Intel Larrabee story

[lopri]

Originally posted by: Idontcare

Originally posted by: T2k
My only thoughts about this sounds like how royally lame, pahtetically fucked up is our patent system?

How so?

Intel filed a suit against nVidia in Delaware court [naturally, since both companies are incorporated in the "Venture Capital of the World" state], claiming that nVidia doesn't hold the license for CPUs that have integrated memory controller. nVidia didn't stand back, but pulled a counter-suit, but this time around, nVidia wanted the cross-license deal annulled and to stop Intel from shipping products that use nVidia patents.

Well, if our patent system was so well developed/organized and in accordance with the industry and the society as a whole, we wouldn't see these endless litigation, would we?

It's not like there is a shortage of real-world examples. Like this.

Or how about this. Simply changing names and being able to charge x10 more is quite cool, isn't it? I'm sure examples like this please Intel stock holders greatly.

And you could always follow the by-quarterly lawsuits filed by Rambus. Or Creative.

Talking about stock holders, it's getting tiresome to read the same messages over and over again, regarding why stock holders do this or do that. I am not saying you're wrong or right, but I just think there'd be a better venue to discuss such interest. This is AnandTech.com, after all, not ConvenientInvestmentTheoryForYouWeekly.com.

 

[thilanliyan]

I have faith that Intel will eventually get there...with their deep wallets it's almost a given that it will happen sometime. I was hoping it would come out this year or early next year but I doubt that will happen.

 

[BenSkywalker]

Well, if our patent system was so well developed/organized and in accordance with the industry and the society as a whole, we wouldn't see these endless litigation, would we?

How does that relate to this case in particular though? 3dfx, nVidia and ATi spent billions and billions of dollars making the graphics industry what it is today, Intel should then just have the right to walk in and use all of that IP? Seems to me that Intel has kept x86 locked down fairly tightly and we don't see a lot of people arguing they should have to hand it over.

People may think the way to render things in 3D is obvious now, but they weren't around for the early days and the massive trial and error that was going on, pushing these companies to the brink of(and into) Bankruptcy on a frequent basis. That they are allowed to protect the IP they put their company on the line for over and over again seems rather reasonable. If not for the Saturn, nVidia almost certainly would have gone under after the nV1(at the time they were thinking quads over polys was the best way to go). We had companies that though voxels was the way to the future, others were working on spline based rendering. We take a lot of things for granted now, but a large pile of companies who tried and failed was left in the wake, along with billions upon billions of dollars dropped into R&D.

This case is nothing like the touch screen patent dispute you were talking about, Apple just used technology that we have had for decades and was creative in their wordings and application of it.

 

[Genx87]

Originally posted by: T2k

Originally posted by: BenSkywalker

Intel filed a suit against nVidia in Delaware court [naturally, since both companies are incorporated in the "Venture Capital of the World" state], claiming that nVidia doesn't hold the license for CPUs that have integrated memory controller. nVidia didn't stand back, but pulled a counter-suit, but this time around, nVidia wanted the cross-license deal annulled and to stop Intel from shipping products that use nVidia patents.

If you wonder why this cross-license agreement is of key importance for Larrabee, the reason is simple: without nVidia patents, there is no Larrabee. There are no integrated chipsets either, since they would infringe nVidia's patents as well. Yes, you've read that correctly. The Larrabee architecture uses some patents from both ATI and nVidia, just like every graphics chip in the industry. You cannot invent a chip without infringing on patents set by other companies, thus everything is handled in a civil matter - with agreements. We heard a figure of around several dozen patents, touching Larrabee from the way how frame buffer is created to the "deep dive" called memory controller. If you end up in court, that means you pulled a very wrong move, or the pursuing company is out to get you. If a judge would side with nVidia, Larrabee could not come to market and well can you say - Houston, we have a problem?

While I knew this was going to happen, for some reason it hadn't even dawned on me that Intel wouldn't be able to sell any graphics chips once they played hard ball with nVidia. nV being more then willing to leave the chipset business makes a lot more sense in this context, every Intel system sold will be forced to use a discrete graphics card. That will result in significantly more revenue then their chipset business and be well worth the trade off.

My only thoughts about this sounds like how royally lame, pahtetically fucked up is our patent system?

Why? If Intel wants to recreate the wheel and not pay or license Nvidia patents nothing is stopping them.

 

[Idontcare]

Originally posted by: lopri
Talking about stock holders, it's getting tiresome to read the same messages over and over again, regarding why stock holders do this or do that. I am not saying you're wrong or right, but I just think there'd be a better venue to discuss such interest. This is AnandTech.com, after all, not ConvenientInvestmentTheoryForYouWeekly.com.

That's the kind of posting that really baffles me, people wanting less information at their disposal, fewer viewpoints and opinions expressed in the forums.

At any rate your post there is really quite rude at a personal level, if you can't see that or if you don't care that this is the case then I doubt you care that I would state it as being such.

You have had moderator training, put yourself in your mod shoes and self-assess what it is you just did there by castigating me for taking time out of my life to attempt to add some value to this forum.

 

[yh125d]

I agree n7, any way you put it it was a great read - as well as the "Diesel powered supercomputing article" it linked to on the last page

 

[lifeblood]

If Intel wants Larrabee to be successful, they will make it so. Their pockets are too deep, their influence too strong. They can make the industry do what they want, the only question is how much money will it take. And that's the problem. They can force the industry down a less efficient path by pure force of will (and money) if they really wanted.

That's my problem with Intel and why I hope Larrabee fails. It's only in the face of real competition that innovation occurs. Microsoft demonstrated that with IE, Intel demonstrated that with P4. Only when Firefox and Athlon 64 came along and started taking market share did change occur. I like the current nVidia vs AMD/ATI situation and don't really want to see it end. But, of course, life isn't like that.

 

[v8envy]

Yes, Intel's deep pockets were the only reason the Itanium with the i740 GPU is the resounding success in every market today. Oh wait...

Ego doesn't drive multi-billion dollar development efforts. At least not for long. There must be a happy shiny pot of gold at the end of the rainbow for companies to continue burning the money torch. Not all Intel executives are motivated by malice and the chance to do harm to the IT industry; most are motivated by profit and unfathomable personal wealth resulting from increasing Intel's slice of the money pie.

 

[lifeblood]

Yes, Intel's deep pockets were the only reason the Itanium with the i740 GPU is the resounding success in every market today. Oh wait...

i740 never went anywhere because Intel didn't keep pursuing it. They didn't see the need. If Intel had wanted to they could have kept working on it, improving it, and turned it into the market leader. Remember, most battles are not won because one side destroys the other, but because one side decides it wasn't worth fighting any longer. Intel saw no reason to continue development beyond the i740. Given the fusion of the CPU and CPU the stakes are much higher and Intel cannot afford to let Larrabee fail. The first generation may seriously disappoint, but the next would be better, and the third better still. Time and money and willpower are all that is needed.

 

[bfdd]

Oh how funny would it be if Nvidia got an x86 license out of this? I bet AMD would blow their lid. Good read OP and good posts by some of you guys here, IDC some of us appreciate all the extra information we can get.

 

[tviceman]

Originally posted by: bfdd
Oh how funny would it be if Nvidia got an x86 license out of this? I bet AMD would blow their lid. Good read OP and good posts by some of you guys here, IDC some of us appreciate all the extra information we can get.

I personally would *LOVE* to see nvidia get an x86 license. The reality is, though, even if they were to obtain said license it would be years before they had a working cpu.

 

[Genx87]

Originally posted by: tviceman

Originally posted by: bfdd
Oh how funny would it be if Nvidia got an x86 license out of this? I bet AMD would blow their lid. Good read OP and good posts by some of you guys here, IDC some of us appreciate all the extra information we can get.

I personally would *LOVE* to see nvidia get an x86 license. The reality is, though, even if they were to obtain said license it would be years before they had a working cpu.

There have been rumors for years that Nvidia has been working on an x86 CPU. I have no idea how far along it is or what its capabilities. But with their GPU situation it would be an interesting scenario if they got an x86 license. Fermi + x86 cpu could be a powerful combo in a single socket.

 

[bryanW1995]

I don't see intel giving nvidia an x86 license. If nvidia DID get one and was able to develop it, intel could get frozen out of the high end gaming market completely...well, I guess they would probably have larrabee working by the time nvidia was able to produce an x86 cpu (notice I said probably), but as we've seen in the vast majority of games these days you don't need the fastest cpu to take advantage of the badass video cards we have.

 

[her209]

Originally posted by: bfdd
Oh how funny would it be if Nvidia got an x86 license out of this? I bet AMD would blow their lid. Good read OP and good posts by some of you guys here, IDC some of us appreciate all the extra information we can get.

Why would they? AMD's patents wouldn't be allowed transfer to Nvidia just because they have an agreement with Intel otherwise Intel may be violating the Intel-AMD agreement.

 

[JSt0rm]

Originally posted by: v8envy
Not all Intel executives are motivated by malice and the chance to do harm to the IT industry; most are motivated by profit and unfathomable personal wealth resulting from increasing Intel's slice of the money pie.

lol.

 

[Nemesis 1]

Originally posted by: Keysplayr

Originally posted by: Phynaz
Why do people give anything Theo Valich writes any credence?

What about the article is false? If you know, please let us know.
I myself had a strong feeling that Larrabee would not be here for a long while yet, and when it does arrive, it's not going to be what we thought it would be. E.G. a competitor to AMD/NV.
Maybe the value low midrange.
I guess Intel just doesn't have the know how. Even with all their money, they can't just whip up a competitor in 4 years to compete with companies that have been at it for the better of two decades. So, I kind of expected this despite the massive hype around Larrabee.

And NV knows how to make CPUs right . LOL. Its a 2 way street Keys . Look at it like that . Lets not do the NV/ATI thing ok . Lets just see what each has to offer. Should both arrive about same time , I doubt intel will show its hand first Why should they . They made 2 billion last qt. and the EU thing is already done as far as cash assets. But intel has a good chance of getting that back . Intel is in know hurry here only fanbois are.

It was NV that was opening that can of whoop ass not intel. I think intel will wait to see whats in said can befor they blow NV away.

 

[Nemesis 1]

Originally posted by: BenSkywalker

Well, if our patent system was so well developed/organized and in accordance with the industry and the society as a whole, we wouldn't see these endless litigation, would we?

How does that relate to this case in particular though? 3dfx, nVidia and ATi spent billions and billions of dollars making the graphics industry what it is today, Intel should then just have the right to walk in and use all of that IP? Seems to me that Intel has kept x86 locked down fairly tightly and we don't see a lot of people arguing they should have to hand it over.

People may think the way to render things in 3D is obvious now, but they weren't around for the early days and the massive trial and error that was going on, pushing these companies to the brink of(and into) Bankruptcy on a frequent basis. That they are allowed to protect the IP they put their company on the line for over and over again seems rather reasonable. If not for the Saturn, nVidia almost certainly would have gone under after the nV1(at the time they were thinking quads over polys was the best way to go). We had companies that though voxels was the way to the future, others were working on spline based rendering. We take a lot of things for granted now, but a large pile of companies who tried and failed was left in the wake, along with billions upon billions of dollars dropped into R&D.

This case is nothing like the touch screen patent dispute you were talking about, Apple just used technology that we have had for decades and was creative in their wordings and application of it.

Why go to the dark side young skywalker. X86 can be built by others . Not the full x86 but still much is no longer protected because of time clause on this stuff. Much of intels IP is of age were its no longer protected . Same applies to gpus patents are only good so long befor public domain cuts in , Time has ran out on some x86 stuff as well as GPU stuff.

 

[Genx87]

Originally posted by: her209

Originally posted by: bfdd
Oh how funny would it be if Nvidia got an x86 license out of this? I bet AMD would blow their lid. Good read OP and good posts by some of you guys here, IDC some of us appreciate all the extra information we can get.

Why would they? AMD's patents wouldn't be allowed transfer to Nvidia just because they have an agreement with Intel otherwise Intel may be violating the Intel-AMD agreement.

Outside of 3dnow and AMD64 what patents would AMD own?

 

[evolucion8]

Originally posted by: Nemesis 1
Why go to the dark side young skywalker. X86 can be built by others . Not the full x86 but still much is no longer protected because of time clause on this stuff. Much of intels IP is of age were its no longer protected . Same applies to gpus patents are only good so long befor public domain cuts in , Time has ran out on some x86 stuff as well as GPU stuff.

I heard that technology that breaks the 20 yeard threshold are no longer protected, thats why I heard somewhere that the 386 and 486 CPU are no longer protected and someone can use that IP, I can't wait to see another company taking such IP and see how much power can be untapped from the 386/486 and original Pentium design!! LOL

 

[Idontcare]

Originally posted by: evolucion8

Originally posted by: Nemesis 1
Why go to the dark side young skywalker. X86 can be built by others . Not the full x86 but still much is no longer protected because of time clause on this stuff. Much of intels IP is of age were its no longer protected . Same applies to gpus patents are only good so long befor public domain cuts in , Time has ran out on some x86 stuff as well as GPU stuff.

I heard that technology that breaks the 20 yeard threshold are no longer protected, thats why I heard somewhere that the 386 and 486 CPU are no longer protected and someone can use that IP, I can't wait to see another company taking such IP and see how much power can be untapped from the 386/486 and original Pentium design!! LOL

How ironic this dialogue in a Larrabee thread...considering what Larrabee is created from. Atom too.

 

[Lonyo]

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: her209

Originally posted by: bfdd
Oh how funny would it be if Nvidia got an x86 license out of this? I bet AMD would blow their lid. Good read OP and good posts by some of you guys here, IDC some of us appreciate all the extra information we can get.

Why would they? AMD's patents wouldn't be allowed transfer to Nvidia just because they have an agreement with Intel otherwise Intel may be violating the Intel-AMD agreement.

Outside of 3dnow and AMD64 what patents would AMD own?

Outside of AMD64, what do they need to own? I would think that alone would quite effectively cut off anyone who wanted to make a modern x86 CPU which had general future worth.

 

[scooterlibby]

Originally posted by: lopri

Originally posted by: Idontcare

Originally posted by: T2k
My only thoughts about this sounds like how royally lame, pahtetically fucked up is our patent system?

How so?

Intel filed a suit against nVidia in Delaware court [naturally, since both companies are incorporated in the "Venture Capital of the World" state], claiming that nVidia doesn't hold the license for CPUs that have integrated memory controller. nVidia didn't stand back, but pulled a counter-suit, but this time around, nVidia wanted the cross-license deal annulled and to stop Intel from shipping products that use nVidia patents.

Well, if our patent system was so well developed/organized and in accordance with the industry and the society as a whole, we wouldn't see these endless litigation, would we?

It's not like there is a shortage of real-world examples. Like this.

Or how about this. Simply changing names and being able to charge x10 more is quite cool, isn't it? I'm sure examples like this please Intel stock holders greatly.

And you could always follow the by-quarterly lawsuits filed by Rambus. Or Creative.

Talking about stock holders, it's getting tiresome to read the same messages over and over again, regarding why stock holders do this or do that. I am not saying you're wrong or right, but I just think there'd be a better venue to discuss such interest. This is AnandTech.com, after all, not ConvenientInvestmentTheoryForYouWeekly.com.

It seems to me the business side of things has a huge effect on what we get and when we get it as enthusiasts. So, personally, I think it directly pertinent and quite interesting. In fact, what is annoying is when people come here and complain about release dates and prices with zero knowledge of the forces behind them. Just my two cents.

edit: spelling

 

[sandorski]

Originally posted by: Lonyo

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: her209

Originally posted by: bfdd
Oh how funny would it be if Nvidia got an x86 license out of this? I bet AMD would blow their lid. Good read OP and good posts by some of you guys here, IDC some of us appreciate all the extra information we can get.

Why would they? AMD's patents wouldn't be allowed transfer to Nvidia just because they have an agreement with Intel otherwise Intel may be violating the Intel-AMD agreement.

Outside of 3dnow and AMD64 what patents would AMD own?

Outside of AMD64, what do they need to own? I would think that alone would quite effectively cut off anyone who wanted to make a modern x86 CPU which had general future worth.

5ish years back, I recall a year where AMD applied for more New Patents than Intel. I don't know what all those Patents covered, but I suspect they go far beyond 3DNow/AMD64 and extend to things involving HyperTransport, AMDs' Memory Controller, etc. Other Patents from the SS7 era are probably obsolete and no longer of interest to anyone. Other Patents probably are more related to the Manufacture of Chips. Flash Memory probably also many AMD Patents, but I think they were Sold off.

 

[lopri]

Originally posted by: Idontcare
At any rate your post there is really quite rude at a personal level, if you can't see that or if you don't care that this is the case then I doubt you care that I would state it as being such.

I re-read the post I made the other day, and it does indeed sound rude. Regardless of points I wanted to make, I regret that I spoke in a manner in which you (or anyone else) felt offended. Hope it won't discourage your contribution to this forum in the future. I am a big believer of free speech.

 

[BenSkywalker]

Time has ran out on some x86 stuff as well as GPU stuff.

Some of the original x86 patents have expired, which wouldn't even get you a processor that could run current code. As far as GPU stuff, heh, nVidia was founded in '93, 3dfx in '94- the GPU patents won't start running out for years(probably by 2018 or so Intel should be OK to use their integrated solutions again).