI and AMD turned out ok, it was the first time ATI pulled ahead...


New to the graphics arena, eh n00b? :heink: 

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]

m
0
l
June 19, 2010 9:48:31 AM

Not really where you think ATI get the funds to make the graphics cards? From AMD.

And your a mod why do you think you can call me a noob?
m
0
l
June 19, 2010 10:36:48 AM

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.
m
0
l
a b Î Nvidia
June 19, 2010 2:32:15 PM

weehamish said:
Not really where you think ATI get the funds to make the graphics cards? From AMD.

And your a mod why do you think you can call me a noob?


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? :non: 

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. :hello: 
m
0
l
June 19, 2010 4:19:18 PM

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.
m
0
l
a b Î Nvidia
June 19, 2010 7:19:45 PM

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.
m
0
l
a b Î Nvidia
June 19, 2010 8:04:56 PM

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
m
0
l
a b Î Nvidia
June 20, 2010 11:56:31 PM

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. :pfff: 

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.
m
0
l
a b Î Nvidia
June 21, 2010 12:21:15 AM

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.
m
0
l
a b Î Nvidia
June 21, 2010 12:26:13 AM

notty22 said:
Yawn


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. :foudtag: 
m
0
l
a b Î Nvidia
June 21, 2010 12:43:23 AM

Nice edit to expand on your previous one word reply, which showed more of the true nature of your contributions. :sarcastic: 

notty22 said:

You get hostile and contemptuous towards almost any comment about ATI, unless its a riddled with excuses for this or that.


No I get hostile towards yours and other's ignorance as if GPU history is 2 years old and there is only one participant. :pfff: 

Quote:
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.


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]

m
0
l
June 21, 2010 11:03:33 AM

He's a mod he knows everything.
m
0
l
June 21, 2010 11:31:17 AM

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.
m
0
l
June 21, 2010 11:40:19 AM

Alls i said was since they merged ATI got better, even without AMDs help it was since the merge.

Notty is also saying this, the mod is just raging for some unknown reason because he is the hulk when hes on the forums.
m
0
l
June 21, 2010 1:37:42 PM

weehamish said:
Alls i said was since they merged ATI got better, even without AMDs help it was since the merge.


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.
m
0
l
a b Î Nvidia
June 21, 2010 1:51:17 PM

weehamish said:
Alls i said was since they merged ATI got better, even without AMDs help it was since the merge.


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? :heink: 

Quote:
Notty is also saying this, the mod is just raging for some unknown reason because he is the hulk when hes on the forums.


For some unknown reason? Really? Yeah, I guess I didn't explain it clearly enough. :sarcastic: 
You still think the ATi/graphics division got funds from traditional AMD activities to make graphic cards and not vice versa? :mouais: 
m
0
l
June 21, 2010 2:42:56 PM

Hmm, weehamish is a youngster and notty is the nvidia troll.
Continue with your work.
m
0
l
!