Update:
Time to update the article with a bit of reaction from others in the industry, in no particular order (other than we happened to ring them first):Now we spoke to Chris Hook, ATI Head of Public Relations, EMIA, as obviously NVIDIA and ATI are the big graphic companies and it would be interesting to hear what ATI had to say about this move by their competitors, especially in the light of the recent ATI and Intel deal for integrated graphics on Intel chipsets. Chris had this to say:
“ATI have a really strong platform and product road map for the future. ATI’s success does not rely on third party technology or expertise”
So ATI are obviously confident that the NVIDIA/ULI deal isn’t going to threaten what they have in the pipeline for the future. In the past, ATI have focused on buying in the technology they needed for their chipsets, something which looks set to continue for the foreseeable future. This allows them to control costs and maintain flexibility but who’s to say that NVIDIA’s approach won’t do the same thing?
An industry veteran of some 30 years was somewhat less diplomatic:
“You only buy a sandwich when there’s a hole in your stomach! This appears to be a clear admission by NVIDIA that they have serious deficiencies in their existing chipsets and they need to make this kind of investment if they are to stand any chance at all in the future. Defective armour is only one of a string of embarrassments for their in-house chipset team. Let’s hope for the sake of their customers that this acquisition is not a massive white elephant. When Intel were looking for a chipset partner for their DX9 products, NVIDIA couldn’t cut the mustard.”
At the time of this update we’re waiting on comments from AMD and Intel and a significant interested party would only provide off-the-record comments.
