Report: AMD Considered Buying Nvidia Before ATI Purchase

Status
Not open for further replies.

iLLz

Distinguished
Nov 14, 2003
102
0
18,680
0
"But during the talks, Nvidia Chief Executive Jen-Hsun Huang reportedly insisted that he become chief executive of the combined company."

Yea that sounds like him...
 

tiang

Distinguished
Jul 28, 2011
109
0
18,690
1
I don't see that there is a problem for AMD graphic card to be on top of the graphic card world in future with the great improvement of each generation of card they produced. Sooner or later, it will be like Intel dominated the desktop processor segment and AMD GPU will dominated the discrete GPU segment. Well done AMD, you made the right choice to acquire ATI even struggled so hard at the beginning.
 

joytech22

Distinguished
Jun 4, 2008
1,684
0
19,810
10
Relevant: I wonder how AMD would have done if they had to integrate Fermi into their CPU's.. lol..
Joking aside, I seriously wonder what they would have done if they did manage to obtain Nvidia, what kind of things they would have done together.


Irrelevant:

AMD has kept Radeon's past work strong and has had the fastest dual-GPU cards for two generations as well as amazingly competitive single-GPU performance.
I don't think competition has ever been this close, Nvidia and AMD are trading blows like crazy in every segment from low-end right up through to high-end.
I just wish they did the same in the CPU market for their high-end CPU's.
 

joytech22

Distinguished
Jun 4, 2008
1,684
0
19,810
10
[citation][nom]mr_wobbles[/nom]That could have been a better choice, because ATi was sort of bankrupt. AMD could have had a Monopoly on GPUs.[/citation]

That would have been terrible, pricing would be through the roof for the most part.
We need competition to keep prices down, look at how Intel is keeping AMD in check when it comes to pricing.

AMD is CURRENTLY known for it's cheap yet capable CPU's, now look at their GPU's and you'll find the 7970 for like $700 AUSD, almost as much as a 6990 here.

If Nvidia releases something competitive enough it'll drive down the price.

We need competition.
 

NapoleonDK

Distinguished
Nov 3, 2009
460
0
18,810
6
It really makes you wonder where the technology would be today if AMD had gone with Nvidia instead. Theories?

A few months after AMD bought ATI, Nvidia releases the Geforce 8-Series. A year and a half later, Tegra is announced, but it's another year and a half before anyone uses it. (ZuneHD) Meanwhile, ATI/AMD pushes the unamusing HD2XXX/HD3XXX out to compete with the power hungry 8 and 9-series.

In the background to all this, Nvidia is polishing Tegra and AMD is developing Fusion. (While the iPhone changes the face of mobile computing and the public begin demanding more and more mobile devices to compete.)

Intel was of course owning the x86 market and developing Larrabee...I wonder if Intel hadn't wasted time on that, if they would have been willing to give Jen-Hsun Huang the seat he wanted in order to sell his company? I'm surprised that Huang even considered selling out to AMD, it doesn't seem like something he would do, even for a seat on the board.

Anyway, imagine a world where Intel is producing Fusion APU's with ATI, and Nvidia instead buys AMD and begins making both ARM and x86 processors with fermi-like power consumption! X_x
 
G

Guest

Guest
AMD was a failure under Ruiz, and is a failure to this day. Nvidia could have made AMD a competitor to Intel, instead of the joke of the hardware world.
 

fazers_on_stun

Splendid
Aug 31, 2006
4,743
0
22,860
42
Hmm, Jen Hsun-Huang would probably have not run AMD into the ground and force them to sell off their fabs, although JHH does occasionally open a 'can o' whoopass' on himself :p.

Too many big egos to fit into one combined company, IMO..
 

Camikazi

Distinguished
Jul 20, 2008
1,403
1
19,310
5
[citation][nom]mr_wobbles[/nom]That could have been a better choice, because ATi was sort of bankrupt. AMD could have had a Monopoly on GPUs.[/citation]
Yea and right now the 7990 would have the performance of the 4870 and cost $1000, having competition is a good thing.
 
G

Guest

Guest
If Amd bought Nvidia, ATI would have died, since their graphic products weren't that great for 2007-2009.
 

NastyPope

Distinguished
May 20, 2010
12
0
18,510
0
Considering I've been an AMD/ATI fanboy since long before the acquisition, I wouldn't have wanted it to go any other way. Well, I mean, the planning and implementation could have gone better, but I'd have been pretty upset if AMD had bought Nvidia instead of ATI.

On the other hand, AMD might be doing better had they been able to negotiate a compromise with Huang...
 

Marco925

Distinguished
Aug 11, 2008
967
0
18,990
1
[citation][nom]joytech22[/nom]That would have been terrible, pricing would be through the roof for the most part.We need competition to keep prices down, look at how Intel is keeping AMD in check when it comes to pricing.AMD is CURRENTLY known for it's cheap yet capable CPU's, now look at their GPU's and you'll find the 7970 for like $700 AUSD, almost as much as a 6990 here.If Nvidia releases something competitive enough it'll drive down the price.We need competition.[/citation]
more like AMD keeps intel in check from charging whatever they want :p
 

aidynphoenix

Distinguished
Apr 26, 2009
155
0
18,680
0
i think intel should start making high end graphics cards.
then we can have a third competitor on the graphics card market, and not only lower prices more. but give the public more choices.

 

alidan

Splendid
Aug 5, 2009
5,303
0
25,780
0
[citation][nom]Camikazi[/nom]Yea and right now the 7990 would have the performance of the 4870 and cost $1000, having competition is a good thing.[/citation]

no it isnt... look at gameing, on a AAA game, it costs 10 million per platform to develop for them, more platforms equal bigger costs equal higher priced games, or less ambitious games.

now thats just gameing. but lets go with a cpu market or a gpu...
if there were more than 2 companies and more than 2 graphics companies, do you really thing that it would be for the better...

there is a minimum cost for parts on these gpus and cpus, and that's generally 50000$ per waffer, and about 1 billion minimum for a architecture design. if we had lets say 5 viable solutions all with the same market share, would we still get better products? im betting the products would ultimately be cheaper but there is no way all 5 would pull anywhere near the profit they currently do...

its hard to explain this in a way that people will understand because most people cant think of how more choices will bite them.
 

nezzymighty

Distinguished
Apr 11, 2010
45
0
18,530
0
This is VERY OLD news; about 2006 old news. Can't believe I was coaxed into read the article.... wait a minute... Extra ... Extra... read all about it.... this just in... AMD invents a 64 bit chip... they call it AMD64...
 

shin0bi272

Distinguished
Nov 20, 2007
1,103
0
19,310
12
If nvidia hates Intel so much why wouldnt they have partnered with AMD? Ive been asking this question since amd bought ati... makes no sense to me mang.
 

Darkk

Distinguished
Oct 6, 2003
615
0
18,980
0
[citation][nom]esrever[/nom]Why not buy both?[/citation]

AMD can't now due to lack of cash to do it. Besides antitrust courts won't allow it.
 

aidynphoenix

Distinguished
Apr 26, 2009
155
0
18,680
0
[citation][nom]alidan[/nom]no it isnt... look at gameing, on a AAA game, it costs 10 million per platform to develop for them, more platforms equal bigger costs equal higher priced games, or less ambitious games. now thats just gameing. but lets go with a cpu market or a gpu... if there were more than 2 companies and more than 2 graphics companies, do you really thing that it would be for the better...there is a minimum cost for parts on these gpus and cpus, and that's generally 50000$ per waffer, and about 1 billion minimum for a architecture design. if we had lets say 5 viable solutions all with the same market share, would we still get better products? im betting the products would ultimately be cheaper but there is no way all 5 would pull anywhere near the profit they currently do...its hard to explain this in a way that people will understand because most people cant think of how more choices will bite them.[/citation]


what you are saying is that if there was more company's each company would have less money to spend on research and graphics card improvements, which would hinder advances in technology and graphics card improvements.
 

knowom

Distinguished
Jan 28, 2006
777
0
18,990
1
So to summarize the situation Jen-Hsun Huang is still cheif executive of Nvidia who's market capitalization is nearly double AMD's and Hector Ruiz the chief executive at the time for AMD was basically kicked out of AMD.

As for Intel they are slowly being eaten from the bottom up by hungry ARMy of ants and guilty of typical monopoly behavior forced to settle out of court with Nvidia as well as AMD.

Meanwhile Nvidia has branched out and diversified and partnered together and worked with the tech industry both on the hardware and software side of things working with game developers, the scientific community, open source community, and hardware manufacturing companies.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS