... o... common... and intel can't behave too?! Soooooo many antitrust cases all over the world... lets make a big hype about them too... i imagine, that intel behind this to clear the way for larabee... and why not? They can pay... and everything haz its price... so lets fantasize about that... i'm a lucky HD4870 user... and the prise was nice too... soo, lets see... intel destroys AMD with CPU pricing... and intel even don't need to to conspire with others, because intel act/is like a monopolist... intel poses a thread to AMD and nVidia... AMD can sing a blues about it... and nVidia haz sean it... so what can AMD/ATI and nVidia do... ok... they may have some aces... many patents for grapics tehnology... that's why intel have to push a a new standard GPUCPU, that's, by the way is a AMD's Fusion's concepts 1 to 1 copy... or seams so... then nVidia haz the Physix, AMD haz CPU's... intel got just badass CPU's, tons of many, monopolist attitude and a killer behavior... so it's eat or be eaten...

Hey djeazy Spelling or English?

On the side note, you must be blind. If Nvidia and AMD conspire together to fix prices, then it is acting like a monopolistic single body. Whether it's one company being a monopoly to control prices or a bunch of companies working together to hike or control prices, it's the same result for the consumer. Seriously, get a clue.

Wow, AMD can't seem to ever catch a break. Since ATi was purchased in 2006 I wonder if AMD is even at fault (I don't necessarily mean legally) or if they bought the wrong GPU manufacturer, at the wrong time.

woot...
I love that graph, they are even comparing crossfire setups to single geforce cards in price, how lame is that.

Man, wish you could edit comments, as a side note I just wanted that this whole thing makes me think of what kind of GPU manufacturers there would be in the market today had there not been price fixing.

I'm no legal analyst nor accounting person. I'm just a computer end user who must not fully understand the problem here. So AMD and nVidia have been working together to release new technology at the same time. Or they have 'conspired' to keep certain pricing points. Ummm, "So?" Doesn't the automotive industry do this worldwide? They produce a product to compete in a certain price range and release them to the public at various auto-shows. nVidia and AMD do the same thing with their products at tech shows.
With regards to price fixing, how much can one really complain when there is an available product in nearly every price range? From the old MX4000/Rage chips available for $10 to their high-end models in the $350+ range, where is the price fixing? Are they supposed to release newer, faster products for less than their current lineup still in the pipeline? And let's not forget the vendors that use nVidia/AMD reference designs. They need to be able to have some profit margin as well. Are nVidia/AMD going to cut the throats of the vendors that buy their chips/designs?
And lastly, AMD and nVidia are constantly going back and forth for the crown in respective areas, the same way that AMD and Intel go at it. I hardly call "one-upping the competition" price fixing or collaborating to defraud the public. How long did nVidia hold the performance crown prior to AMD finally catching up...close to a year or more? How often did we hear, "Whenever AMD ("ATI") finally releases their new chip, it had better be a good showing!" We heard it a lot for a long time. That's "collaborating"?

all but one would have gone out of business because of price wars... lol

I'm tired of the AMD and Nvidia market games. The future is UNICHROME!

I think the terms you're all looking for are collusion and oligopoly. Two competing companies should never be discussing some of the contents of those conversations in private. I think they would be in a lot less hot water had they discussed these ideas as a part of an open forum or committee. Meeting in private and closing out any potential competition is anti-competitive, regardless of whether there is any competition, you must leave the door open under U.S. law.

Hmm, I would be interested to know what product lines they feel were subject to price fixing.

i like how the article states that they conspired to stabilize and maintain low prices on CPU's and GPU's. Wouldn't that mean they tried to keep the prices lowest for the consumers? Shouldn't we be loving that? Or am I interpreting the article wrong? All this stuff is pure marketing, not evil based bull crap. Are you going to yell at McDonald's because they charge $1 for a 5 cent cheeseburger? I think not, since that is absurd. All these companies are trying to do is get both companies profit

It doesn't matter. They bought them and now whatever happened is now on them.

Why people can't just accept this may have happened with AMD themselves is beyond me. TBH I myself think AMD could have done it because they are a company just like Intel and IBM and worry more about their bottom line and their stock prices than anything.

... sorry for my bad English... i'm from Latvia...
... latvieši amīšiem BMX olimpiādē sadeva pa pakaļu...
... feel free to translate that... and i just suggested to fantasize...

I think the article is saying that both companies conspired to establish a MINIMUM level of pricing, as in, a level where they would not force each other to go below. That is NOT the same as working together to lower prices. Geez.

Well well, now that we know that, the next lawsuit should target companies that produce laptops that wont last more than a year, wireless companies that produce low quality wireless product that don't last more than a year.
It is pretty sad that you can't trust them no more, even though the technology has been there for a while

Yes, you must. It's not rocket science and it is of utter importance to you.

The free market economy is the driving social force of the 21st century in all developed countries, even post-communist ones like Russia and China.

Anti-competitive behavior is like Kryptonite for the free market. It slows down progress, it keeps prices unnecessarily high and worst of all, it barrs new enterprises from entering the market.

What you get is the bastard love child of communism and capitalism with all their combined drawbacks and none of the advantages.

I don't see any price fixing in those quotes. If that's all the evidence, then this lawsuit is an imbecility and all it will achieve is to force AMD and nVidia to waste some money on lawyers. Guess whose video cards will be more expensive, to pay for those lawyers.

I think AMD and nVidia should indeed work together, to establish some standards (for example ATI cards should support CUDA, and the whole PhysX/Havok thing should be unified). They should also work together in marketing, as those emails said, so that every computer buyer who wants to play games understands that a $1000 CPU and a $50 video card is a bad combination for games. Nothing wrong with getting both sets of PR people to work on that, IMO. We here at THG try to pass that message on too, after all.

The boys on the board won't like this.

Regardless of the legality of this issue, this is awful for consumers! I wish there were more competition here.

agreed, aevm, if thats all they had to go on, there is evidence of nothing but mutual respect between competitors.... although that might lead to something....

While some of the email exchange may not be ethical it does not warrant anything beyond what it is. The only way these companies make profit is at the high end, the price of the raw materials and the production process is too high. Bogus lawsuit, hope the ones filing lose.

It is also weird that coincidentally there is 2 major GPU and CPU makers. It is strange there isn't a third company to mix it up a little.....

I think the point of the lawsuit, is that since there are really only two serious GPU manufacturers (ATI/nVidia), that the two working together to 'fix' prices, is bad for the public. It's sort of allows these two companies to decide the market price of their video cards. In other words, even if the 'market value' of a particular video card should be $200, they can artificially inflate that purchase price to $300. Thereby, increasing profits for each company, and hosing customers.

Now, I'm not saying that's exactly what happened. But obviously that's what is being alleged. So, even though you're right about there being video cards in all price brackets. Imagine if the "high end" price bracket was $400 instead of $500-$600. That's the point the plaintiff is trying to make I think.

Should be interesting to see what happens. Although, today's market seems to be better. At least that's my impression. As there's some pretty dang good deals to be had on great video cards right now.

The boys on the board will be apart of this .. if it is true .. things like this go high up! in the food chain

lol, stupidest anti-trust lawsuit. There is a mountain of evidence against this over the last several years.

Wow good thing this lawsuit is happening! It's what is needed to bash the monopolistic behavior of these two companies that i have bought products from in the past and will so in the future because there are no other choices.
Gee a class action lawsuit, that means "us" the consumers would stand to get refunded about $20 and the "lawyers" will get millions.Seems fair to me, and their products will go back to high prices which they will get my $20 back.I can hardly wait for the settlement(my $20), i mean the next generation of graphics cards.

Sigh... where are the days you could actually _choose_ your computer parts from more than 2 manufacturers.

This is great, I owned 3 video cards within the conspiracy period and I'm still using one. Maybe I could join the class and get some pretty $25 coupon toward my next purchase.

It doesn't matter my next 4850 class card will cost $500; I'll have my coupons mailed to me in a few years after the suit settled.

ok, ok so making business makes you an evil minded corporation? sure it was behind closed doors, but does that make it dishonest? (if you revealed ALL your business strategies to the public, the competition would eat you alive) all i see is 2 companies teaming up against one bigger company for profits and market share....isn't that what making business is all about? so what if they don't have the consumers in mind, for them isn't it all about making money in the end? is like when japan used to have a gentleman's agreement between all major manufacturers that they had to limit their horsepower from the factory to a certain number (i believe 280 HP). so were consumers supposed to argue that there was a conspiracy set out to give them lesser cars for their money?

i mean who doesn't like a good product for less? but is this lawsuit really justified? who determines the actual prices of GPUs when there is only two major families of them?

Wait... none of the quotes from the emails prove a thing. It's like each sentence is being analyzed out of context, total BS. In the last quote the ATI rep mentions there desire to bring GPU respect up in comparison to the CPU market and that their current fiscal position is poor in that respect. The comment about losing what they'd built can be taken two ways: that they'd built a pricing increase in collusion or that they'd built market position compared to CPUs. Given previous text in the email, it's obvious that one could argue the latter, either way, evidence is not conclusive. Besides, rival companies always work together. And exchanging emails is normal between execs of rival companies. The emails shown here prove nothing. It *could* be construed that these companies are in collusion, but it appears from the *entire* content of what is shown that the interest is in their market and market gains... they are feeling in the shadow of the CPU giants in terms of their consumer respect and are upset about it. Whining at best. These dudes suing may just find themselves in over their heads.