[citation][nom]Evolution2001[/nom]I'm no legal analyst nor accounting person. I'm just a computer end user who must not fully understand the problem here. So AMD and nVidia have been working together to release new technology at the same time. Or they have 'conspired' to keep certain pricing points. Ummm, "So?" Doesn't the automotive industry do this worldwide? They produce a product to compete in a certain price range and release them to the public at various auto-shows. nVidia and AMD do the same thing with their products at tech shows.With regards to price fixing, how much can one really complain when there is an available product in nearly every price range? From the old MX4000/Rage chips available for $10 to their high-end models in the $350+ range, where is the price fixing? Are they supposed to release newer, faster products for less than their current lineup still in the pipeline? And let's not forget the vendors that use nVidia/AMD reference designs. They need to be able to have some profit margin as well. Are nVidia/AMD going to cut the throats of the vendors that buy their chips/designs?And lastly, AMD and nVidia are constantly going back and forth for the crown in respective areas, the same way that AMD and Intel go at it. I hardly call "one-upping the competition" price fixing or collaborating to defraud the public. How long did nVidia hold the performance crown prior to AMD finally catching up...close to a year or more? How often did we hear, "Whenever AMD ("ATI") finally releases their new chip, it had better be a good showing!" We heard it a lot for a long time. That's "collaborating"?[/citation]
I think the point of the lawsuit, is that since there are really only two serious GPU manufacturers (ATI/nVidia), that the two working together to 'fix' prices, is bad for the public. It's sort of allows these two companies to decide the market price of their video cards. In other words, even if the 'market value' of a particular video card should be $200, they can artificially inflate that purchase price to $300. Thereby, increasing profits for each company, and hosing customers.
Now, I'm not saying that's exactly what happened. But obviously that's what is being alleged. So, even though you're right about there being video cards in all price brackets. Imagine if the "high end" price bracket was $400 instead of $500-$600. That's the point the plaintiff is trying to make I think.
Should be interesting to see what happens. Although, today's market seems to be better. At least that's my impression. As there's some pretty dang good deals to be had on great video cards right now.