Slashdot Mirror


Interview with ATI's soon-to-be CEO Dave Orton

wolfgang writes "Tom's Hardware has published an interview with Dave Orton, who will become ATI's next CEO in June. Orton talks about the transformation of the company within the last three years, the current competition with Nvidia and what can be expected from graphic chipsets in the near future. Orton believes that ATI can grab more than 50 percent market share in the desktop market in the short term."

6 of 138 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Right. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

    I would have to agree especially since you have many motherboard / chipset manufacturers that integrate their own video chipsets (VIA, Intel, nVidia) to alleviate user's from buying that additional video card that they probably don't need. There are more people using computers for standard business purposes than there are for gaming / graphics design. Most users don't need a high-end gaming / graphics card to browse the web and use standard business applications. ATI may be able to capture 50% or more of the gaming / graphic design market, but certainly not the whole desktop market.

  2. Re:Right. by mobby_6kl · · Score: 2, Informative

    Yeah I was also surprised. Last time I checked, Intel had the largest market share at about 33%, then nVidia had 27% and ATI 24%. (VIA and SIS had both about 7-8%). I seriously can't see a way how they could get 50% there.

  3. Read the interview instead of the headline. by guidryp · · Score: 2, Informative

    Here is the actual quote: "We would like to reach 50 percent of the market in the short term." Since there are only really two main players for graphics cards, and they have been gaing share on NV, the goal of 50% doesn't seem unrealistic. Especially when you consider that so far ATI seems to be leading again on the high end.

  4. Re:Right. by DarkMageDTM · · Score: 2, Informative

    Sorry, but when 95% of the market is two companies, it's pretty easy for 1 to get 50% or more...no one else has the money to compete. Matrox tried...and failed.

    It costs so much time and money to design modern GPUs that we aren't going to have a new major player for a long time. More is sunk into their R&D than Intel and AMD at this point.

    --
    -- Darkmage "You've got to let it all go - fear, doubt, copyright... Free...Your...Code."
  5. Re:Well... by Lehk228 · · Score: 2, Informative

    FGLRX has one flaw that I have found, it always picks your monitors highest possible refresh rate no matter how many times you set your config file to use one step down (at 75 hz my monitor loses the signal periodically, at 72 it works perfectly, guess which refresh rate FGLRX uses)

    --
    Snowden and Manning are heroes.
  6. Re:Exactly. by ImpTech · · Score: 2, Informative

    Everybody says "More games, need more games!" How many do you want??? We've got UT2004. We'll be getting Doom3. Return to Castle Wolfenstein? Enemy Territory? Ok, we won't get Half-Life 2, but who knows if even the Windows guys will get that one. Don't like FPS? We've still got NWN, probably some others I can't think of right now. Okay, we don't get *every* game, but we're getting a respectable selection these days, particularly of the graphically-intensive variety. At this point, ATI should want our business. If they don't, well, more power to NVidia.