BSN Rumor: Intel to Acquire Nvidia, Jen-Hsun the New CEO of Intel?

[tviceman]

Intel could buy Nvidia very easily.

The FTC would beg to differ.

 

[Will Robinson]

I would think that Intel would want to buy Nvidia. They could stomp AMD into the ground if they were selling Nvidia parts that were a node ahead of AMD.

Intel already stomp AMD CPUs into the ground.

I'd like to see AMD sell off an ATi "Skunkworks' offshoot to Intel then merge with NVDA or Apple.

With Apple's cash reserves and marketing,AMD's processor experience coupled with NVDA's design flair and JH's drive....it would be a worthy competitor for Intel/ATi.

 

[Keysplayr]

The FTC would beg to differ.

Just curios, but why was AMD allowed to purchase ATI? Was it because there was still another CPU and GPU company? In other words, had AMD never purchased ATI and they were still separate entities, would the FTC still frown on Intel purchasing Nvidia? Or would they allow it.

 

[AnandThenMan]

Just curios, but why was AMD allowed to purchase ATI?

Because the resulting enterprise did not represent a monopoly according to U.S. antitrust law.

 

[Keysplayr]

Because the resulting enterprise did not represent a monopoly according to U.S. antitrust law.

So what would the reason be for the FTC to stop Intel from purchasing Nvidia?

There would still be two companies who produce CPUs and GPUs.

 

[AnandThenMan]

So what would the reason be for the FTC to stop Intel from purchasing Nvidia?

There would still be two companies who produce CPUs and GPUs.

As it stands, Intel is already a coercive monopoly at best, toss in the market leader in GPUs and it seals the deal. Especially given that Intel has a history of anti-competitive behavior, that fact alone right off the top sours them in the eyes of federal regulators. Really the only way Intel will be allowed to buy Nvidia (logistics aside) is if they "persuade" the FTC to see it their way.

I really don't want to see Nvidia purchased by Intel, I don't think it will do Nvidia or the market one bit of good. Nvidia has a good corporate culture and understands how to push tech forward, Intel is largely successful because of their x86 monopoly that allows them to throw huge dollars at any problem they face, not because they are particularly innovative. Intel copied AMD's direct connect architecture concepts nearly verbatim, Intel just eventually did it better because they can so easily out spend AMD. I've said it before, imagine what Intel could do with AMD's R&D budget and fabrication capabilities.

 

[BenSkywalker]

They want to dominate the mobile space with x86 because then they have the ability to choose whom they give the license to.

You should check out how to properly leverage a monopoly

Use 20nm to put every other vendor out of the ARM market, dump ARM and move to x86 when there isn't anyone else left. It's why the FTC gets involved in such things.

So what would the reason be for the FTC to stop Intel from purchasing Nvidia?

There would still be two companies who produce CPUs and GPUs.

Who are you considering the second? Samsung, TI, Qualcomm or nVidia? I'm assuming not nVidia since they are the ones that may get bought out. TI is actually backing out of the major CPU market so only Samsung and Qualcomm will be left as serious competitors in the CPU space. Oh, I guess AMD still makes a tiny portion of the imploding x86 market too.

The big issue is in the GPU space. All of nVidia's major competitors in the GPU race, ARM, PowerVR and Qualcomm would be at a massive disadvantage in fabrication technology if Intel were to acquire them. Not to mention that would also increase the strength of their considered monopoly in the PC sector(they are already considered a monopoly due to their overall marketshare combined with related monopoly in a joint category- that is by FTC standards).

 

[Keysplayr]

This is kind of what I was wondering, Ben. The percentage of CPUs produced/sold/marketshare by a given company dictate whether it is a monopoly. I really don't have any idea about it, which explains all the dumb questions.

 

[BenSkywalker]

This is kind of what I was wondering, Ben. The percentage of CPUs produced/sold/marketshare by a given company dictate whether it is a monopoly.

Actually, the FTC kind of deems a company a monopoly when they feel like it. There isn't a strict litmus test to pass, and Intel has already been found in violation of antitrust laws relatively recently. Politics being what they are, the FTC isn't going to let Intel pick up a major player in the tech industry. By the time the IBM antitrust suit was settled about them having a monopoly in the PC sector they didn't even have a plurality of the market. That was a suit looking at breaking them up, there is no chance the FTC would have allowed them to acquire another major player during that time era. Same thing with this situation.

One thing I have to take back however, this hypothetical(it won't happen) involves JHH becoming CEO of Intel- due to that the whole paranoia Intel has involving NIH isn't going to be a factor- they would continue to produce Tegra parts using ARM cores and just hold on to the market using that. JHH has no problem using external technology that is better suited to do a given job, even if Intel currently does.

Personally, I think the best thing that could happen for the entire technology sector is if Intel became a fab company offering their fabrication plants for production to other companies(for what I'm sure would be extremely fat profits)- total pipe dream and I know it won't happen but it would be nice to see that the best CPU/GPU engineers could do combined with the best fabrication engineers in the world.

 

[Keysplayr]

Very interesting. Thanks for explaining, Ben.

 

[tviceman]

Personally, I think the best thing that could happen for the entire technology sector is if Intel became a fab company offering their fabrication plants for production to other companies(for what I'm sure would be extremely fat profits)- total pipe dream and I know it won't happen but it would be nice to see that the best CPU/GPU engineers could do combined with the best fabrication engineers in the world.

That would be a wet dream come tried. But I think Intel knows they would be out gunned in just about every market (sans servers and desktop) if all their process advantage was eliminated. Xeon Phi would be a $500 product and Medfield would be unfavorably comparable to upcoming quad core A15's.

 

[Fox5]

That would be a wet dream come tried. But I think Intel knows they would be out gunned in just about every market (sans servers and desktop) if all their process advantage was eliminated. Xeon Phi would be a $500 product and Medfield would be unfavorably comparable to upcoming quad core A15's.

The current 32nm Atoms are to ARM basically what AMD is to Intel atm.
On the other hand, Intel's desktop and mobile chips still outperform just about every competitor in every metric even at the same process node. Of course, they're also are much much more expensive designs and Intel probably couldn't maintain that R&D if they were reduced to only a small lead over the competition.