There's a lot of discussion around why AMD bought ATI. Two things that seem to rise to the top are AMD's need to have platform capabilities to compete with Intel and integrating GPU and CPU onto the same sillicon. However, both these will not come to fruition quickly. Assuming a realistic timeframe for either of these to come alive will be 2008, I'm guessing AMD will begin to attack Intel's integrated graphics business. Intel is the #1 graphics vendor (I'm not debating quality of graphics here) and AMD now has an opportunity to slow this business. I believe they will do two things in 2007 - both are sales & marketing tactics:
1. Traditionally ATI and Nvidia have not promoted their low end graphics cards. This has allowed the graphics card market not to be commoditised the way the CPU has. I think AMD will now market ATI's low end graphics as a better quality solution just above IGP or perhaps even match the Intel graphics solution at the PC BOM cost.
2. They might adopt a sandwich strategy by bringing their integrated graphics below Intel's in price...or perhaps equal but offer better quality.
These two things can make things very difficult for Intel in 2007 as AMD gets ready for their bigger assault.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
6 comments:
If discrete becomes cheap, I think game over IGP. Specially the quality of IGP we see today.
Your assumption about why AMD bought ATI is incorrect; the main reason is not integrated GPU's as has been suggested on the INQ.
Intel has a lot of corporate clients and these clients demand more guarantees that regular consumers do. Intel has had a tremendous advantage in this area because they manufacture about 80% of Intel chipsets. This means that they can not only guarantee that these chipsets work with their processors but they can provide a factory warranty for both.
AMD decided that the simplest way to become more competitive in the corporate market would be to bring a chipset into its own brand. This means that ATI chipsets will be guaranteed to work with AMD processors and AMD will provide the warranty for both processor and chipset. It is also possible for AMD to guarantee simultaneous shipments of both processors and matching chipsets and this is what these customers require.
The secondary reasons do include better notebook chipsets, lower cost integrated chipsets, and diversification into consumer electronics. However, the corporate market was the primary reason.
Your assumption about why AMD bought ATI is incorrect; the main reason is not integrated GPU's as has been suggested on the INQ.
Intel has a lot of corporate clients and these clients demand more guarantees that regular consumers do. Intel has had a tremendous advantage in this area because they manufacture about 80% of Intel chipsets. This means that they can not only guarantee that these chipsets work with their processors but they can provide a factory warranty for both.
AMD decided that the simplest way to become more competitive in the corporate market would be to bring a chipset into its own brand. This means that ATI chipsets will be guaranteed to work with AMD processors and AMD will provide the warranty for both processor and chipset. It is also possible for AMD to guarantee simultaneous shipments of both processors and matching chipsets and this is what these customers require.
The secondary reasons do include better notebook chipsets, lower cost integrated chipsets, and diversification into consumer electronics. However, the corporate market was the primary reason.
Scientia - essentially what you're talking about are platforms which I have mentioned.
AMD's need to have platform capabilities to compete with Intel
Okay, you did mention this. However, you then said:
Assuming a realistic timeframe for either of these to come alive will be 2008
This is what got me confused because I thought you were referring to your statement about putting a GPU onto the CPU die. Now, I understand. The problem was your time estimate of 2008.
However, AMD will gain advantage from its purchase of ATI in the 1st quarter of 2007, not 2008. I have no idea why you think that it would take until 2008. This would be a reasonable time frame to deliver a CPU with GPU on the die, but not a reasonable timeframe to deliver a bundled solution (cpu plus chipset). The bundled solution is good immediately in 2007.
A third issue though is whether or not ATI is developing a better mobile chipset. This could have a later timeframe in 2007.
Post a Comment