Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

AMD tops Nvidia in graphics chip shipments

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #11
    Originally posted by kazetsukai View Post
    I think NVIDIA needs to break back into the chipset business. Regardless of the flaming, ION is a pretty successful platform and integrated NVIDIA chipsets were not (always) total sh!t.
    Ion is great for a low-power system like my HTPC. The problem as I see it is Intel refusing to let Nvidia hook their Ion chipsets up to the new Atoms (I believe that's still the case?).

    I think Nvidia's long-term problem is the decline of the PC gaming market; if most PC gamers are playing Farmville rather than 'Super Whizzbang Shooter 23' that requires the world's fastest graphics card, then there's no need for a gaming card. Of course if most people are playing Farmville rather than SWS23, then Microsoft are going to be in big trouble too, since Farmville runs on any OS with a Flash plugin.

    Comment


    • #12
      I remember the nForce2 being a very good and successful chipset back in the good old days before cpu makers stopped licensing their proprietary bus interfaces. It's too bad there is no chance of more competition in the chipset market right now.
      Ah.... 2005-2006. AMD really had a shot at flipping that graph in 2006 with their AMD64 line.
      That could have happened if it wasn't for intel's anti-competitive actions.

      Comment


      • #13
        Originally posted by devius View Post
        That could have happened if it wasn't for intel's anti-competitive actions.
        As far as I remember, AMD's fabs couldn't possibly make enough chips to supply 70% of the market at that time?

        Comment


        • #14
          Originally posted by movieman View Post
          As far as I remember, AMD's fabs couldn't possibly make enough chips to supply 70% of the market at that time?
          Well, then it's actually a good thing that intel prevented OEMs from using AMD hardware through ilegal monopolizing tactis, or else AMD would be in a tight spot!

          Comment


          • #15
            Originally posted by devius View Post
            Well, then it's actually a good thing that intel prevented OEMs from using AMD hardware through ilegal monopolizing tactis, or else AMD would be in a tight spot!
            More likely, the OEMs were dangling the threat of AMD design wins in order to get concessions from Intel, knowing that they'd never have to ship those AMD systems.

            I may be wrong, but I remember reading at the time that AMD was selling every single CPU they could produce, and I'm sure I remember some OEMs complaining that they couldn't get enough AMD chips.

            Comment


            • #16
              intel paid AMD a billion just to drop the cases about Intel's shady practices. And the EU and FTC are still going after Intel. Intel played dirty. Very, very dirty.

              And Nvidia's x86 dreams? Will become a nightmare if they ever release such a chip. There are licences hold by AMD, Intel, VIA and NATSEMI. And then there are patents, hold by the same four. Nvidia doesn't have either.

              Comment


              • #17
                Originally posted by movieman View Post
                More likely, the OEMs were dangling the threat of AMD design wins in order to get concessions from Intel, knowing that they'd never have to ship those AMD systems.
                You're probably right. Whatever it was, I'm sure no one was thinking in the consumer's best interests though. What was the topic anyway? Oh yeah, the HD5000 series is a good product that launched at the right time and that alone may explain this advantage in shipments.

                PS: I still use an nForce2 motherboard on a small server nachine. I really miss more choice in the chipset business. ION2 is probably a no-no on linux due to it using optimus. Anyone tried this?

                Comment


                • #18
                  Originally posted by energyman View Post
                  intel paid AMD a billion just to drop the cases about Intel's shady practices. And the EU and FTC are still going after Intel. Intel played dirty. Very, very dirty.

                  And Nvidia's x86 dreams? Will become a nightmare if they ever release such a chip. There are licences hold by AMD, Intel, VIA and NATSEMI. And then there are patents, hold by the same four. Nvidia doesn't have either.
                  x86 in itself could be considered a monopoly, as if you want to build -any- x86 chip you have to pay Intel, and if you want something with any real performance you have to further pay Intel and also AMD.

                  It isn't just Intel that is shady- the integrity of the whole industry is almost beyond repair. I don't see any architecture competition in the desktop industry- and I don't see any competition in the high performance workstation area either. You used to see SPARC and POWER boxes all over the place, now nothing but x86.

                  There's hope in ARM- ARM looks like it could displace x86 with a few more nudges. Unfortunately there is almost as much of a patent hold on that architecture as x86- the key difference being the main patent holder isn't actually putting out chips.

                  Comment


                  • #19
                    no. x86 has 4 companies holding licences and at least 5 who are allowed to produce x86 chips. POWER on the other hand - nobody but IBM is to allowed to design or make POWER chips. And Sparc? Oracle, Fujitsu and that was the whole range.

                    x86 is very non-monopolistic compared to those. And if you want to make a x86 chip you not only have to pay Intel, but AMD, Via and NatSemi to.

                    Comment


                    • #20
                      National Semi sold off their x86 lines quite some time ago to Via and AMD.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X