It’s beginning to look like AMD will be the anchor that dragged down the S.S. ATI. Since the merger of the two companies, AMD has struggled, poorly, against Intel. The performance per power ratios that Stevie J cited as the reason for moving from PowerPC chips to Intel’s technology seems to hold as a solid reason that they opted not against using AMD chips as well.
That would be bad enough on its own (as I’d rather not be in a processor chip monopoly), but Apple’s former favored graphics chipset company has its fate tied to the failing company. David Orton doesn’t seem to like the direction of the company, and is leaving this month despite being signed to a $1.7 million contract just last October.
You may not have noticed, but as time rolls on, fewer ATI products can be found in Macs. The low end features Intel’s integrated graphics, the MacBook Pro recently switched to Nvidia, and the Mac Pro ships with an Nvidia card by default (though, when it comes to performance, ATI’s offering is a cost effective upgrade). The middle of the road iMacs still feature Radeon chips, but as the machines longest in the tooth (save the Mac mini), how much longer before a refresh changes that?
It’s too bad really. I may be rocking Nvidia graphics in both my Mac Pro and my 12” Powerbook, but there was always something reassuring about have an ATI card in my machine.
As soon as I saw that the new MacBook Pros switched to Nvidia, I knew ATI was on the way out. It's amazing they have lasted this long. Ask anyone in the Linux community how long they waited for drivers.
Yeah but on the other hand ATI gives you a video control panel on Mac OS with a number of features including optimizations for 3D games, whereas nVidia doesn't and never did care about Mac users.