The chief scientist of Nvidia Corp., the world's largest supplier of standalone graphics processors for personal computers, said in an interview that ATI, graphics product group of Advanced Micro Devices and the arch-rival of Nvidia, did not have competitive products and that AMD did not have money to deliver on its promises.
"AMD has been declining because it hasn’t built a competitive graphics architecture for almost two years now - ever since the AMD/ATI merger. They’ve been pulling engineers [from the GPU teams] to Fusion, which integrates GPU technology onto the CPU. They have to do four things to survive, but I don’t think they have enough money to do one thing," said David Kirk, the chief scientist at Nvidia, in an interview with Bit-tech web-site.
Even though the management team at Advanced Micro Devices has achieved the lowest market share in more than half of the decade for ATI in just about 1.5 years, there is a number of achievements that ATI's engineers managed to concquer in the recent quarters, including introduction of the world's first DirectX 10.1 graphics processor, a breed of graphics chips with built-in audio controllers as well as some other things. Still, Mr. Kirk believes that graphics cards like ATI Radeon HD 3870 and 3870 X2 are not competitive, for which there is a reason: Nvidia's discrete GPU business grew 80% year-over-year in Q4 2007, well ahead of market trends.
But there are more problems at AMD than just graphics processing units (GPUs), the chief scientist of Nvidia reminds: AMD has to develop numerous products and fabrication technologies to stay competitive against Intel, Nvidia as well as other companies.
"The first thing they have to do to compete with Intel is the process technology – they have to build the new fabs. The second thing is the next-generation CPU technology. The third one is the next generation GPU technology - we’re going to invest one billion dollars in here this year and they need to invest on the same level to keep up with us. And then the fourth thing is they say the future is going to be this integrated CPU/GPU thing called Fusion, which there’s no evidence to suggest this is true but they just said it. They believe it and they’re now doing it," Mr. Kirk said.
AMD has been developing process technologies together with Chartered and IBM for several years and it did not have to build a fab for this reason. Morever, code-named Fusion processors integrate already available CPU and GPU technology, which does not require any research and development, but implementation work. Nevertheless, it is true that AMD has to compete against two strong players: Intel Corp. and Nvidia, which is not an easy task considering that both are very strong at the moment.
Even though AMD has not been profitable in many quarters, the company is working to improve its present stance. Unfortunately, in doing so AMD does not spend a lot of time talking about its achievements and future potential, but leaves this for third parties, who claim, based on market share figures, that AMD's market shares are shrinking across the board.
Comments currently:
19
Discussion started: 05/03/08 02:24:22 PM
Latest comment: 05/07/08 07:55:12 PM
Expand all threads |
Collapse all threads
[1-10]
1.
Finally someone who knows how things really are.
[
Posted by: 1234

|
Date: 05/03/08 02:24:22 PM]
2.
Abu Dhabi bailed them out once what makes Nvidia think they wouldn't do it again,especially after they have invested so much already? They might only be a minority shareholder but still have a lot of capital.
[
Posted by: Mr Roboto

|
Date: 05/03/08 07:42:29 PM]
+ expand thread (1 answer)
- collapse thread
Puja McGriddle and Ali Baba have nothing to do with it. His point is they're hemorraging (sp?) on multiple fronts and spread too thin.
[
Posted by: boner

|
Date: 05/04/08 06:29:32 PM]
3.
In short, AMD has been rolling with consecutive blunders!
[
Posted by: JJ

|
Date: 05/03/08 09:34:58 PM]
4.
Oh yes! No one knows what's going on internally than the companies competitor. Like nVidia would really come out and say anything positive about AMD/ATI.
The leaked specs for the Radeon 4870 look like ATI could have a winner on their hands shortly. We won't know for sure until it's released.
[
Posted by: Klinky

|
Date: 05/03/08 11:17:53 PM]
5.
Look, this guy is absolutely right. I just hope AMD can get back on track to keep innovation going forward. They need to compete with Intel, and they need to compete with Nvidia, period. Otherwise, AMD's competitors will release gradual updates to their products to bleed us consumers dry and innovation will take a step or two back. I know Intel has Nehalem coming out and this should be one heck of a performer, and you know they are gonna milk that cow. It hurts us, the consumer. But I am sure all you know this. ;)
[
Posted by: iLLz

|
Date: 05/03/08 11:43:58 PM]
6.
One day attack Intel other day AMD.Menager from Intel say excatly ,Nvidia will disappear from IT market.
[
Posted by: Black_code

|
Date: 05/04/08 12:09:41 PM]
7.
Nvidia says this before Intel comes to lay the smack down on them? In a year or two they'll be sharing the Mac&cheese right along with AMD.
Both companies made the mistake of pissing Intel off, and sadly Nvidia should be pretty humble talking about AMD because they're about to join them in the poor house.
[
Posted by: FXi

|
Date: 05/04/08 01:36:26 PM]
+ expand thread (3 answers)
- collapse thread
Oh really. Is that so? How do you figure exactly?
[
Posted by: EndPCNoise

|
Date: 05/04/08 10:03:57 PM]
Larrabee
[
Posted by: FXi

|
Date: 05/05/08 05:26:11 AM]
Fanboys need not comment.
[
Posted by: boner

|
Date: 05/05/08 08:25:13 AM]
8.
These "scientists" are complete idiots. "there is no evidence fusion is future", LOL. Well if there was evidence for something which will happen in future everybody would do only that.
Second, I really dont know whats he trying to accompish. If he thinks AMD will say, you are right, we will close tomorow, he is crazy. Also if they need billion dolars in R&D that doeasnt mean AT ALL that AMD needs same amount of money. Really what should Intel say about Nvidia in this case? Anyway I really do not understand whats the point of such interviews? If somoene is chosing product based on these philosophical bullshits, he is seriously ill.
[
Posted by: BorgDrone

|
Date: 05/04/08 03:27:57 PM]
+ expand thread (5 answers)
- collapse thread
What is he trying to accomplish? How about addressing the questions posed to him by the interviewer. Pretty cut and clear. No wondering and speculation necessary.
[
Posted by: boner

|
Date: 05/04/08 06:32:31 PM]
Interesting that "interviewer", is asking Nvidia "scientist" about AMD business. Anyway if we are going info formal interpretation - in that case what is interviewer trying to accomplish?
Lets ask Intel scientists what they think about NVIDIAs pathetic billion in R&D? Anyway billion does not mean anything, because if billions were everything IBM would still be only company to manufacture PCs.
[
Posted by: BorgDrone

|
Date: 05/05/08 07:42:06 AM]
"what is interviewer trying to accomplish?"
Now THAT is a very good question! :-)
Seriously - hardly a single site exists that successfully reviews products without bias. Op-Ed's reign supreme because that generates hits and hits generate ad revenue potential. Take EliteBastards.com for example - run by a great guy in the UK (Hanners) who has truly made effort into fairly reviewing products as best he knows how. I can guarentee you he doesn't have the mega-theater Anand Lal Shimpi has. I'm not saying Anand's a crook, but some people are all about the revenue (thus DailyTech was born) and some are not (thus Hanners still has a day job in IT).
But I don't think Intel cares too much about NVIDIA's R&D - as Kirk has just said, Intel does what they do VERY well. When Intel is firing on all cylinders it probably doesn't matter what AMD and NVIDIA are doing. We probably all agree with that.
But I wouldn't toot Intel's R&D horn TOO much. Just because NetBurst is dead, it doesn't mean that shit stain has been wiped clear. It was an astronomical R&D blunder - Intel promised a 6GHz ceiling and demoed a 10GHz prototype and we were left with barely 4GHz, and a crapload of heat and power consumption.
[
Posted by: boner

|
Date: 05/05/08 08:33:44 AM]
What if intel invests 2 billion dollars? Does that mean nvidia is screwed and needs to gather another billion just to keep up?
Is the guy really a "scientist" or a fortune teller?
[
Posted by: cg

|
Date: 05/05/08 03:41:17 AM]
R&D was ONE facet of what he covered. Not very fair to omit the rest of what the guy said (as well as incinuated).
[
Posted by: boner

|
Date: 05/05/08 08:35:02 AM]
9.
What a load of BS, just what you'd expect an NV lackey to say who is pushing for a pay rise
[
Posted by: alpha0ne

|
Date: 05/06/08 12:22:21 AM]
10.
Spending your money wisely is more important than spending your money. Just look at what happened with 3dfx. AMD will either get it's act together, or keep hemorrhaging. Either way I'm a little cautious on taking the word of someone from a rival company about their eminent demise.
[
Posted by: Megamanx00

|
Date: 05/07/08 07:55:12 PM]
[1-10]