G80 is more CPU than GPU. Inq linq

[IntelUser2000]

nvidia does not have any fabs even, I bet they can get away with less than 10 billion (the AMD-ATI deal was 5.4 billion IIRC). you have no idea how much intel is worth, with their pocket change they can acquire nvidia 3 times over.

Even if Intel is much bigger than Nvidia, buying a company that's as big as Nvidia will be a huge dent in their net profits. If it is 1/3 the size(ok Nvidia is nowhere near 1/3), the quarter that they bought is gonna be a nasty one. That's why they make small purchases of companies that are substantially smaller than Nvidia.

Nvidia's market capitalization is 11-12 billion, one Xbitlabs article said about Intel acquiring Nvidia(which proved to be false) said while Intel has little over 7 billion in cash, Nvidia will have to be brought close to 14-15 billion.

ATI's market cap is significantly smaller.

Originally posted by: MegaWorks
ATI

nVidia

ATI was founded in 1985, and nVidia ???

ATI: 1985
Nvidia: 1993

 

[Gstanfor]

Originally posted by: Gamingphreek

Originally posted by: JAG87

it will never happen, and if it does happen, intel will acquire nvidia the next business day.

think about it people. intel wants most of the cake, AMD is already leeching like crazy, if someone as big as nvidia becomes a player, intel will swallow someone.

Intel does not have enough cash to acquire Nvidia. Even though Intel is far bigger than AMD, Nvidia is FAR FAR bigger than ATI was (Partly because they have been around longer IIRC).

Its a testament to what ATI was able to do. They were smaller and didn't have as much money as Nvidia, but after a few years (7000 series and 8000 series and before) they created a fantastic series of chips (9700 and up).

-Kevin

Ati is/was much older than nvidia, and I suspect we would see a rather large anti-trust case brought against intel if they were to try what was suggested above.

 

[apoppin]

Originally posted by: fierydemise
For some reason I don't think the "Fine tune" step is really that simple

fine tune is the *easy* part

who in their *right mind* is gonna license nvidia to make x86 cpus
:Q

AMD?



sure

intel?

like they need a really aggressive competitor

 

[TanisHalfElven]

can someone fill me on on what this x86 licnese is and how one gets it. i'm really curious to know what it does.

 

[apoppin]

an x86 license is one of *many* patents are protected and it takes *permission* from AMD or Intel [and possibly another company or two] to make an x86 CPU

without permission or a really innovative workaround, they will get sued out of existence

in other words, nvidia needs suitcases of money to buy the *rights* to use the IP owned by others ...

others that are not likely to want nvidia as a direct competitor to their own CPU business.

 

[ronnn]

Just the thought of a cpu with default driver settings. :laugh:

 

[josh6079]

Unless the industry begins to head in a direction towards GPU and CPU integration.

Then a new inudustry standard could emerge involving the likes of nVidia or the former ATi - which is what I think fierydemise was kind of discussing.

 

[jim1976]

A thread to consider..

 

[fierydemise]

Originally posted by: josh6079
Unless the industry begins to head in a direction towards GPU and CPU integration.

Then a new inudustry standard could emerge involving the likes of nVidia or the former ATi - which is what I think fierydemise was kind of discussing.

I was generally talking about the eventual integration of CPU and GPU as was pointed out in the Anandtech review of G80 GPUs are becoming more and more CPU like. Whether a new standard is created or the existing standard is modified is anyones guess however I tend to think the latter as changing from x86 would be a major shake up in the tech industry and kill backwards compatibility. Also keeping x86 effectively limits who can enter the CPU market and I don't think either AMD or Intel want the CPU market to gain another competitor.

 

[Pugnate]

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003
Seems that all Nvidia needs to do with G80 architecture is:

1. Fine tune
2. get an X86 license
3. program G80 for x86 instructions
4. Shrink it
5. Market it
5. Pwn. (methinks)

BUT!! What, or how will they offer this? New platform? New socket on new mobos?
I'm sure they have their work cut out for them. The biggest roadblock would be getting the license to produce x86 CPU/GPU's.

Linkage

Why, they could do it by tomorrow!

 

[Schadenfroh]

Originally posted by: Gamingphreek

Originally posted by: allies

Originally posted by: Gamingphreek

Originally posted by: MegaWorks
ATI

nVidia

ATI was founded in 1985, and nVidia ???

Not nearly that long. Like I said, I apologize for the confusion I caused. Nvidia I believe came along ~1996. However, they really took off when they introduced their first Geforce with the first T&L (Transform and Lighting) engine (And quadratic surfaces algorithms).

-Kevin

Heh... actually they gained tons of steam with the TNT2 Ultra which brought 32bit color with great frame rates to the masses.

Very true. It was 3DFX's own pompous attitude that killed them when they decided that we didn't need 32bit color.

-Kevin

32bit was not that big of deal back then (in terms of how much better it looked), but it sure as hell was great at marketing. 3dfx was brought down by sucky management and the merger with STB (big mistake for it alienated their OEMs). Ever see how much 3dfx spent on company meals and perks? Those guys could have fought a war on the amount of cash they dropped on that kind of thing. Delaying of rampage to focus on the banshee and voodoo 3 / 4 /5 did not help either.

 

[apoppin]

Originally posted by: josh6079
Unless the industry begins to head in a direction towards GPU and CPU integration.

Then a new inudustry standard could emerge involving the likes of nVidia or the former ATi - which is what I think fierydemise was kind of discussing.

you might be interested in this discussion, Josh:

Nvidia at work on combined CPU with graphic - On 65nm in 2008

 

[ArchAngel777]

Originally posted by: Gamingphreek

Originally posted by: JAG87
are you insane... nvidia is worth nothing compared to intel

nvidia is worth just a bit more than ATI, and AMD was actually considering merging with nvidia at one point. They decided to go with ATI because its was cheaper, and because ATI has fabs which are essential for AMD to produce their chipsets and their Fusion crap.

nvidia does not have any fabs even, I bet they can get away with less than 10 billion (the AMD-ATI deal was 5.4 billion IIRC). you have no idea how much intel is worth, with their pocket change they can acquire nvidia 3 times over.

No. Nvidia is MUCH MUCH larger than ATI was. Yes they aren't worth as much as Intel, but Intel would be spending a very very large portion of its cash to acquire Nvidia.

-Kevin

You are wrong (again). nVidia's capital was around 6.5 billion at the time of the AMD/ATi merger. nVidia hasn't even surpassed 10 (Edit: They actually hit 10 billion October 2006, which surprised me) billion yet. Intel is a 100+ Billion and AMD is around 10 - 12 Billion. Intel is a giant company.

 

[Gamingphreek]

Originally posted by: ArchAngel777

Originally posted by: Gamingphreek

Originally posted by: JAG87
are you insane... nvidia is worth nothing compared to intel

nvidia is worth just a bit more than ATI, and AMD was actually considering merging with nvidia at one point. They decided to go with ATI because its was cheaper, and because ATI has fabs which are essential for AMD to produce their chipsets and their Fusion crap.

nvidia does not have any fabs even, I bet they can get away with less than 10 billion (the AMD-ATI deal was 5.4 billion IIRC). you have no idea how much intel is worth, with their pocket change they can acquire nvidia 3 times over.

No. Nvidia is MUCH MUCH larger than ATI was. Yes they aren't worth as much as Intel, but Intel would be spending a very very large portion of its cash to acquire Nvidia.

-Kevin

You are wrong (again). nVidia's capital was around 6.5 billion at the time of the AMD/ATi merger. nVidia hasn't even surpassed 10 (Edit: They actually hit 10 billion October 2006, which surprised me) billion yet. Intel is a 100+ Billion and AMD is around 10 - 12 Billion. Intel is a giant company.

No way. There is no way Nvidia is worth only 1 Billion more than the entire DEAL for ATI.

-Kevin

 

[JAG87]

thats how it is bud.

amd almost went with nvidia because it was within their budget, but AMD saw a much better deal in ATI since it was cheaper and they had fabs. AMD loves free fabs.

but you have to realise intel is worth 10 times more than these companies. were not talking a 1:3 or a 1:4 value, were talking 1:10 were 10 is intel and 1 is ATI or nvidia.

 

[Gamingphreek]

Originally posted by: JAG87
thats how it is bud.

amd almost went with nvidia because it was within their budget, but AMD saw a much better deal in ATI since it was cheaper and they had fabs. AMD loves free fabs.

but you have to realise intel is worth 10 times more than these companies. were not talking a 1:3 or a 1:4 value, were talking 1:10 were 10 is intel and 1 is ATI or nvidia.

Yes, but do you really think Intel would give away 1/10 of their assets to acquire Nvidia. It isn't any where near financially sound.

AMD most certainly couldn't have afforded it.

-Kevin

 

[JAG87]

I agree with you on that,

it would hurt them pretty badly, but most important it would hurt us more.

 

[zephyrprime]

The inq is just smoking some dope. Nothing to see here move along. Being general purpose and being high performing are totally different issues.

 

[ArchAngel777]

Originally posted by: Gamingphreek

Originally posted by: JAG87
thats how it is bud.

amd almost went with nvidia because it was within their budget, but AMD saw a much better deal in ATI since it was cheaper and they had fabs. AMD loves free fabs.

but you have to realise intel is worth 10 times more than these companies. were not talking a 1:3 or a 1:4 value, were talking 1:10 were 10 is intel and 1 is ATI or nvidia.

Yes, but do you really think Intel would give away 1/10 of their assets to acquire Nvidia. It isn't any where near financially sound.

AMD most certainly couldn't have afforded it.

-Kevin

Again, unless you really know business, big business, then you havn't a clue of what a company can and will do. Companies very often makes business moves that will not bring a profit until 20 years in the future... Business is always thinking ahead, not current. Everyone around here that says no company would give up 10% of its assets to acquire something else simply doesn't have a clue. It is sometimes the best decision that could ever be made. Dump your unprofitable divisions and gobble up the profitable ones.

nVidia is a profitable company, very profitable in fact. Intel has entire divisions that are larger than nVidia and less profitable. You can bet your skinny wallet that if Intel could work out a deal, they would buy out nVidia. But last I heard, the CEO of nVidia wants nothing of it... But hey, before you think I am coming down hard on you, I am not. I am no expert either.

 

[apoppin]

Originally posted by: ArchAngel777

Again, unless you really know business, big business, then you havn't a clue of what a company can and will do. Companies very often makes business moves that will not bring a profit until 20 years in the future... Business is always thinking ahead, not current. Everyone around here that says no company would give up 10% of its assets to acquire something else simply doesn't have a clue. It is sometimes the best decision that could ever be made. Dump your unprofitable divisions and gobble up the profitable ones.

nVidia is a profitable company, very profitable in fact. Intel has entire divisions that are larger than nVidia and less profitable. You can bet your skinny wallet that if Intel could work out a deal, they would buy out nVidia. But last I heard, the CEO of nVidia wants nothing of it... But hey, before you think I am coming down hard on you, I am not. I am no expert either.

i think you'll like this article ... even if is theInq:

Nvidia boss wanted the AMD crown

GOSSIP from a highly placed source at AMD last week suggests the reason it didn't buy Nvidia is simple and it's down to one person.

An AMD person at CES, possibly mischievously, suggested that Nvidia CEO Jensen Huang wanted to become the CEO of AMD in a merged company. If that gossip is correct, we can just imagine the look on Hector Ruiz' face. Not that Jensen would not be a great CEO of AMD but he is a very different character from Hector.

This, the gossip, er gossipped, was the key condition that both companies could not work out. The Nvidia talks took place in 2005.

Another factor, apparently, is that AMD dithered over a potential acquisition of Nvidia while meanwhile the price of its graphics stocks went through the roof.

AMD could have secured the cash, and desperately needed a graphics part because of its Fusion plans.

gossip, of course

but intel is probably afraid to buy nvidia . . . Jensen Huang probably wants to become the CEO of intel in a merged company
:Q

 

[Gstanfor]

Originally posted by: JAG87
thats how it is bud.

amd almost went with nvidia because it was within their budget, but AMD saw a much better deal in ATI since it was cheaper and they had fabs. AMD loves free fabs.

but you have to realise intel is worth 10 times more than these companies. were not talking a 1:3 or a 1:4 value, were talking 1:10 were 10 is intel and 1 is ATI or nvidia.

ATi does not have and has never had fabs.

As for intel being frightened of Jen Hsun Huang wanting to be CEO, I personally think that would be a good move. Huang is very much like Andy "Only the paranoid survive" Groves, and intel simply isn't the company it was under Groves any more.

 

[apoppin]

Originally posted by: Gstanfor

Originally posted by: JAG87
thats how it is bud.

amd almost went with nvidia because it was within their budget, but AMD saw a much better deal in ATI since it was cheaper and they had fabs. AMD loves free fabs.

but you have to realise intel is worth 10 times more than these companies. were not talking a 1:3 or a 1:4 value, were talking 1:10 were 10 is intel and 1 is ATI or nvidia.

ATi does not have and has never had fabs.

As for intel being frightened of Jen Hsun Huang wanting to be CEO, I personally think that would be a good move. Huang is very much like Andy "Only the paranoid survive" Groves, and intel simply isn't the company it was under Groves any more.

i don't think intel thinks it is a good idea

but they do need to *partner up* to counteract DAAMiT's *bundles*

Bundles featuring AMD chips with ATI graphics discounted