Slashdot Mirror
Exploring the ATI/AMD Rumor
phaedo00 writes "Ars Technica writes about current speculation circling around the supposed imminent merger of ATI and AMD: 'Last week at Computex, however, Intel allegedly began telling folks behind closed doors that AMD is planning to acquire ATI. This news came courtesy of Tweaktown, who cited a trusted and reliable anonymous source for the claim. It wasn't clear from Tweaktown's report if Intel itself had heard a rumor to this effect, or if the company was reading the same tea leaves as the RBC Capital Markets analysts in the Forbes article and coming to the same conclusion.'"
huh? Why would that make any monopolies? Intel makes graphics chips right now. AMD does not. It would be nice if they did. If they consume ATI and rebrand their products, then so be it. Who cares.
Windows has more viruses because linux has more virus coders.
Or it could be very bad for gamers. Remember a few years ago with the Intel Pentium MMX stuff? It would be unfortunate if games started coming out that specifically require an AMD/ATI config in order to play them reasonably. I much prefer today's methodology of having a game that will play on any system (AMD/ATI, AMD/NVidia, Intel/ATI, Intel/NVidia, etc).
My first reaction was to laugh and think about all the nForce motherboards out there, but ATI has done some very interesting things with AMD chipsets recently.
One thing is for sure: when Intel, AMD, Nvidia, and ATI fight, we customers win.
Will ATI GPUs perhaps get some advanced optimizations? What if I want to use an NVIDIA GPU with an AMD/ATI CPU?
That's not necesarily true.
If that were to happen, why would AMD keep working with Nvidia? What would stop the (Currently fictional) AMD/ATI Corporation from makign Nvidia graphics run poorly in comparison to their own offerings?
A good number of people find ATI's offerings to be lackluster in comparison to Nvidia.
I see this as a bad thing. I like AMD's offerings, I have never liked ATI's offerings. If I get stuck with the graphics of ATI, if I want to keep using AMD, I would rather switch over to Intel and use their over-priced crap to ensure a certain "freedom" of choice and still use Nvidia Graphics chips.
If you ignore the other uses of a tool, does that make the tool less useful, or you less useful?
Would certainly piss me off enough to release the lawyers if I were AMD.
The Biggest thing I'd hate to see is the Alt OS support.. AMD banks real money on Alt OSes, where ATI views them as trouble... in that respect nVidia would be a better match because AMD would provide Fab allowing costs to be lower. Lower costs mean better support for OSS, combine with AMD chips it could provide a complete solution off the shelf.. just add OSS.
The only thing I see is that ATI has the inside contracts already... AMD desperately wants into the "big leagues" of the computer world. Customers that already use ATI video and like ATI's business (remember, OEMS don't care about performance or drivers as much as bottom line and buzzword compliance) would be heavily leaned upon to try out AMD chips with a good discount. ATI also has some interesting patent agreements with Intel and Microsoft that AMD & nVidia got cut out of in the last 5 years or so... but that means AMD would be planning to "roll over" or "sell out" to the Wintel homogney rather than keep fighting... very sad.
I've got a Radeon Express 200M in a laptop where an old ATI driver worked great with the 128MB of onboard RAM but later versions of the driver are crap. Newer versions of the ATI driver require setting both Video Sideport+UMA memory to 128MB each! And 3D performance was cut in half while also losing 128MB of system memory. So if this merger is true, if it does not mean better GNU/Linux drivers, I'll stick with Nvidia cards thankyou. And that might mean I go back to Intel CPUs if AMD forces the ATI video systems on equipment makers.
LoB
"Anyone who stands out in the middle of a road looks like roadkill to me." --Linus
Why would Intel be saying this? I would like to know what Intel people have to gain by spreading rumors like this, 'cause this type of rumor mongering isn't really hurting anyone's impression of AMD or ATI (not that intel would want to ruin ATI's image). When you think about it, it only makes you want to look to AMD in the future, and away from Intel's new line of 2-core processors. Hmmm, I'm not saying that a merger like this would be bad, I just really want to know what some of the Intel guys are up to... On another note, AMD might really have something here, and the author really has something there with AMD's intro of the cHT. That alone is an indication that AMD might either buy out or partner up with ATI. I can't see AMD pulling the cHT off without dedicated support from a graphics producer. Anyways, just thinking aloud... or should I say, thinking... onto my keyboard... or something to that effect... :/
Har?
I find this comment to be rather naïve - how could this merger, if it happens, be a bad thing for the Linux market? AMD is well-supported under Linux and supports Linux rather well (though I imagine it's more on one side than the other). Developing drivers for Linux has always been an issue of balancing available resources, and the resources AMD could potentially provide for this purpose would be invaluable.
If anything, a merger like this should really push the Linux desktop forward and challenge the Wintel trap we've been in for so long. This is just one more factor that is continuing the push for greater Linux penetration. A good example to cite would be Dell's acquisition of Alienware. If AMD & ATI merge, what kind of hardware do you think would be best optimize? Taking the Dell example further, as their sales of Linux servers increase, they undoubtedly are going to explore Linux on the desktop (after overcoming the obviously hurdle that Microsoft would present to them in terms of OEM Windows pricing). Just add up all these trends, and it can only be an optimistic outlook, in my opinion.
Kindness is not to be found in anything but that it adds to its beauty...
As an enthusiast I would not like to see this go down. AMD is great, but not everyone likes ATI. Buggy drivers, slow to catch on tech development(only recently got Pixel Shader 3.0) and relatively sensitive boards(personal experience)..these phrases are what come to mind.
Granted, nvidia is slightly evil (their Software Product Manager goes by the name of Andrew Fear) but that just makes them badass, and gamers couldn't care less for their association with MS. Try
What's with the headlines though? Sounded like "celebrity frolicking" gossip. Will they hold conferences in Namibia?
If AMD wanted to really shock Intel, why not just buy SGI too. Move Altix from Itanium to Opteron and cripple Intel even more. I just don't understand why this has not happened yet. It would be the death blow to Itanium in my opinion.
Then you've not asked much of your hardware or you've been extremely lucky. I've owned a Rage3D, Rage128, and Radeon9600XT, and infuriatingly bad drivers were just par for the course.
.net based control panel in Windows - WTF were they thinking?
Their Linux support has always been sub-par.
They did get somewhat reasonable in Windows towards the end with the Radeon, but then they introduced that insane
Doesn't matter to me - I went back to Nvidia and have enjoyed just not having to mess with things.