• Competitor rules

    Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.

AMD have bought ATI

Looks like the great battle between AMD and Intel will rage on for quite a while methinks !

Roll on integrated CPU GPU...........

If this happens I wonder what the future will bring?
 
If this go through whats the betting on an AMD/ATI merger with NVidia ? Think about it. Best boards for AMD so far have been NVidia based, ATI's are good but use a ULI chip. Who own ULI ? They are all in bed together already.

Daft I know, but business is business, although the anti competative side of such a move could scupper it. :confused: :confused: :rolleyes: :eek: :(
 
Originally Posted by Cyber-Mav
what a shame, AMD was going down with the launch of conroe now they gonna take ati down with them.
Click to expand...

you realy think amd are going down? lol. i think not. amd will come out with an uber chip that beats intel for cheese.
 
Cyber-Mav said:
what a shame, AMD was going down with the launch of conroe now they gonna take ati down with them. :p
Click to expand...

as a wiseman once said

tis a foolish man who fails to check the AMD roadmap

or something to that effect :D

AMD do have an answer for conroe, its just going to be next year. I mean it took Intel how long to get conrole ? AMD have had better power/watt for years. Its only conroe thats shifted the balance. Frankly im glad, competition is good for the market.
 
Doubt that AMD could afford to by Nvidia, not only that, it would make AMD into an evil monopoly, with no competition in the GPU markets. That would only drive up prices, and slow down development.

With so many people grumbling about intel's monopolistic behaviour I dont understand how anyone could think that it would be good for the industry to have both the best GPU companies in the hands of AMD. Would also be hard to get the deal through, both european, and american law is very tight when it comes to monopolies and mergers.
 
laws are stupid. if someone owns a company then its their right to buy another company as long as its done legally as in paid the right cash with no extortion etc.

so intel shoudl have bought both ati and nvidia and then make sure gfx cards do a check on the system and refuse to run if an amd cpu is detected. that would be the best solution.
 
Cyber-Mav said:
so intel shoudl have bought both ati and nvidia and then make sure gfx cards do a check on the system and refuse to run if an amd cpu is detected. that would be the best solution.
Click to expand...

Lol :D ;)
Sounds like Micro$oft and Apple. :x
 
Cyber-Mav said:
laws are stupid. if someone owns a company then its their right to buy another company as long as its done legally as in paid the right cash with no extortion etc.

so intel shoudl have bought both ati and nvidia and then make sure gfx cards do a check on the system and refuse to run if an amd cpu is detected. that would be the best solution.
Click to expand...

Stupid? I don't think so. Intel would be charging $1000 for the E6300 Core 2 if AMD had been driven out of business. Probably worse than that, intel would still be pushing Netburst down our throats, still 32bit, trying to sell Itanium to us for 64bit computing.

Alternativly, if AMD did buy Nvidia, and ATI, what would happen if the entire thing crumbled and went out of business. We could all be left with rubbish Intel GPU's. And so far intel have not suceeded in making a good high end GPU.
 
Cyber-Mav said:
laws are stupid. if someone owns a company then its their right to buy another company as long as its done legally as in paid the right cash with no extortion etc.

so intel shoudl have bought both ati and nvidia and then make sure gfx cards do a check on the system and refuse to run if an amd cpu is detected. that would be the best solution.
Click to expand...

The law is there for a reason, to prevent monopolies. Think how much higher CPU and video card prices would be without competition. If it wasn't for the re-emergence of ATI we would all be paying 30% more for graphics cards right now and they'd probably be quite a lot slower since nvidia would have been able to cut R&D.
 
The society you suggest Cyber-Mav, where companies could form monopolies at will (which of course they would), is called anacho-capitalist. It has certain problems if followed through in its entirety. It's not a favoured political theory because those who advocate it are generally concerned with justice, fairness and even utility, in equal measures with profit, power and inscrutability.

I'd be very disappointed, given your good reputation and sound opinion on these boards, to discover that you were not capable of thinking such a things through in the fullness of time and rejecting what you've just said.

NB: Please don't think my swift rebuttle in any way fully represents the arguments against your position. In fact if I thought I had to spell out the problems I wouldn't even bother addressing you on the subject.
 
Cyber-mav does sometimes come out with ****.

AMD are going nowhere, there enthusiast market is 5% of the total profits.

2ndly, stopping mobos/gfx using AMD processors would knock out a large part of the market for mobos/gfx. They may be owned by a bigger company, still doesn't mean they will reduce profits to stop competitors.

Intel buy nVidia, 50% of nVidias profits are from AMD sales (possibily), they REALLY going to stop that?

Think dude before you post, im 16 and I know the basic workings of buisness. ;)
 
Last edited:
locutus12 said:
the only problem is where intel is concearned there is no market :( its a very uneven playing field AMD are competing on.
Click to expand...

AMD were enough competition to force them to abandon netware

thats a big enough statement as it is
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom