If it's of no advantage to them, then yes they will. You're acting as if staying on top of the GPU tech is just going to be another minute task for AMD. Something where they can just throw some money at it and have it bring them significant gains. That's not how things work, as I outline in prior posts.Originally posted by: Creig
Nor does it meant they intend to pull out of the high end market.
There not going to shift away from Intel by pouring in R&D into the discrete GPU buisiness, unless you're telling me they now plan to compete with nVidia, too. And if that's the case, it's inevitable that much of their resources would be divided / shifted so that they could not only combat Intel, but nVidia, as well. Does that really sound logical to you? 0_oOriginally posted by: Creig
Why would they need to shift anything away from Intel? They still have all the ATI employees and engineers. They will probably downsize ATI a bit, just to get rid of managerial and executive positions that are now duplicated between ATI/AMD, but ATI can (and is) continuing business as usual.
Nobody is claiming AMD is telling ATI to "close up shop." The high-end discrete market is just one portion of ATI's business, and the one that remains in question on whether AMD will decide to continue to pursue it post R600. You seem to think otherwise, yet your only reason is because it'll be another area where AMD can make a buck. I've consistently refuted that claim, and yet that's all you and apopin can resort to.Originally posted by: CreigI don't think YOU'RE looking at the big picture. ATI now has access to all the patents, licensing and technology of AMD and vice versa. Both ATI and AMD are now in an even stronger position to bring new technology to their respective production lines than they were before the acquisition. ATI wasn't in any danger of going under before the buyout and now they have even greater technological resources to draw upon. It makes no sense to say AMD bought ATI for $5.4 billion dollars only to tell ATI to close up shop.
The discrete GPU is their core market. That isn't the same for AMD. And because ATI is now AMD, that still applies, because like I said time and time again, this was an aquisition, not a merger.Originally posted by: Creig
I'm sure that if Nvidia thought they would do better by not offering a high end card, they would have by now. They aren't coming out with cards like the G80 just for the sheer joy of building it. They're doing it to make a profit. The same applies to ATI.
nVidia and ATI are competitng in that market, or begining too, but its a low margin market, and therefore has typically been at the bottom of their priority lists (atleast for nV).Originally posted by: josh6079
If the integrated market was really that inticing for businesses, Nvidia and ATI would have been competeing in the integrated sector instead of the discrete power-houses. I mean, if the integrated solution is really that appealing for large corporations such as Nvidia and ATI, they both would have been making nothing but integrated solutions for years so as to reap the rewards from it's huge user-base.
It's still not going to offer what a highend of the time, or even midrange, discreet GPU will be able to. That should be common sense at this point.Originally posted by: josh6079
A integrated solution isn't demanding enough to warrant the design of a CPU/GPU substrate. Also, Nvidia isn't planning on making CPU's just so that it can sit out with an overpriced, high-end, discrete video card while making integrated CPU/GPU solutions. These first CPU/GPU designs will have more power than a simple integrated Intel, otherwise they wouldn't be pushing for the design.