• 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 nearly bought Nvidia

Possible, but it never happened of course.

'Fast forward to today and AMD owns the second largest share of the total graphics chip market with 24.8 percent, behind Intel at 59.1 percent and ahead of Nvidia at 15.7 percent'

Sits back and watches it kick off!
 
I wouldn't be surprised at all, AMD were looking to buy up a GPU manufacturer which I can only assume was to give then decent onboard graphics for their CPU's, so I'm sure they looked at Nvidia at the time.
 
tommybhoy said:
Possible, but it never happened of course.

'Fast forward to today and AMD owns the second largest share of the total graphics chip market with 24.8 percent, behind Intel at 59.1 percent and ahead of Nvidia at 15.7 percent'

Sits back and watches it kick off!
Click to expand...

Think his numbers are for market share by sales per quarter and don't reflect overall market share :P (AMD may have higher share overall not sure but they definitely don't have the higher share of the enthusiast sector).

At the time AMD bought ATI the price of buying nVidia would have been considerably outside of what AMD could realistically have afforded to throw in one direction so I don't see it would have ever happened.
 
tommybhoy said:
'Fast forward to today and AMD owns the second largest share of the total graphics chip market with 24.8 percent, behind Intel at 59.1 percent and ahead of Nvidia at 15.7 percent'

Sits back and watches it kick off!
Click to expand...

interesting numbers from that report, upon reading the Jon Peddie Research document I see that it includes the figures for GPU's IGP's, HPU's, and EPG's but not for SOC (tablets and the like) not that they would make much of a difference though.
 
lol, its hardly newsworthy.

AMD wants to buy a GPU company...... and fails to do any research into how viable it would be to buy Nvidia, that is what wouldn't be even slightly believable. Never particularly thought about it but it would seem insanely obvious that they considered Nvidia and ATi, they should have considered a couple others as well, but the other possibilities would have been a lot less likely to be a good merger.
 
My computer won't load the article for some reason, but as others have stated its hardly shocking news that they were considered for purchasing...
 
Seems believable, and given how well the Radeon stuff has integrated with their CPUs and opened up a whole new market for them, it seems like it was the right choice.
 
I always thought Nvidia was much bigger than ATI ? maybe bigger than AMD ?

I think it was very wise for AMD to buy ATI and I think they could well have faded away without the GFX side over recent years.
 
Both AMD and NVidia are getting pommelled by Intel witnin the graphics market. Laptops are now much more common than desktops, and Intel dominates here. Ivy Bridge will only make things worse for the green and red camps as Intel effectively doubles it's graphics performance. NVidia are making positive inroads into the Tablet market with their Tegra chips, but there is little positive news for either AMD or themselves. From a financial perspective, AMD is in a much deeper hole because of it's massive debts (mostly due to it's CPU division).

Article
 
I call ********. Intel tried to buy out NVIDIA (hostile takeover) and failed. AMD's entire value is pocket change for Intel. And AMD as a whole (GPUs, CPUs, memory everything combined) is only about as big as NVIDIA. On some metrics it is smaller. And all NVIDIA really does is GPUs.

Furthermore, if AMD tried to buy NVIDIA I bet it will be illegal. The Department of Justice won't hear it. It would be anti-competitive.
 
xsistor said:
I call ********. Intel tried to buy out NVIDIA (hostile takeover) and failed. AMD's entire value is pocket change for Intel. And AMD as a whole (GPUs, CPUs, memory everything combined) is only about as big as NVIDIA. On some metrics it is smaller. And all NVIDIA really does is GPUs.

Furthermore, if AMD tried to buy NVIDIA I bet it will be illegal. The Department of Justice won't hear it. It would be anti-competitive.
Click to expand...

This was pre AMD buying ATi so there would have been nothing illegal about it.

As said above, this has been known, or at least rumoured, for years. It would have been a merger, not a buyout, but both CEO's wanted to be the boss man so AMD went with ATi.
 
xsistor said:
. And AMD as a whole (GPUs, CPUs, memory everything combined) is only about as big as NVIDIA. On some metrics it is smaller. And all NVIDIA really does is GPUs.
Click to expand...

nvidia's net worth is roughly double what AMD as a whole is worth

in case you missed it, nvidia have this little thing called "tegra", that I believe are used in some new fangled thingies called "fondleslabs" or something
 
andybird123 said:
in case you missed it, nvidia have this little thing called "tegra", that I believe are used in some new fangled thingies called "fondleslabs" or something
Click to expand...
I think Tegra is relevant in this context, but not directly. NVidia's whole Tegra line contributes less than 10% of their revenue and makes basically no money at all. Selling $10 ARM chips isn't a way to get rich, especially when the competition is cut-throat and the two biggest tablet/phone manufacturers (Apple and Samsung) have their own in-house designed processors.

The reason NV's market cap is so much higher than AMD's is a combination of stability - they dependably turn a decent profit each quarter and don't suffer AMD's habit of shedding CEOs and top execs like used underwear - and projects like Tegra and NV's high-profile HPC installations, which are financially irrelevant but make for great PR fluff to excite analysts who don't dig too deeply.

AMD having tried to buy NVidia isn't any great surprise, remembering that back in those days to two companies operated very closely and had a formal co-operative agreement (SNAP - Strategic Nvidia-AMD partnership). That JHH's demand to be top dog killed the deal is no surprise either, given his legendary ego. But I can't help think NV will ultimately regret that. NV is a one-trick pony: discrete gaming GPUs. Their chipset biz is dead. Tegra makes no money and isn't likely to in the near future. Quadro and Tesla sales and margins are excellent, but those lines depend completely on re-purposing existing discrete GPUs and aren't enough to pay for the R&D on their own.

So if the GPU market contracts enough (and it has been shrinking consistently the last few years) NV will start bleeding red ink. AMD can cope with declining GPU sales much easier because the basic design work needs to be done for Fusion APUs anyway, and APUs are proving to be very good sellers indeed.

Brazos and Llano started the death spiral of GPUs, Trinity and Ivy Bridge will just accelerate it. NV is running out of time to find an escape route.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom