AMD to buy ATI for $5.4 billion

Son of a..... Now I have to rethink if I want to continue buying ATI cards. AMD will likely make them become worthless.
 
[quote name='ironmouse']Son of a..... Now I have to rethink if I want to continue buying ATI cards. AMD will likely make them become worthless.[/QUOTE]

Here's to blind brand loyalty! Cheers to you, the fanboy.
 
I'm actually interested to see what this does for both the PC world and console gaming world. By having both the AMD and ATI brand under one house, AMD is going to have a great deal of leverage going forward.
 
[quote name='guyver2077']go buy nvidia instead[/QUOTE]QFT (even though I'm using an ATI card right now, I'd rather have nvidia)
 
I'll continue to buy the best price/performance chip and graphics card no matter who manufactures them. I could care less when it comes to ATI vs. Nvidia (VooDoo FTW!) But I def prefer Intel chips to AMD.
 
If this is bad news for anyone, it's bad news for enthuestis. As it stands, the best processor is the Core 2 Duo but there are no good dual GPU ready mobos yet. ATI was making a triple GPU ready mobo but now that AMD owns them, I doubt it'll see release.

Otherwise, this won't effect the industry too much. I'm sure Nvidia will still pump out GPUs for everyone.

I was going with a Core 2 Duo and ATI GPU... but I might have to change my strategy now.
 
Integrated Graphics are supposedly over 70% of the graphics market, but they really cant play any of the games that come out, which some people have faulted as hurting the PC games market, since it really requires a dedicated card.

If they can put out better IGPs, it could really have an effect
 
Hmmm, do you think I can PM this at CC???

I love my Intel/ATI systems, plus my love for the ATI goes even further because of the 360 and the cube. But buyouts in general water down the buyee's products. I'm taking a lets wait and see approach
 
Yes I am a Nvidia Fanboy, but remember this will not short term affect us to much, if anything it will make ATI cards better for those of us who prefer Nvidia. And Nvidia isn't about to break relations with Nvidia, This is probally more for integrated small formfactor like PDA, Cellphone stuff that I don't think AMD partnered with Nvidia much on anyway. This might shift things in the future, but right now this is more about AMD vs Intel, not AMD vs Nvidia. And now ATI might be able to produce better chipsets and cause Nvidia to be even better quality manufacturer on the Chipset market of course i jumped from Nvidia to ULI, becuase of the problems with Nforce 3 and 6xxx series cards before ULi got bought by Nvidia.

Also remember this may make Via become a bigger Chipset company because it will be about the only real Alternative to the Processor Companies on chipsets.
 
I am shocked by this, mostly because I would never suspect AMD could afford it. I love AMD products even though right now for the first time in a long time they aren't 'the best' on the market even though I think soon enough we'll see AMD take the lead back from Intel. And while I currently have an nVidia card in my PC and have always used nVidia GPUs, ATI seems to have the more forward thinking architecture right now with the intergrated pipelines. Not to mention I believe last time I checked ATI's new stuff was pulling away from nVidia's speed wise. I wonder if this means whoever uses an ATi GPU in their console next will turn to AMD for the CPU as well.
 
It's a double edged sword... I ordered a Core 2 Duo and have my X800GTO coming. I don't know if I should go ahead with this or wait.

On one hand, AMD could let ATI continue to make GPUs for everyone but I don't think that'll do. Intel declined to renew ATI's contract so that basically means Intel will not receive any chipset support for their mobos.

The best processor on one side, the best GPUs on the other. This is a bad time for this to happen...:lol:
 
[quote name='Brak']I thought that said $5.58.[/quote]So did I... and I was gonna say "Hot shit I coulda bought that goddam company if I hadn't bought those two hot dogs and a soda.... :("
 
[quote name='Brak']I thought that said $5.58.[/quote]

I can understand mistaking the B for an 8, but how did the 4 become a 5?
 
[quote name='Dr Mario Kart']Integrated Graphics are supposedly over 70% of the graphics market, but they really cant play any of the games that come out, which some people have faulted as hurting the PC games market, since it really requires a dedicated card.

If they can put out better IGPs, it could really have an effect[/QUOTE]

Especially if they can earn a bigger part of the laptop market since integrated graphics are pretty much the standard in laptops. I have a feeling that was a big part of the reason for the merger.

Also hopefully this means that AMD can help out ATi figure out how to make a quality motherboard so that they can start to get a piece of that market.
 
[quote name='Stuka']I can understand mistaking the B for an 8, but how did the 4 become a 5?[/QUOTE]
By a slip of the wrist.
 
[quote name='Dr Mario Kart']Integrated Graphics are supposedly over 70% of the graphics market, but they really cant play any of the games that come out, which some people have faulted as hurting the PC games market, since it really requires a dedicated card.

If they can put out better IGPs, it could really have an effect[/QUOTE]

Pretty sure you pulled that number out of your ass. Either way, the bulk of integrated graphics PCs are bought by schools and businesses. They really have no use for running games, so I fail to see how it's hurting the PC game industry.

If anything, its the lack of quality PC games.
 
[quote name='Dr Mario Kart']Integrated Graphics are supposedly over 70% of the graphics market, but they really cant play any of the games that come out, which some people have faulted as hurting the PC games market, since it really requires a dedicated card.

If they can put out better IGPs, it could really have an effect[/QUOTE]

If they continue making it easy to disable integrated this shouldn't be a problem
 
Actually Stealth He very well might be lowballing the percentage of PC's with Integrated Graphics. Most computers in the us are family computers or laptops that aren't used for high end gaming like ours are. If PC gamers who upgrade their equipment were 20% of the total PC ownership in the states I'd be kinda surprised.
 
That was the only specific figure that I had heard in discussions on this topic elsewhere. This is the internet after all, so things can be checked on. I asked him about it and looked into it a bit myself. It seems most boards have integrated video of some sort, so that even if you DO have a high end graphics card, you probably still have integrated video of some sort that you had to turn off.

http://www.technoclicks.com/article-655.php

JPR estimates that approximately 50.9 million desktop graphics devices shipped in the third quarter of 2005, of which 30.7 million or 60.3 percent were integrated parts.
Click to expand...
Thats still fairly high, but perhaps the number I heard was mobile

Mobile integrated graphic chipsets (IGCs) shipped in record numbers during the period and also claimed record share of 72.4 percent in the mobile graphics market, up from 67.2 percent share in the prior quarter and 52.4 percent share in the same period a year ago.
Click to expand...
 
[quote name='jm2u']Here's to blind brand loyalty! Cheers to you, the fanboy.[/QUOTE]

I've had both Nvidia and ATI cards. I personally found ATI to perform better.
 
Wow, hopefully this will turn out well. I have used both Nvidia and ATI GPUs as well as Intel and AMD CPUs. I mostly choose the best performance for the price range I'm looking for.
 
Was I the only one who thought that "B" looked like an 8 at first so I thought it said "AMD to buy ATI for $5.48"...

I just thought it was some typo error on the account of the guys who published the news and that this was just making fun of it... haha
 
[quote name='stormenmormon']Was I the only one who thought that "B" looked like an 8 at first so I thought it said "AMD to buy ATI for $5.48"...

I just thought it was some typo error on the account of the guys who published the news and that this was just making fun of it... haha[/quote]I'll be the asshole to say it.. Did you even read the thread? Like three people have pointed that out.

That being said, seriously, I read it the same way. "$5.48 could either buy you a delicious Subway sandwich, or, ATI!"
 
[quote name='Puffa469']I'll continue to buy the best price/performance chip... no matter who manufactures them.[/quote]
[quote name='Puffa469']But I def prefer Intel chips to AMD.[/QUOTE]

These statements contradict each other. AMD has had the upper hand in price/performance for a while now, regardless of your non-preferential preference of Intel.
 
[quote name='radjago']These statements contradict each other. AMD has had the upper hand in price/performance for a while now, regardless of your non-preferential preference of Intel.[/quote]

Technically right now the new Core Duos are faster than AMD chips, although from what I've seen it's not a case where they blow the doors off AMD chips as somewould suggest. As for the performance to price ratio I don't know as I haven't been sollowing Core Duo prices.
 
This will have no effect on consumers for a good while. Keep in mind that this has months, even years, of regulatory morass before the companies are truly merged and until then certain amounts of separation must be maintained.

Even after that is done, you're unlikely to see ATI support for Intel systems dry up. On the board level, things will continue to be based on the PCI-E open standard. With the 5 Gb/s version still in the draft stages, there isn't going to be a shift away from PCI-E as the standard for a very long time. At least a decade.

On the chipset level there isn't much to lose. You may have seen reports that Intel was 80% of ATI chipset income but they usually fail to note that PC chipsets are still a new business for ATI and a very small part of their revenue picture. Losing the Intel motherboard market doesn't change much going forward, especially when they'll be gaining a favored position in AMD branded motherboards. (In the same way, Nvidia loses some of their AMD business but picks up more Intel business.)

AMD has long been disinclined to produce their own chipsets for their own CPUs and even less their own motherboards. But those factors are critical requirements for taking away some of Intel corporate desktop market. Vendors and big corporate buyers both like that they can get a single complete board from Intel, drop in an Intel CPU, add some RAM and that's all the silicon for a PC. (Hard drives have their own silicon but since they're self-contained it isn't viewed that way.)

AMD could have picked up all the elements ATI offers to PC integration for a lot less cash than buying ATI but the strong ATI consumer product market is what makes the difference. It will do a lot to boost AMD's revenue picture despite the debt load incurred from the purchase. Both AMD and ATI have lesser margins than their competition but they're generally profitable.

The primary goal here is to create a single entity with a superior combined revenue than the two of them separately. That means little change to either company's business for a good while.
 
[quote name='radjago']These statements contradict each other. AMD has had the upper hand in price/performance for a while now, regardless of your non-preferential preference of Intel.[/QUOTE]

Intel has made a major comeback with the Conroe product. Both price and performance are very much in Intel's favor and with Intel's traditional high margins while AMD is forced to slash prices.

Intel had expected to get a few more good years from the P4 architecture and recovering from that has been costly but that recovery is here. AMD is now appreciating the strength of Intel's ability to deliver end-to-end solutions where AMD is dependent on partner companies who don't have as much to lose as AMD if they're late to market. That is part of why the acquisition of ATI is happening.
 
[quote name='SpeedyG']Actually Stealth He very well might be lowballing the percentage of PC's with Integrated Graphics. Most computers in the us are family computers or laptops that aren't used for high end gaming like ours are. If PC gamers who upgrade their equipment were 20% of the total PC ownership in the states I'd be kinda surprised.[/QUOTE]

First of all, if laptops are included, then it is incredibly misleading. Of course most laptops have integrated chips, because they are not designed around gaming. They are designed around portability.

You just don't game on a portable laptop. Needless to say, most laptops would of course have no integrated chip, and shouldn't be part of the target market for games anyway. The last thing we'd want is gimped games so they could run on laptops.
 
[quote name='epobirs']Intel has made a major comeback with the Conroe product. Both price and performance are very much in Intel's favor and with Intel's traditional high margins while AMD is forced to slash prices.

Intel had expected to get a few more good years from the P4 architecture and recovering from that has been costly but that recovery is here. AMD is now appreciating the strength of Intel's ability to deliver end-to-end solutions where AMD is dependent on partner companies who don't have as much to lose as AMD if they're late to market. That is part of why the acquisition of ATI is happening.[/QUOTE]
From everything I've read, Conroe will be a great step in the right direction for Intel in terms of raw performance, but it has yet to hit the streets. Price cuts will help keep AMD competetive in the mid-to-lower end of the consumer market. Now if they could just find a way to have the socket stability that they had in the socket A era.
 
[quote name='radjago']From everything I've read, Conroe will be a great step in the right direction for Intel in terms of raw performance, but it has yet to hit the streets. Price cuts will help keep AMD competetive in the mid-to-lower end of the consumer market. Now if they could just find a way to have the socket stability that they had in the socket A era.[/QUOTE]

Earlier today ZZF had some of the 6300's in stock, but they have sold out since then .

On another note, motherboard prices for the conroe are flat out insane.
 
If you're in Santa Clara tomorrow you can buy a high end Conroe PC. Intel is having a press event, starting at 10 AM, that will culminate at the MicroCenter near Intel HQ. A bunch of machines will supposedly be available for purchase. Conroe processors and boards should be hitting the shelves everywhere very soon after.

I would be driving to Santa Clara right now but the person who was supposed to be going with me bowed out and the gas makes it too expensive to do on my own without a paycheck attached to the effort. The other person was in a better position to get paid for the trip but couldn't summon the enthusiasm and was making good progress on his latest novel and didn't want to break stride.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top