This is pure speculation without taking consideration that the purchase of ATi actually led AMD to very nasty financial position. AMD overpaid heavily for ATi.
And given that today the best products from AMD are all Zen-based, the Radeon lineup is somewhere third or fourth in the priority list, I think that AMD without ATi would have been in a much better situation today.
Your posts are speculation, my posts are speculation, almost all posts in a forum are speculations. Your point? Please don't say that you post facts.
AMD's demise had to do with their CPUs not their GPUs. They lost time with Barcelona, not to mention that TLB bug, they messed up with the FX line and if they had insisted with their factory business, those 5 billions would have gone to the trash can, for nothing a few years later. In the end those 5 billions probably forced them to do something that seems a great decision today. Get rid of their fabs before it is too late. And I am not thinking of Intel while saying this. I am thinking of how much money someone would have to spend today to develop a new node.
And of course thanks to ATI, they had the best integrated graphics in the market, THE ONLY selling point for some of their products in that horrible Bulldozer era and also brought them the consoles to them. Without the consoles, AMD would have been dead. Call it a speculation if you wish. Also in the future they will have a chance in the AI market, because of those GPUs.
As for Zen. There would have been no Zen if there was no Radeon group in AMD. No money, no Zen.
lol, you know that the Antitrust regulators will never allow a single x86 player and that the court after all hands beefy fines over to the naughty Intel.
10-15 years ago I was very very very favorite to that idea. Then Intel in one night throw out of the chipset business EVERYONE. SiS, VIA, Nvidia. They did had to pay Nvidia some money for the next few years - i don't know about the others - but NO Antitrust regulators rush to make sure that there was more than one maker of chipsets for the Intel platform. Do you know anyone making Intel chipsets other than Intel today? I don't.
Then it is ARM and other CPU architectures. You can argue that more than one x86 maker is needed in a healthy market, but you can't say that Intel is a monopoly in the CPU business. Even 10+ years ago they where not. So, are you sure that Intel would have to split or at least pay beefy fines? Best case scenario AMD was going bankrupt and someone else, like Samsung, was coming in to bought everything, including of course the x86 license. Yeah, speculation. Like that "Antitrust regulators will never allow a single x86 player" phrase. Speculation.
You have to check the facts first:
First settlement:
Intel to pay AMD $1.25 billion in antitrust settlement
AMD drops its litigation while Intel agrees to "abide by" a long list of prohibitions. And renewed patent cross-license agreement frees AMD to spin off chip manufacturing.
AMD drops its litigation while Intel agrees to "abide by" a long list of prohibitions. And renewed patent cross-license agreement frees AMD to spin off chip manufacturing.
www.cnet.com
Second fine:
Antitrust: Commission imposes fine of €1.06 bn on Intel for abuse of dominant position; orders Intel to cease illegal practices
Highlights, press releases and speeches
ec.europa.eu
Intel was making BILLIONs for years, while AMD was losing BILLIONs for years, but yeah, Intel got fined a couple of billions so justice had prevailed. Oh...my.....
AMD still benefits because it allows them to compete more freely.
Also, Microsoft and Google get fined, too.
Antitrust: Commission fines Microsoft for non-compliance with browser choice commitments <div class=
ec.europa.eu
The European Commission has fined Google €1.49 billion for breaching EU antitrust rules. Google has abused its market dominance by imposing a number of restrictive clauses in contracts with third-party websites which prevented Google's rivals from placing their search adverts on these websites.
ec.europa.eu
Damn, every post you do is completely wrong. Do I have to quote more?
Haven't you following the market those last years? Don't you see what is going on in the laptop market? OEMs DO build AMD systems now, they don't make Dell's error to avoid building even a single model, but they make.... strange choices. Single channel memory, small battery, bad screen, stupid price, illogical choices like touchscreens in a form factor that is useless and of couse, the new fashion of limiting the top GPU with Renoir models.
Do you not comprehend the ratio? You claimed they are winning supercomputer contracts left and right and yet they are in the single digits! Just don't post anything more, it's embarrasing...
