14 DAY TRIAL // Intel could buy nVidia after AMD managed to get ATI. The big "concern" was that FCC wouldn't allow the deal, because a merge between Intel and nVidia would be death-blowing to other producers. AMD said until that Intel operates as a virtual monopoly anyhow, but now that it has ATI in its pocket, it wouldn't look good at all for them if they used that argument.
On Intel's side, however, a new excuse develops: "AMD now has the high end graphic and we don't, so that's why we need a firm such Nvidia", and Nvidia's board of shareholders would likely agree to that at a price of $38 per share (following the same scenario as ATI shareholders did), reports Fuad Abazovic from The Inquirer. Yesterday, another journalist from the publication, Charlie Demerijan, said that he would vote "no" if questioned about this union (the price/share he mentioned was then $37, so there are at least two possibilities - negotiations are taking place and The Inquirer has a "spy", or it was a typo; anyway, $1 is a big difference in some domains, and shares belong to that area).
Surely we cannot leave aside the fact that the 2 firms have a bit of a history together. Just an example: in November 2004, Nvidia and Intel signed a patent cross-licensing agreement that opened the way for nForce chipsets that support Intel microprocessors. At that time, Nvidia's spokesman Bryan Del Rizzo said "when you look at the deal, it's really a win-win for everybody. If you look at the available market, AMD holds about 20 percent, while Intel is about 80 percent." We can only guess what will happen to small and medium firms - that are already struggling to stay alive - if such a merge takes place.