AMD talked to NVidia about aquisition before getting ATI

[NTMBK]

Of course I know that. Since when is a business supposed or allowed to be criminal [..] or godless

Nothing wrong with being godless.

 

[formulav8]

Don't start that stuff please. Lets get back on topic.

 

[pw38]

Don't start that stuff please. Lets get back on topic.

Well he does have a point. What does godlessness have to do with anything? You're right though about being back on topic but if you want to avoid these conversations don't post them. Edit them out too if it helps.

 

[chimaxi83]

Maybe for AMD the company, but for AMD's last few generations fan base... Not so much. He's effectively destroyed AMD's price/performance reputation for me in two releases the 7xxx series and bulldozer are both not reflective of what many of us came to love about AMD in the past.

lol more of the "AMD charges too much" bs, sigh. Just because AMD has been known for their price/performance deals, doesn't mean that that's what defines them. Take off that green jersey, give it up already.

Every thread will devolve into this once the usual suspects/green team shows up.

 

[BallaTheFeared]

It's what defined them for me, on both the cpu and gpu sides.

But go ahead and tell me my opinions are wrong because you don't agree with them and how I'm a fanboy for every reason possible.

I mean what else is Anandtech if it isn't a pissing contest between brand loyalist who base their entire comments around the fact that the person they're quoting is by all rights a fanboy just like them?

 

[blackened23]

Dominos pizza is delicious

 

[Arkadrel]

Nvidia made alot of cash since AMD bought out ATI.
AMD hasnt been makeing that much, in-part to debt from buying ATI.

However since then this also happend (on nvidia side):

Nvidia lost the chip set business,
it lost the IGP business,
it lost the low end GPU business (Intel/amd IGP's),
it lost the future console business (all 3 rumored to be AMD GPUs),
their ARM chips are getting their asses kicked, so its losing that business except it had little of it to lose
the new AMD hd7xxx series are set to provide a challenge to nvidia's "pro market" as you call it (GPGPU strength).

Theres stuff like this:
http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/26067-amd-seizes-more-gpu-market-share

AMD ended Q4 2011 with a 24.8 percent market share, growing 7.8 percent sequentially over Q3. On the other hand, Nvidia’s share dipped by 3.1 percent, from 16.1 percent to 15.7 sequentially. Intel’s growth also came to a halt.

So in the last year:
AMD went from 24.2 to 24.8.
Intel went from 52.5 to 59.1
Nvidia went from 22.4 to 15.7

Nvidia comeing in at 15.7% is actually party better than it should be, because they sold off alot of old IGP chips in asia. Next year their total % is bound to be alot lower.



AMDs future looks better than Nvidias.
Nvidia just has more stock value, and more money in the bank (from previous years).



But nvidia has mobile devices right? tegra3 line ect?

yeah around 3% of market share, and thats gonna go downhill because tegra3 now has more powerfull chips out to compete against.


Nvidia has all that money laying around, time to invest it in its future.

 

[Arkadrel]

Nvidia haveing 3% of marketshare in mobile phones / tablets, is actually kinda grim looking.

Intel is soon gonna push into the mobile market, with its low powered Atoms.
AMD, I think I read where planning to do custom designs, ei. someone want ARM+amd Radeon for a phone, they can get it.

That has to steal a few % from here and there.
Apple and Qualcomm are the big boys in the mobile devices, industry. Their chips are beating the tegra lines.


You have to ask yourself is nvidia would have been better off today if they had been bought out instead of ATI.

 

[BenSkywalker]

Nvidia made alot of cash since AMD bought out ATI.
AMD hasnt been makeing that much, in-part to debt from buying ATI.

However since then this also happend (on nvidia side):

You want to know what the biggest difference between ATi being part of AMD versus JHH running AMD? Take a look at this chart again-

http://www.techpowerup.com/img/12-02-25/jpr_mdgpu_2011_01.jpg

See the Qualcomm numbers? AMD sold them that technology for $65 Million. One of the most absurdly stupid business choices ever. nVidia has ~10% of that market share and is posting quarterly profits for that division higher then $65 Million. This is why the comparison to JHH versus whatever helmet head AMD has crashing(can't really say running) the business into the ground is laughable.

yeah around 3% of market share, and thats gonna go downhill because tegra3 now has more powerfull chips out to compete against.

The SoC market isn't anything you seem to understand. Nothing is out that can compete against Tegra3 at the moment. Some of the chips that we have seen that are supposed to handily beat Tegra3 aren't scheduled to ship in a device until 2013- in some cases several quarters after Tegra4 is out. Until nV gets LTE integrated with the Tegra line they are going to have a rough go against Qualcomm. As of this moment however, nothing is shipping that can top Tegra3(Samsung has even pushed back the announcement of their product that is supposed to be better- not the ship date, just the announcement of products based on Exynos 5250).

BTW- The 3% doesn't include tablets which is by far Tegra's strongest market(well, tablets and automobiles, but automobile integration isn't a hot topic for fanboys, just people who are interested in the business end of making money).

Intel is soon gonna push into the mobile market, with its low powered Atoms.

Intel has been trying to do that for years. They find a way to fail.

AMD, I think I read where planning to do custom designs, ei. someone want ARM+amd Radeon for a phone, they can get it.

They have done that already, it's called the Snapdragon and it is fairly dominant in the market. The morons who helm AMD just decided to sell it for $65 Million. One of the dumbest business choices in history.

Apple and Qualcomm are the big boys in the mobile devices, industry. Their chips are beating the tegra lines.

Qualcomm and Samsung are the big boys in the SoC market. Apple doesn't make a SoC as of yet. You can read whatever charts you like, the A6 is the first SoC that Apple may be having made on their own(TSMC fabbing it for them). Samsung products all of the A5s.

You have to ask yourself is nvidia would have been better off today if they had been bought out instead of ATI.

nVidia? No, certainly not. nVidia makes money hand over fist in its' ventures, AMD finds a way to lose money no matter how great the product is. JHH certainly would have helped that out enormously, but I don't think it would have been enough to equal the companies out on a straight profitability metric.

 

[Keysplayr]

Nvidia made alot of cash since AMD bought out ATI.
AMD hasnt been makeing that much, in-part to debt from buying ATI.

However since then this also happend (on nvidia side):



Theres stuff like this:
http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/26067-amd-seizes-more-gpu-market-share

Nvidia comeing in at 15.7% is actually party better than it should be, because they sold off alot of old IGP chips in asia. Next year their total % is bound to be alot lower.



AMDs future looks better than Nvidias.
Nvidia just has more stock value, and more money in the bank (from previous years).



But nvidia has mobile devices right? tegra3 line ect?

yeah around 3% of market share, and thats gonna go downhill because tegra3 now has more powerfull chips out to compete against.


Nvidia has all that money laying around, time to invest it in its future.

The funny thing is, you don't see anything wrong with that graph. Or should I say something missing.

 

[Idontcare]

Of course I know that. Since when is a business supposed or allowed to be criminal or jealous or hostile or war or wickedness or sickness or godless or inhumane. There is a difference. Uggg. Sorry for the off-topicness. I speak no more about it.

They are allowed to be such in any nation that allows their businesses to operate that way (China, Somalia, etc), and any time they are operating in international waters or space.

I would argue that the question of business criminality in practice has been laid to rest with the essentially zero incarceration rate for business and political leaders that had a hand in crafting the housing mortgage debacle and unregulate credit default swaps market that imploded in 2008.

Prisons are for the poor or the inescapably stupid (Bernie Madoff). But if you have some money and are moderately intelligent in building your networkings then you are going to skate (Hector Ruiz) or get to walk by paying back a mere percentage of your ill-gotten goods.

 

[SirPauly]

Nvidia made alot of cash since AMD bought out ATI.
AMD hasnt been makeing that much, in-part to debt from buying ATI.

Some people lock onto just the graphics division but when you factor chip-sets and the APU's, growth potential with APU's and giving AMD a competitive advantage and some differentiation -- ATI was a gem. What would AMD be without this purchase today?

 

[railven]

It's what defined them for me, on both the cpu and gpu sides.

But go ahead and tell me my opinions are wrong because you don't agree with them and how I'm a fanboy for every reason possible.

I mean what else is Anandtech if it isn't a pissing contest between brand loyalist who base their entire comments around the fact that the person they're quoting is by all rights a fanboy just like them?

I'm going to toss my support to Balla for this one, I've been an Intel/ATI supporter since I started my trek down PC-Lane.

AMD (CPUs mind you, since before that's all they were) have always been about budget. During the Anthlon days it was a double-win since for the price you got a better chip than the competition, but they were still priced cheaper than the Intel "equivalent" even though they'd whoop their ass.

I still call AMD GPU's ATI's, because to me that's what they still are. Anyways, I've never considered AMD-GPU's cheap (always buying in the $400+ price range when available.) Even now, I still see the HD 79xx series priced well in comparative to the competition.

Anyways, yeah, AMD-CPUs to me have always been budget, which Bulldozer literally crapped all over it. AMD-GPU's are still the same (in my book.)

 

[Grooveriding]

Of course I know that. Since when is a business supposed or allowed to be criminal or jealous or hostile or war or wickedness or sickness or godless or inhumane. There is a difference. Uggg. Sorry for the off-topicness. I speak no more about it.

Not to perpetuate the off-topic nature, but it begged an observation. The tolerance and absolution for the crooks of the business world can ultimately be laid at the feet of the voters in countries where the government creates a climate that allows corruption.

Speak up and take notice with your vote, if you account for the majority, things will change. Find you're not in the majority and things stay the same, immigrate

 

[SirPauly]

The landscape would be really different today if that happened. Would AMD/Nvidia still have gone for mobile computing via ARM?

Great question actually.

 

[thilanliyan]

AMD (CPUs mind you, since before that's all they were) have always been about budget. During the Anthlon days it was a double-win since for the price you got a better chip than the competition, but they were still priced cheaper than the Intel "equivalent" even though they'd whoop their ass.

What about the Xtreme Edition like Athlon 64 FX CPUs from AMD? Those were not "budget" CPUs. And the X800s, X1800s, and X1900s? My, how people forget. AMD has been a "budget" company for several years now because they didn't have the performance to justify the price, whereas back in the Athlon 64 days you could pay $1000 for one of their CPUs because they were top performers.

 

[thilanliyan]

I would argue that the question of business criminality in practice has been laid to rest with the essentially zero incarceration rate for business and political leaders that had a hand in crafting the housing mortgage debacle and unregulate credit default swaps market that imploded in 2008.

Not 100% sure of it's accuracy but apparently some of the very same government people responsible for deregulation, etc during the Clinton and Bush administrations were rehired by the Obama administration?! That shows that likely nothing will change. You guys/gals in the US should take back your country...it's been hijacked!!! There's more of you than them!

 

[railven]

What about the Xtreme Edition like Athlon 64 FX CPUs from AMD? Those were not "budget" CPUs. And the X800s, X1800s, and X1900s? My, how people forget. AMD has been a "budget" company for several years now because they didn't have the performance to justify the price, whereas back in the Athlon 64 days you could pay $1000 for one of their CPUs because they were top performers.

And that's why people were buying AMDs during those days? I thought it was because for a little less than the Intel equivalent you were getting better performance? That to me implies a better perf : price ratio, so budget builds were coming out on top.

They held the crown during that generation, but I don't recall ever recommending $1,000 CPUs. Do you? Intel now is moving closer to holding both titles in my book. Their cheap-o stuff is starting to really make AMD's cheap-o stuff look obsolete.

 

[thilanliyan]

And that's why people were buying AMDs during those days? I thought it was because for a little less than the Intel equivalent you were getting better performance? That to me implies a better perf : price ratio, so budget builds were coming out on top.

Athlon 64 CPUs IIRC were not cheaper than Intel CPUs, and neither were the Athlon 64 X2 CPUs when they first came out...maybe Athlon and Athlon XP CPUs were.

Here are some X2 prices:
http://www.anandtech.com/show/1676

"Now armed with final silicon, our stance on AMD's Athlon 64 X2 doesn't change at all - AMD clearly has the faster overall dual core desktop solution, but at a price that will be out of reach for most users."

 

[formulav8]

Looks like IV delay could help AMD/ATI with their trinity apu. Hopefully they can get into the ultra-thin market with that cpu.

Well he does have a point. What does godlessness have to do with anything? You're right though about being back on topic but if you want to avoid these conversations don't post them. Edit them out too if it helps.

Excuse me, I have no problem with the comment in itself. Its where the comment is being made. Thankyou.

 

[Topweasel]

Athlon 64 CPUs IIRC were not cheaper than Intel CPUs, and neither were the Athlong 64 X2 CPUs when they first came out...maybe Athlon and Athlon XP CPUs were.

Here are some X2 prices:
http://www.anandtech.com/show/1676

"Now armed with final silicon, our stance on AMD's Athlon 64 X2 doesn't change at all - AMD clearly has the faster overall dual core desktop solution, but at a price that will be out of reach for most users."

QFT. I purchased my 4400+ For $500 and that was third from the top at the time. It was the cheapest I could get a 2MB L2 X2.

 

[formulav8]

I paid $359 for my 3800+ X2 s939 @ googlegear (Now called zipzoomfly). Still have it too. Since then the highest i've paid for a cpu is my current q9450 for $140. The 3800 was great though. I could oc to 2.6ghz right around stock voltage.

 

[Dribble]

The landscape would be really different today if that happened. Would AMD/Nvidia still have gone for mobile computing via ARM?

Intel was attempting to cut nvidia out of it's key markets, nvidia had to adapt or slowly die. Here lies the big difference between them and AMD - the market is changing and AMD has effectively stuck their heads in the sand. They've missed many opportunities and failed to get key products out fast enough.

It's those sort of strategy decisions and company drive that the CEO makes, JHH is key to nvidia being in a strong place just as AMD's last two CEO's are key to the dead end they were driving up - the board saw this and acted decisively, just got to hope for AMD's sake it wasn't too late.

Anyway I suspect if JHH had got control of AMD he would have seen the futility of their current position much sooner, and had them looking to new markets they could dominate in. That might have included ARM, whatever it certainly wouldn't have included them accepting they were doomed to pick up the scraps that Intel threw them.

JHH may not be the nicest guy, but as Jobs has shown it's often not the nice guys that win - it's the hard edged fighters, who will stop at nothing to succeed.

 

[SirPauly]

Can one make the claim that AMD's APU strategy has been more effective than nVidia's mobile strategy so far? Considering AMD may have had limited resources, they spent them on what made the most sense for AMD at that time. AMD can still enter the mobile market and try to innovate SOC wins.

 

[Topweasel]

I paid $359 for my 3800+ X2 s939 @ googlegear (Now called zipzoomfly). Still have it too. Since then the highest i've paid for a cpu is my current q9450 for $140. The 3800 was great though. I could oc to 2.6ghz right around stock voltage.

Well technically they aren't called anything been dead for half a year or so, and dieing for almost a full year before that.