For AMD, NVIDIA, nothing says "holiday greetings" like federal subpoenas

You can color us ignorant here, but we sort of figured that after all those regulatory hoops AMD jumped through in the process of getting approval for its ATI acquisition, the DOJ would've wrapped up any antitrust reservations it might have before the $5.4 billion deal went down. But for whatever reason, the Justice Department picked late Thursday to slap AMD with a federal subpoena regarding an investigation into possible antitrust violations in the graphics card biz. As if this wasn't weird enough, we just got word that NVIDIA has been slapped with a similar subpoena, with just as little explanation as to why. Shares are down for each company, both of which hold about 25 percent of the graphics card market, with Intel managing the rest. Intel apparently hasn't received a subpoena yet, but a spokesman said he was checking with the company lawyers just to make sure. According to analyst Nicholas Aberle, "It's a bit of a headscratcher. I don't know exactly what the angle is from the DOJ." We're just as much in the dark, but we'll definitely be keeping an eye on the situation.

Read - AMD Receives Federal Subpoena
Read - AMD, NVIDIA hit by graphics chip probe

[Matt B @ Dec 1st 2006 3:28PM]

They are probably just trying to extort some quad-core SLI setups for their kids before xmas.

[Juaquin @ Dec 1st 2006 4:05PM]

Huh? Just because ATI is now part of AMD does not make AMD a monopoly in the graphics market- AMD never did graphics. Maybe if ATI merged with Nvidia they could cry foul, but come on - what has changed now that ATI is called AMD?

[Moridin @ Dec 1st 2006 4:23PM]

Either something we don't know about has been going on, or once again the government is proving that they're just a bunch of ignorant savages that think computers run on "magic".

[Paul @ Dec 1st 2006 4:32PM]

Who owns ATI? doesnt AMD own both ATI and nVidia?

[Mike @ Dec 1st 2006 7:07PM]

Nope, AMD now owns ATI but not Nvidia. Nvidia is still it's own company

[John Doe @ Dec 1st 2006 5:11PM]

Nope.

[Paul @ Dec 1st 2006 6:41PM]

Well, I just found the article, AMD just aquired ATI, which means they own both nVidia and ATI, that kinda sounds like a start to a monopoly if you ask me.

Here are a few links...
http://www.engadget.com/2006/07/24/amd-buying-ati-for-5-4-billion/
http://www.engadget.com/2006/10/25/amd-and-ati-finally-tie-the-knot-embark-on-fusion-honeymoon/

So... about that competition thingy...

[John Doe @ Dec 1st 2006 5:16PM]

Maybe some at the DoJ realizes that if AMD stops making cards for Intel's platform a large vacuum like sucking sound would occur in the room called choice. Granted there is no guarantee that AMD would do this but its a very real possibility with the tit for tat crap going on between AMD and Intel. People need to realize that like it or not the vast majority of the PC industry IS Intel based. The last thing I want is Nvidia to own the Intel platform. Competition is good and hopefully this is occurring to someone at the DoJ.

[yosh @ Dec 1st 2006 5:29PM]

Good you blocked out the other 2 members of Busted.. the guy in the middle was the only one who could really sing.

[Patrick @ Dec 1st 2006 5:32PM]

Well since the SEC approved the merger of ATI and AMD, the DOJ ought to go after the SEC for incompetence, if it finds any misdoings. Seems to me that would make for an easy defense of any charges of monopolization or market manipulation.

[Michael @ Dec 1st 2006 5:37PM]

This is likely about SLI/Crossfire being tied to the chipset. There's no technical reason why I can't run Crossfire on my nVidia based motherboard, so that becomes a monopoly situation. That makes this investigation good for us, a slight driver change is all that's required to make it work anyway. ATI/nVidia would rather do this then have a long, costly battle with the DoJ. I'm sure there's really nothing to do, they probably have the code already and can just roll it into a future driver release.

[Sinbios @ Dec 1st 2006 6:20PM]

Since when did Intel own 50% of the graphics card market? o_O

[Paul @ Dec 1st 2006 6:40PM]

Well, I just found the article, AMD just aquired ATI, which means they own both nVidia and ATI, that kinda sounds like a start to a monopoly if you ask me.

Here are a few links...
http://www.engadget.com/2006/07/24/amd-buying-ati-for-5-4-billion/
http://www.engadget.com/2006/10/25/amd-and-ati-finally-tie-the-knot-embark-on-fusion-honeymoon/

So... about that competition thingy...

[Peter M. @ Dec 1st 2006 6:54PM]

I say it's a dirty little move Intel made against AMD.

[David @ Dec 1st 2006 7:31PM]

Well maybe an argument can be made that Intel has a monopoly on the low budget built in graphics into motherboard market...

Or maybe some smaller third party is saying that ATI/Nvidia/Intel is being a monopoly keeping other competitors out...

[RL @ Dec 1st 2006 11:28PM]

This smells like a price fixing investigation. ATI and Nvidia may have had some illegal dealings.

[Gori @ Dec 2nd 2006 1:18AM]

I may buy a laptop with AMD Turion because of the price...
the problem is that i heard long time ago that AMD had some heat problem...
So i m not sure which one is better an AMD turion MK-36 or an Intel Core Duo T2050 (1.60Ghz)?

[John Doe @ Dec 2nd 2006 1:32AM]

Mobile CPU wise Intel's Core 2's kick the shit out of ANYTHING AMD. Heck what am I kidding. Even their desktop chips do the same. Intel's core series really turned things around for Intel. Only fanbois would go AMD for laptops at this point. Well fanbois and people who are looking for extraordinarily cheap laptops.