Analyst Expects NVIDIA to Acquire AMD Despite Chances of Losing x86 License.

[mascaras]

Analyst Expects NVIDIA to Acquire AMD Despite Chances of Losing x86 License.

Doug Friedman, an analyst with American Technology Research, said that graphics chip maker NVIDIA Corp. could well acquire x86 microprocessor maker Advanced Micro Devices in order to “re-architect it”. The acquisition is considered to be useful due to the fact that roadmaps of AMD and Intel Corp. threat NVIDIA. The only problem for the graphics giant is that AMD’s x86 license is a non-transferable one. “We believe AMD [could] face mounting pressure from shareholders, to restructure the company with a focus on a change in leadership,” said the analyst. Indeed, shareholders of AMD are hardly pleased with the company’s performance in the recent quarters as well as issues with the launch of quad-core microprocessors and the release of DirectX 10 graphics processing units. Nevertheless, late last year AMD managed to secure $622 million from Mubadala Development Company, which means that there are those who believe in AMD. But despite the problems that AMD has had, its roadmap of integration graphics cores into central processing units (CPUs) threatens NVIDIA: not only because AMD increases its market share in the market of graphics adapters, but it transforms graphics solutions into commodity, which may potentially affect NVIDIA’s revenues going forward.


“The Intel/AMD roadmap of integration of the CPU/GPU could pose a risk to NVIDIA, and buying AMD propels Nvidia into a formidable competitor for Intel with the upside coming from Huang’s ability to re-architect AMD’s design,” said Mr. Friedman.

At press time, AMD’s market capitalization was $3.82 billion and it has $1.89 billion in cash. NVIDIA Corp.’s market capitalization at press time was $13.01 billion, besides, the company had $1.85 billion in bank.

Perhaps, Jen-Hsun Huang, the chief executive of NVIDIA, could re-architect Advanced Micro Devices in order to make it profitable. However, due to the fact that wide cross-licensing agreement between AMD and Intel, which is also believed to cover x86 instruction set, does not allow AMD to transfer any of Intel’s technologies to any third-party. As a result, if AMD is acquired by Nvidia, the new company will not have rights to produce x86 central processing units (CPUs) or utilize any technologies from Intel.

It is uncertain whether NVIDIA, or any other company that has no wide cross-licensing agreement with Intel that covers x86 instruction set, is interested in getting AMD and not interested in making CPUs. But what is almost certain is that various antitrust organizations would be against the two suppliers of discrete GPUs becoming one.


X-bit Labs


http://www.techpowerup.com/52573/Ana..._License..html

[turtletrax]

That could get very confusing and complex in a hurry. I still don't think it would happen, but you never really know.

[WeStSiDePLaYa]

This would be a bad thing for us.

No competition in the GPU market means stagnant developments.

Even though intel has a much larger GPU share then both nvidia and ATI. It is solely on the low end.

[cajer]

If this happens, then Nvidia would also own ATI. Then they would have no compition. Then they would release crappy products or be antitrusted.

[saaya]

this is nonsense...

[HousERaT]

Folks should be very afraid of something like this happening.......

[cajer]

I am afriad anti-trust... gulp

[fallwind]

All competition in the CPU and GPU markets would be gone if Nvidia aquired AMD. No way this is going to happen.

[HKPolice]

NOT POSSIBLE.

Why? AMD owns ATi, nVidia acquiring ATi would violate anti-trust laws.

The end.

[deathman20]

Na it can't happen at all.. thats all BS right there it wouldn't be feasable.

Truely, if nVidia bought AMD, really only thing they'd aquire is a few fabs and ATI since the CPU side would be useless to them unless nVidia has something up its sleeves in an actual CPU market product.

[Indes]

This would be a bad thing for us.

No competition in the GPU market means stagnant developments.

Even though intel has a much larger GPU share then both nvidia and ATI. It is solely on the low end.

Like Westside says Intel has a larger share than both nvidia and ati, therefore if they merged wouldnt intel still have more marketshare so there would be no anti trust?

[deathman20]

Like Westside says Intel has a larger share than both nvidia and ati, therefore if they merged wouldnt intel still have more marketshare so there would be no anti trust?

Anti-trust would come in play with the CPU market though I think.

[brewer265]

boo, nvidia has already shown how much they would slow down innovation when they have no competition. ie 8800

[Yakyb]

with the entry of larabee this could be feasible

although part of me hopes it is not true

[RAMMAN]

technically, intel dominates both markets so anti-trust might not come into play at all.

[brewer265]

technically, intel dominates both markets so anti-trust might not come into play at all.

imagine how expensive video cards would be especially if larrabee isnt all its cracked up to be.

[eric66]

bs haha

[cky2k6]

could be true though, we have to think radical here, but you never know... think about this, the computer as we know it may very well end soon for the majority of consumers. people have shown their dislike for large bulky desktops, and preference for mobility. linux has increasing merit in the industry, and microsoft's popularity is admittedly going down. this will suck for us, but it might not be too bad for amd and nvidia, they have a chance to create their own market. umpc is here, but its not taken on too well. with a good redesign, they might capitalize big on such a product. would blow for us enthusiasts though, will pretty much depend on intel to keeping it going... nvidia will then be able to capitalize on two markets, extreme pefromance servers and high mobility. plus, they could design a console. now, that would be a good lol.

[[XC] Lead Head]

Na it can't happen at all.. thats all BS right there it wouldn't be feasable.

Truely, if nVidia bought AMD, really only thing they'd aquire is a few fabs and ATI since the CPU side would be useless to them unless nVidia has something up its sleeves in an actual CPU market product.

Wouldn't matter without a valid x86 license.

[RAMMAN]

perhaps if nvidia kept the amd brand name and sold of ati this could work?

[Starscream]

technically, intel dominates both markets so anti-trust might not come into play at all.

Seeing Intel only delivers onboard solutions atm the anti trust organisations will treat the dedicated market as a seperate market.
Mainly cause it is very hard to enter this part of the market (the last few companies that tried failed) the anti trust organisations wont allow this entire part of the market to fall into the hands of 1 company.
(ps. i know Intel is going to enter this market but they havent yet so they dont count yet)

I can only see 1 way of this happening.
Nvidia announces a takeover and to avoid anti trust stuff immediatly announces that part of their plans is to immedialy sell ATI.

edit: another way would be that they have takeover talsk with AMD and int hose talks AMd agrees tos ell ATI before a possible merger/takeover.

I could see them buying parts or tech from AMD for mobile use but not the entire company. technically its possible but financially the risc for Nvidia is way to high.

[nemrod]

perhaps if nvidia kept the amd brand name and sold of ati this could work?

Buy AMD (without x86 licence) and sold ati? What do they keep? Hector?

[deathman20]

Wouldn't matter without a valid x86 license.

While im not a programer and all but what if they didn't need the x86 licence?

[Calmatory]

1. IF they had x86....
2. Intel going for High end GPU market this year, GPU competition remains. Now they would need that x86 and they'd be ready to go.

IMO Nvidia + AMD + ATI vs. Intel is awkward situation. Both companies would make their own chipsets, own CPU's, own GPUs. What if another company takes over the market? :|

While im not a programer and all but what if they didn't need the x86 licence?

Do you mean that what would happen without the licence? Basically Windows wouldn't run on Nvidia CPU's, those machines wouldn't be PC's at all. They would ened their own architecture, and try to make companies to use it = failure.

[Syn.]

Since when does anyone sane listen to an analyst?