Thursday, February 23rd 2012

AMD Talked to NVIDIA Before Acquiring ATI: Report

According to a Forbes report which cites former AMD employees, AMD approached NVIDIA for a merger, before going on to acquire its rival ATI. Well before 2006, AMD's CPU designers envisaged the basic concept of an APU, where with advancements in silicon fab processors, chip-designers could add other components to a processor, such as an integrated GPU that's reasonably powerful. AMD lacked an integrated graphics chipset of its own, back then. These were some of the prime-movers of AMD's hunt for a GPU company, which was then much healthier, as it then had a promising and competitive CPU lineup.

According to the Forbes report, AMD first approached NVIDIA with the idea of a merger. Back then, AMD and NVIDIA had extremely cordial relations, as NVIDIA had a large market-share in motherboard chipsets for AMD processors. Apparantly, NVIDIA's boss Jen-Hsun Huang insisted on going on to become the CEO of the proposed AMD-NVIDIA combine, an idea that didn't fly too well with AMD's Hector Ruiz. AMD then went on to acquire NVIDIA's cash-strapped rival ATI Technology, which went to make AMD's Graphics Products division before being restructured and fully amalgamated with the rest of AMD.

The report provides a fascinating insight into the paths AMD and NVIDIA each followed, how their paths crossed at one point, and how the two went on to follow two entirely different ones. Forbes notes AMD going on to work on ever more powerful GPUs, while NVIDIA works on highly-competitive mobile processors. NVIDIA declined to comment on that story.
Source: Forbes
Add your own comment

58 Comments on AMD Talked to NVIDIA Before Acquiring ATI: Report

#51
BlackOmega
Wile ECUDA and SLI are doing very well in their intended markets at their intended market share percentage. Just look at Tesla.

GPU powered Physx, not so much.
The reason PhysX is not doing so well is because they're trying to force anyone who uses it to buy an Nvidia card as their primary. In their arrogance, they're effectively killing off PhysX because who the hell is going to take the extra time to code for it when a relatively small percentage of people are going to use it? Probably not many that aren't reimbursed for doing so by Nvidia.

Aegia had a great idea with PhysX, Nvidia bought them and have now effectively screwed it up.
Posted on Reply
#52
TheoneandonlyMrK
BlackOmegaAegia had a great idea with PhysX, Nvidia bought them and have now effectively screwed it up.
defo

you can buy a gpu off them to do compute but try to use its compute with an amd gpu and its not officially allowed, boll4x and pointless, their is allways going tobe a way so why bother and its an ocassional(due to few physx games) lost sale:)
Posted on Reply
#53
BlackOmega
theoneandonlymrkdefo

you can buy a gpu off them to do compute but try to use its compute with an amd gpu and its not officially allowed, boll4x and pointless, their is allways going tobe a way so why bother and its an ocassional(due to few physx games) lost sale:)
Exactly. There's always workarounds to anything that's limited by a driver. Hell, back in the Nforce 4 days, you could even mod the hardware to run SLI even where Nvidia had laser cut it.

Also, with PhysX, when it was still allowed with an AMD GPU as the primary, I actually bought a decent midrange card specifically to run it. Ever since they disabled it through drivers, I haven't bought another Nvidia card for the sole purpose of running PhysX.

Not to mention, their advertising scheme is losing momentum since there's less and less games that have it. Another notch in their fail belt.
Posted on Reply
#54
eidairaman1
The Exiled Airman
Maybe in the Science world but the Consumer market SLI is slowly disappearing and NV cant make a Standard Glue Logic anymore
Wile ECUDA and SLI are doing very well in their intended markets at their intended market share percentage. Just look at Tesla.

GPU powered Physx, not so much.

Nvidia is doing just fine, and is in no way hurting from passing on the deal.

3dfx still beat them both to the market with multi-card setups. Feb '98 they introduced SLI on VooDoo2 vs Oct '99 for the Maxx. but really, that's just picking nits. Who had it first is pretty much irrelevant in today's market.

And, actually, I had a bad time with Crossfire (and a handful of other driver bugs), too. That's why I went with single gpu nVidia this round. May try SLI at some point to get a feel for the other side of the coin if another cheap 580 comes my way, but a single powerful GPU will do for now.

But, would also happily go back to AMD if they offered what I want in a single gpu at my next upgrade point, and I knew the bugs were squashed.



There is no real need in the markets we are discussing. Almost nobody NEEDS powerful computers. We just want them. It's all based on consumer wants. If a company doesn't produce what the consumer wants, and doesn't make the majority of their customers happy, they cannot be successful, and cannot turn a profit. These companies are not forcing people to buy their goods, so the idea that they do nothing to satisfy their customer base is a false notion.
Posted on Reply
#55
Prima.Vera
nickbaldwin86LOL


I am very glad AMD didn't get in bed with NVIDIA...

ATI and AMD make a great couple, both are failing companies that I could careless about other then to create competition for NVIDIA and Intel.

I personally wouldn't/couldn't run a GPU without CUDA and can imagine running a CPU other than Intel :rockout:
WOW! Fanbuoyisms at is finest!! :laugh::laugh::laugh:

Classic!
Posted on Reply
#56
Wile E
Power User
eidairaman1Maybe in the Science world but the Consumer market SLI is slowly disappearing and NV cant make a Standard Glue Logic anymore
I'm willing to bet that SLI and CUDA make more money in the science market anyway.

Either way, doesn't change the fact that they are successful. It's not like if the merger happened they would only go after teh consumer market. Mergers include all their markets.
Posted on Reply
#57
Totally
Why is everyone surprised? It's common knowledge. I know I'm late in saying this but, this isn't exactly news, I pretty sure there was an article outlining the same exact things here posted a few years ago at the time of ATi aquisition. I can't find the article on here but did find an article where Tom's revisited the subject.

www.tomsguide.com/us/amd-nvidia-merger,review-1061-4.html
Posted on Reply
#58
largon
AMD certainly got less than it paid for with that five-point-four billion dollars. Graphics division of AMD is pretty much insignificant to the company's financials. All AMD got was graphics chip design teams. They could've bought S3 instead, for a lot less and dump most of the cash on a new fab.

Ergo, ATi buy-out was a bad deal for AMD.
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment
Jan 10th, 2025 00:15 EST change timezone

New Forum Posts

Popular Reviews

Controversial News Posts