AMD & ATI Merger- what does this mean for us?

jrazz wrote on 7/25/2006, 8:25 AM
Here is a snippet from a press release: By 2008, AMD plans to introduce new processor configurations that would integrate the CPU and graphics processor into a single unit. The end result will be smaller, more powerful computers.

What does that mean for us? If now Vegas is processor intensive and by 2008, those of us who use AMD chips will have the option of moving to a combined GPU/CPU unit. I wonder if Vegas will be able to tap into this power or if this combo will reak havic with the way Vegas runs. Where does nVidia fit into this picture? Hmmm.

j razz

Comments

TheHappyFriar wrote on 7/25/2006, 8:35 AM
not directed at you, but this is the 4th forum I've been to that has posted this. :D

anyway.. someone in another forum (here: http://www.forumplanet.com/planetdoom/topic.asp?fid=3082&tid=1922812 ) posted this (and it sounds very much like common sence:

" What isnt well known is that AMD is going to loose ALOT of money from this buyout. The real trick of it is to hang Intel by a noose, leaving them nothing but thier own company to create exclusives for their harware. Unfortunately, this a a VERY risky deal... if Intel can find a way out of the trap, AMD could be hurt BAD... they have just blown nearly $7 billion alltogether, leaving very little to continue investment on outperforming competetions hardware. That means, and I'd expect, the next generation CPUS and now, graphics cards, we will see aren't going to be the best of the best, and will be a bit pricey to make up for the debt. I could allways be wrong, but I beleive AMD is willing to take that risk and rely on this tactic. ATI cards will no longer be powerhouse, and will be quaint for sometime, if not just used for a while to regain profits, and then phased out.

You have to remember, ATI provides NO benefits to AMD other than a household name for good graphic cards (which may not be so good due to limited funding for the next couple of years). They are allready buddies with NVIDIA. AMD has long stated the technology of NVIDIA on AMD platforms far outweighs and is more resourceful to them than ATI. NVIDIA and AMD also hold exclusive hardware contracts that may not end for many years. Its a chokehold tactic... buy your competitions best friend.

Finacially, the buyout cant be justified, as it has put a massive hurt on AMD for research, project funding, advertising, manufacturing, and so on. While now they may be raking in cash from both their own company, as well as ATI, and intel royalties, its far from what they need to get out of such a massive debt. Just the slighest screw up with a product, or bad sales could bring AMD to their knees and kill the company. Dont beleive me? Look at SGI vs. IBM.... SGI, a world leader in graphics systems and supercomputers --- huge billion dollar corporation, now filing bankruptcy and getting help to just stay on their feet, with less than 300 million dollars to fund the company and a massive debt.

Intel COULD seek revenge in the courts and cry out monopoly, but all it would really take is a damn good merge of their own, or a damn good product. They are far more finacially stable than AMD, and they do have companies like microsoft in their favor (most of the time, outside of 64-bit OS's :-P). But, if AMD can beat a risky game, Intel may be the next down on their knees begging for government funding assitance. Though, it could be vice versa if AMD doesnt use their current friends and new assets right..."

p@mast3rs wrote on 7/25/2006, 9:17 AM
Just think, the Macs use ATI cards and Intel procs. Hmmm, what is Jobs going to do now if AMD says "thanks but no thanks" to use of their cards in future lines? Or will we see a new line of MACAMD to go with the Mactels? If so, then could this be an even further assault on MS and Windows altogether?
apit34356 wrote on 7/25/2006, 11:09 AM
Bill Gates announced that MS was going to redefine the PC into a gaming system...... media center combination. One quess that X360 war is not going well and the cost is adding up, he does not want to open up the X360 OS where it will hurt the PC money cow.

AMD buying ATI has been talked about since last December, rumors in Asia about this has been a hotter topic that the BR and HD "war". With the future of "OS"s being gaming.... AMD and ATI deals permits them to be a player in the Intel & MS lovefest. MS has created a lot of alliances to stop BlueRay and the PSP3. The real question is how far will MS redesign this new "OS" approach to its alliances to exclude the "ememy" and their associates.
bakerbud9 wrote on 7/25/2006, 11:51 AM
Do you have a link to that press release? I've checked the AMD website, but they only mention something to the effect of a "strategic alliance." But they didn't seem to say anything specifically about putting the graphics chip onto the CPU. I'd be interested to know more details about what the merger is all about.
jrazz wrote on 7/25/2006, 12:12 PM
The Article

j razz
dat5150 wrote on 7/25/2006, 3:51 PM
friar....I don't know what the BB's have to say, but I guarantee that AMD did more market research then those you quoted.

apit34356 wrote on 7/25/2006, 4:12 PM
"Look at SGI vs. IBM.... SGI, a world leader in graphics systems and supercomputers ---"..... IBM is no small start-up. SGI problems were over a 8 year period and the collapse of the specialized supercomputer hardware market and supercomputing moving to microCPU clusters/arrays.

Intel marketing people have been bad mouthing this deal since March, when the rumor appeared to have legs.

AMD is planning for future market needs. Many people believe that the average computer, in a year, being sold will have to be able to play HD media with ease, while doing other tasks, ie powerpoint....
craftech wrote on 7/25/2006, 4:15 PM
ATI has made it's living for as many years as I can remember as an OEM manufacturer. ATI "onboard" has been their mainstay. The video cards have never been.

John
bakerbud9 wrote on 7/25/2006, 6:20 PM
jrazz: thanx for the link