Engineering Lifestyle
Comment
MtnView101
"The first advantage of such an alliance, of course, would be patents. And lots ...
krh
Yahoo buys RIM then the combined buys AMD...just give me the new stock ...
AMD, who will buy?
Sylvie Barak
7/30/2012 8:05 PM EDT
Intel, Apple, Microsoft or Nvidia?
Intel
Next on the list of likely/unlikely suspects is Intel, the world’s largest semiconductor provider. Though it is highly unlikely such a deal would ever pass through regulations (it would probably be slapped down before you could say “antitrust”), it would certainly give Intel a boost in graphics technology, where it has historically lagged.
It’s still highly questionable whether there would actually be any value for Intel acquiring AMD, though, as the smaller firm has not held a leadership position in CPU technology since 2006.
Apple
Apple, the world’s largest company, has the biggest war chest of cash and is under pressure from Wall Street to spend it. By buying AMD, Apple could achieve full silicon CPU/GPU independence for its MacBooks. The firm could also migrate off of Imagination Technology’s graphics core for iPad and iPhone.
Despite Apple’s predilection for owning as much technology in its supply chain as possible, however, the firm has a bit of a checkered past working with AMD, including issues with discrete graphics and lost design wins on CPU.
Microsoft
Microsoft is another dark horse not to be overlooked. The firm already buys AMD hardware for Xbox, using a royalty-based model, and is rumored to be working with the firm on the upcoming Xbox 720.
Also, after past issues with hardware partners, Microsoft has shown itself to be interested in taking a more vertical stance, with the recent launch of its Surface tablet. By buying AMD, Microsoft could easily assimilate the company’s technology, given its X86 expertise.
Nvidia
Last, and sadly probably least likely, is Nvidia, AMD’s rival graphics partner. Historically bitter enemies, ATI and Nvidia spent decades duking it out on the graphics front, but buying AMD now would give Nvidia the much needed CPU expertise it needs to challenge Intel and Qualcomm long-term.
The move would also round out Nvidia’s portfolio, boost its enterprise/HPC push and give the company a fully integrated CPU/GPU solution.
Unfortunately, aside from the massive clash of corporate culture involved, the move would likely face regulatory challenges on potential discrete graphics monopoly and the financial costs would also be too high for Nvidia to stomach.
If I was a betting girl, I’d put my money on Samsung, but it’s just as likely that none of the above will ever materialize.
What do you think, readers? Should AMD be bought? And if so, who is your money on?
Intel
Next on the list of likely/unlikely suspects is Intel, the world’s largest semiconductor provider. Though it is highly unlikely such a deal would ever pass through regulations (it would probably be slapped down before you could say “antitrust”), it would certainly give Intel a boost in graphics technology, where it has historically lagged.
It’s still highly questionable whether there would actually be any value for Intel acquiring AMD, though, as the smaller firm has not held a leadership position in CPU technology since 2006.
Apple
Apple, the world’s largest company, has the biggest war chest of cash and is under pressure from Wall Street to spend it. By buying AMD, Apple could achieve full silicon CPU/GPU independence for its MacBooks. The firm could also migrate off of Imagination Technology’s graphics core for iPad and iPhone.
Despite Apple’s predilection for owning as much technology in its supply chain as possible, however, the firm has a bit of a checkered past working with AMD, including issues with discrete graphics and lost design wins on CPU.
Microsoft
Microsoft is another dark horse not to be overlooked. The firm already buys AMD hardware for Xbox, using a royalty-based model, and is rumored to be working with the firm on the upcoming Xbox 720.
Also, after past issues with hardware partners, Microsoft has shown itself to be interested in taking a more vertical stance, with the recent launch of its Surface tablet. By buying AMD, Microsoft could easily assimilate the company’s technology, given its X86 expertise.
Nvidia
Last, and sadly probably least likely, is Nvidia, AMD’s rival graphics partner. Historically bitter enemies, ATI and Nvidia spent decades duking it out on the graphics front, but buying AMD now would give Nvidia the much needed CPU expertise it needs to challenge Intel and Qualcomm long-term.
The move would also round out Nvidia’s portfolio, boost its enterprise/HPC push and give the company a fully integrated CPU/GPU solution.
Unfortunately, aside from the massive clash of corporate culture involved, the move would likely face regulatory challenges on potential discrete graphics monopoly and the financial costs would also be too high for Nvidia to stomach.
If I was a betting girl, I’d put my money on Samsung, but it’s just as likely that none of the above will ever materialize.
What do you think, readers? Should AMD be bought? And if so, who is your money on?
|
|
|
|
|
Navigate to related information
hm
7/30/2012 8:44 PM EDT
Microsoft may be most suitable buyer.
Sign in to Reply
eewiz
7/30/2012 11:43 PM EDT
AMD can get the funds pretty easily. What they really need now is innovation. Though the current Market Cap is ~3B, the moment there is an acquisition rumour it will go to 15-20B easily because of the Patents and IP they hold.
Sign in to Reply
resistion
7/31/2012 3:05 AM EDT
Yea, I think Samsung would be very interested to complete its hardware coverage with x86 CPU portfolio.
Sign in to Reply
SiliconAsia
7/31/2012 1:12 PM EDT
Why would a company like Samsung be interested in x86 CPU portfolio?? They already rule application processor with ARM CPU. AMD is gone to easy money (Petro dollars) to rescue company. I don't think any of listed companies can offer easy money to them. They have to prove to others they can survive by themselves.
Sign in to Reply
http://www.lulu.com/spotlight/poconoarmchairreview
7/31/2012 1:42 PM EDT
"And with its chips down, there’s blood in the water."
LOL. I think I'm getting dizzy trying to picture that.
Sign in to Reply
Luis.Cargnini
7/31/2012 4:10 PM EDT
Why not Broadcom ?
Sign in to Reply
EREBUS
7/31/2012 5:23 PM EDT
AMD has no unique products. It is not worth buying. They should have stayed with Intel as their production house, they would be much better off.
Sign in to Reply
MikeSmith2011
7/31/2012 5:55 PM EDT
Samsung?? To think about it, They already manufacture DRAM. The DIMMs and the CPU are the two largest cost components of a server. I can easily imagine a Samsung Server with its own CPUs, Memories, they could easily pick up a NIC company and they already know how to bend sheet metal. The only reason Samsung may hesitate is because AMD's CPUs suck compared to the Sandy/Ivy bridges right now.
Sign in to Reply
resistion
8/1/2012 12:20 AM EDT
They're aspiring to be one-stop shop. Best component in each category may not be necessary. Leveraging the system performance is key.
Sign in to Reply
Luis.Cargnini
8/1/2012 6:48 AM EDT
Another one ... why not Oracle ?? They already bought Sun with AMD they would have full solution and it would be also another hit to HP.
Sign in to Reply
Roadman
8/1/2012 8:59 PM EDT
Buying AMD is all about getting into x86 server space, few points:
- AMD will survive, Intel will have to keep them alive to stay alive. otherwise they will be single source supplier, in X86 offering. otherwise this will open up spot for ARM to get into this $50B server mkt.
- Qualcomm probably has deep pocket ($6~$8B) to get into server market, as Mobile is getting vertically integrated, they need new markets to grow, also they will be able to get/buy a fab process access.
- Intel buy will not work Antitrust etc..!
- Samsung has not anything over a Billion and 11K people with different mindset. They are all about cost optimization.
- BRCM has chance, but buried with ingesting Netlogic currently. may be 2 ~3 years out.
- Others do not make sense.
AMD needs deep pocket, Performance and Advance processes to take on Intel.
-
Sign in to Reply
Lino
8/2/2012 1:49 PM EDT
I am interested in NVIDIA / INTEL:
How about NVIDIA buy AMD CPU department or INTEL buy AMD graphic department? It will be more interesting if both :)
Will that have any anti trust issue? probably not and it save the world!
Sign in to Reply
resistion
8/3/2012 1:30 AM EDT
This article suggesting Apple may still be interested in AMD: http://www.semiwiki.com/forum/content/883-did-apple-influence-amd%92s-tsmc-foundry-switch.html
Sign in to Reply
FireBadTreePretty
8/3/2012 1:44 PM EDT
No One because:
IF AMD IS PURCHASED THE X86 LICENSE IS INVALIDATED. SEEING THAT IT IS NON TRANSFERABLE TO THE NEW COMPANY PERIOD END OF STORY RUMORS DEAD.
Sign in to Reply
FDunn3
8/8/2012 6:07 PM EDT
AMD can stay "AMD" and get around that easily.
All the purchasing company has to do is make AMD an "arms length" company.
Sign in to Reply
krh
8/15/2012 9:25 PM EDT
Yahoo buys RIM then the combined buys AMD...just give me the new stock symbol...I'll short it...and retire...
Sign in to Reply
MtnView101
9/3/2012 9:30 AM EDT
"The first advantage of such an alliance, of course, would be patents. And lots of them. If Samsung really wanted to pull its punches in its frequent spats with Apple, AMD would offer the firm a."
" to pull its punches " generally means to hit less hard than is possible. Not sure how this would assist Samsung against Apple. Which is, I suppose, a " certain je ne sais quoi"!
Sign in to Reply