AMD and ATI May Merge

[The Laughing Man]

Jerry! Jerry! Jerry!

(sorry I just had to LOL)

[tiagosilva29]

^^ Black magic!

Let's all have an hardware supplier's mixed cocktail! :martini:

[+M2Ys4U Subscriber¹]

AMD 'n' ATI, now we can re-arange the letters to spell DAMNIT.

Good news IMO, Even though I prefer Intel over AMD.

[ANova]

I was not talking about market share and stock prices, obviously. I was speaking about current cards both companies are offering, in which we all know nVidia has better offerings at the moment.

More like in which you think you know.

The X1900 is faster, has better image quality, has more features, and costs less than the 7900. Not to mention all the problems the 7900s are currently experiencing.

No, I'm afraid the only thing nvidia is whooping ATI in is marketing.

[Krome]

I thought this is somewhat good... I have seen a lot of AMD user prefer ATi over nVIDIA... the merge does not surprise me one bit... I have always thought nVIDIA goes well with Intel (just my opinion, no rant please...) Based on user's choice/base, I thought technology would go this way...

OFF TOPIC: I hope I can post here... I can't post the comment on the news page... very odd... unless mod had ban me from posting in the comment section...

[Stokkolm]

Discrete graphics marketshare:

Nvidia - 53%

ATI - 46%

Chipset marketshare:

ATI - 12%

Nvidia - 9%

Thats a whopping for sure! :whistle:

ATI's stock went up today because of this rumor, didnt happen with the Intel buying ATI rumor, hmm ..

Wait, your saying that ATi has more market share than nVidia in the chipset market? :blink:

Even though their offering has only been available for a few months and nVidia has been around for a few years now? I think your numbers are wrong.

[mbtx__]

Guys...off topic!!

I think it is not only a smart business move, but it would also help merge two critical areas of gaming that could end up giving AMD/ATi a huge lead in that area of computers.

[MrCobra]

More like in which you think you know.

The X1900 is faster, has better image quality, has more features, and costs less than the 7900. Not to mention all the problems the 7900s are currently experiencing.

No, I'm afraid the only thing nvidia is whooping ATI in is marketing.

Who cares, for example, if I can get 113 fps on an ATI compared to 109 on Nvidia? I sure don't. When I'm playing a fast paced game I really don't pay attention if some obscure part of the screen has a "jaggie" or not. Most others don't as well.

I own both a X1900 and a 7900GTX. I've never had one problem with the 7900. There's been a few issues with the X1900. ATI's drivers may have gotten better but they're still crap. They've always had driver issues from the early cards of way back to the new ones of today.

/on topic

Good luck AMD.

[STanger]

I'd rather see an AMD-Nvidia merger but it still does make sense ... but I forsee ATI muscling over every other GFX company even nvidia. That would not be cool. Then ATI would be the hardware equivalent of microsoft imho

[ANova]

Who cares, for example, if I can get 113 fps on an ATI compared to 109 on Nvidia? I sure don't. When I'm playing a fast paced game I really don't pay attention if some obscure part of the screen has a "jaggie" or not. Most others don't as well.

I own both a X1900 and a 7900GTX. I've never had one problem with the 7900. There's been a few issues with the X1900. ATI's drivers may have gotten better but they're still crap. They've always had driver issues from the early cards of way back to the new ones of today.

Well the point obviously went right over your head.

Look up the 7900 problems buddy, quite a few people are complaining of their brand new or couple week old 7900s artifacting, shutting down or crashing, apparently due to the overclocking IHVs are doing without proper testing.

As far as ATI's drivers, that's an old excuse that hasn't held any water for the last three years at least. I've been running three ATI cards for the last two years and the only problems I've ever had were minor.

[L3thal Veteran]

As far as ATI's drivers, that's an old excuse that hasn't held any water for the last three years at least. I've been running three ATI cards for the last two years and the only problems I've ever had were minor.

Yes, because we all know if ANova has zero issues, everyone else has zero issues :whistle:

Wait, your saying that ATi has more market share than nVidia in the chipset market?

Not according to Mercury Research :whistle:

NVIDIA?s overall chipset market share is 6%, down 1% sequentially, whereas ATI?s share is about 3%, according to Mercury Research. The world?s largest chipset maker is Intel Corp.

Jerry! Jerry! Jerry!

(sorry I just had to LOL)

Way to contr:rolleyes:leyes:

Back on t:shifty:hifty:

Back on topic we go (I will not further argue with jerry, since we all know he is the GPU gur

[Lexcyn]

This would be a good thing. The two best companies merging? Woot. :D

In any case, I don't think this thread should be about which graphics company is better - it's about the possible merger between AMD and ATI. :wacko:

[L3thal Veteran]

I don't see them merging, though I do see them partnering up like it was mentioned in the latter page.

[jerry]

Not according to Mercury Research :whistle:

NVIDIA’s overall chipset market share is 6%, down 1% sequentially, whereas ATI’s share is about 3%, according to Mercury Research. The world’s largest chipset maker is Intel Corp.

SIGH

[Mike Mayer]

I always associated AMD and ATI, not just because of their three-letterness, but because in my mind I've viewed them as the underdogs.

I'm not biased. I've used Intel, AMD, ATI, nVidia. In all sorts of ways. I like them all for different things. Intel for notebooks. nVidia for multiple montiors, Intel for professional audio, AMD for gaming and performance overall.

And I've always associated Intel with nVidia because of the higher manufacturing yield.

It could just be me though...

[Jase]

"ADD" here we come :p

[MasterC]

"ADD" here we come :p

:rofl: Exactly what I was thinking!

[viciv]

Good luck, ATI!

Frankly, I am disappointed with AMD.. we know nothing about K8L while conroe is on it's way to the top... :(

[Elliot B.]

The X1900 is faster..:

No, it's not. Check the benchmarks on most websites that compare the two.

[oldaccount1]

I agree. Anything is possible.

It might create some interesting business upheavals if they do.

I agree. With larger funding, ATI will have a huge edge on new and faster technology, and nVidia will do the same to compete, so at least some good can come from this. (Y)

[ANova]

Yes, because we all know if ANova has zero issues, everyone else has zero issues

Well, three different cards from different manufacturers in four different computers. That's a fairly wide range of hardware.

No, it's not. Check the benchmarks on most websites that compare the two.

Yes, it is. I did on its launch. The difference depends entirely on the game. Older games run about the same on both cards but as soon as you start getting into games that use more complex shaders such as FEAR the X1900 pulls a decent lead due to it's 48 pixel shader units. That lead also gets larger when AA is enabled.

[L3thal Veteran]

Well, three different cards from different manufacturers in four different computers. That's a fairly wide range of hardware.

Is it? I have used over 11 nVidia cards over the past 1 1/2 years and none of those people have called me back saying they are disappointed with their card's performance or had any issues with them. My point is that just because you haven't had problems with your cards, doesn't mean others will. Obviously there are a few problems here and there with a few 7900GTX's just like there are minor problems with the X1900. There isn't any card in history that has had 100% non-failure rate.

P.S. With the power consumption the x1900 uses, you mine as well get two AC's in your room to cool you off :|

Edited June 1, 2006 by L3thal

[viciv]

what is the power consumption of gf7950 gx2?

[L3thal Veteran]

what is the power consumption of gf7950 gx2?

Two Quad SLI 7950GX2's will draw 286W of power when idle and 452W when under load, compared to almost 500W of power for a Crossfire setup of x1900XTX's.

http://theinquirer.net/?article=31429

[viciv]

thank you, L3thal

hmm..

Source

Edited June 1, 2006 by viciv