Rumours are that both AMD and Intel are interested in ATI, along with
Broadcom and TI.

ATI Shares Rally Sparks Takeover Rumours
http://www.cdrinfo.com/Sections/News...x?NewsId=14428

Yousuf Khan

Yousuf Khan wrote:

> Rumours are that both AMD and Intel are interested in ATI, along with
> Broadcom and TI.
>
> ATI Shares Rally Sparks Takeover Rumours
> http://www.cdrinfo.com/Sections/News...x?NewsId=14428

Not sure which of those might lead to an improvement. I suspect that Intel
would kick butt on the driver team, where a good butt-kicking is badly
needed, but that would also further consolidate their monopoly. If
Broadcom goes true to form the driver situation would get worse, I don't
recall AMD shipping much that needs drivers, and I'm surprised that TI
wants back into the graphics chip market.

An ideal situation might be for Intel to buy them, put some professional
management in place, and then be forced to divest.

> Yousuf Khan

--
--John
to email, dial "usenet" and validate
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)

On 11 Jul 2005 09:16:11 -0700, "Yousuf Khan" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>Rumours are that both AMD and Intel are interested in ATI, along with
>Broadcom and TI.
>
>ATI Shares Rally Sparks Takeover Rumours
>http://www.cdrinfo.com/Sections/News...x?NewsId=14428
>
> Yousuf Khan


If Intel buys them, kiss off any overclocking. They'll probably lock the
GPU.

--
Pat

On Mon, 11 Jul 2005 21:30:01 -0700, Pat <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>On 11 Jul 2005 09:16:11 -0700, "Yousuf Khan" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
>>Rumours are that both AMD and Intel are interested in ATI, along with
>>Broadcom and TI.
>>
>>ATI Shares Rally Sparks Takeover Rumours
>>http://www.cdrinfo.com/Sections/News...x?NewsId=14428
>>
>> Yousuf Khan
>
>
>If Intel buys them, kiss off any overclocking. They'll probably lock the
>GPU.

Isn't overclocking ATI GPUs all unofficial anyway? It's not in the ATI
Control Panel, like it is with nVidia and the 3rd party stuff is kinda
flakey too.

--
Rgds, George Macdonald

George Macdonald wrote:

> On Mon, 11 Jul 2005 21:30:01 -0700, Pat <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
>>On 11 Jul 2005 09:16:11 -0700, "Yousuf Khan" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>>
>>>Rumours are that both AMD and Intel are interested in ATI, along with
>>>Broadcom and TI.
>>>
>>>ATI Shares Rally Sparks Takeover Rumours
>>>http://www.cdrinfo.com/Sections/News...x?NewsId=14428
>>>
>>> Yousuf Khan
>>
>>
>>If Intel buys them, kiss off any overclocking. They'll probably lock the
>>GPU.
>
> Isn't overclocking ATI GPUs all unofficial anyway? It's not in the ATI
> Control Panel, like it is with nVidia and the 3rd party stuff is kinda
> flakey too.

There was limited overclocking in the control panel for the XT boards for a
while, but it has since been removed I understand.

Intel though has been locking their chips down pretty thoroughly. AMD's
policy with the 32-bit Athlons was to ship unlocked for the first few
months then lock them down--I don't know if the 64s are locked.
>

--
--John
to email, dial "usenet" and validate
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)

On 7/11/2005 12:16, Yousuf Khan wrote:
> Rumours are that both AMD and Intel are interested in ATI

....and Intel thought their anti-trust worries were bad now! Isn't it true
that Intel ships more video chipsets then everyone else combined (or
something close to that)?

OTOH, if AMD bought them it could send Intel reeling even further...

~Jason

--

Jason Gurtz wrote:
> On 7/11/2005 12:16, Yousuf Khan wrote:
> > Rumours are that both AMD and Intel are interested in ATI
>
> ...and Intel thought their anti-trust worries were bad now! Isn't it true
> that Intel ships more video chipsets then everyone else combined (or
> something close to that)?
>
> OTOH, if AMD bought them it could send Intel reeling even further...

If AMD bought them, that would be the end of ATI's Intel chipset
license. And you might even find that all of a sudden ATI video cards
are suddenly incompatible with Intel chipsets.

I'd say the only safe choice of suitor is TI. Intel hates both AMD and
Broadcom.

Yousuf Khan

Yousuf Khan wrote:

>If AMD bought them, that would be the end of ATI's Intel chipset
>license. And you might even find that all of a sudden ATI video cards
>are suddenly incompatible with Intel chipsets.

Oh, come on now. Video cards go into open-standard slots.

chrisv wrote:
> Yousuf Khan wrote:
>
>
>>If AMD bought them, that would be the end of ATI's Intel chipset
>>license. And you might even find that all of a sudden ATI video cards
>>are suddenly incompatible with Intel chipsets.
>
>
> Oh, come on now. Video cards go into open-standard slots.
>

I am talking about little niggling problems that destroy the reputation
of a company's products. Think VIA vs. Creative Labs products. :-)

Yousuf Khan

On Tue, 12 Jul 2005 14:29:19 -0400, Jason Gurtz <(E-Mail Removed)>
wrote:

>On 7/11/2005 12:16, Yousuf Khan wrote:
>> Rumours are that both AMD and Intel are interested in ATI
>
>...and Intel thought their anti-trust worries were bad now! Isn't it true
>that Intel ships more video chipsets then everyone else combined (or
>something close to that)?

Last numbers I heard had Intel's share of graphics chips at about
35-40% with ATI and nVidia both ranging from about 20-25% and the
remaining 10% being made up of a variety of other companies (VIA and
SiS are the biggest, mainly with integrated graphics on low-end
systems). I don't think Intel has ever managed to get more than 50%
of the graphics chipset market, but they definitely are the #1 vendor
of graphics chips on a per-unit basis. On a dollar basis, my guess is
that nVidia is #1, since Intel's graphics chips are all integrated
ones and mostly sell for very low prices.

>OTOH, if AMD bought them it could send Intel reeling even further...

I really doubt that AMD would buy out ATI, it would involve spending a
lot of money to get into a business with high costs and high risks and
all the while it could **** off one of their key partners (nVidia).
Intel doesn't seem too likely either IMO, they've tried their hand at
buying out a video card maker and found that really they could only
succeed in the integrated market. I doubt that they're up for attempt
number 2 at the high-end add-in graphics market just yet, given that
their first attempt failed pretty badly.

The only company mentioned that seems at all like a good potential
match to me is Broadcom. They've got a more diverse portfolio of
computer-related chipsets, reasonably good alliances with some major
manufacturers (though their relationship with Intel is strained to say
the least) and they've got the money for such a buyout. Still I
wouldn't hold my breath on this one, it all seems to have started from
some off-hand comments by some analyst.

-------------
Tony Hill
hilla <underscore> 20 <at> yahoo <dot> ca