Nvidia announces x86 chip *edit: not true*

[Idontcare]

NVIDIA ANNOUNCED AN x86 CPU ? you know, those things that don't matter ? yesterday at a Morgan Stanley conference.

http://www.theinquirer.net/inq...dia-announces-x86-chip

Haven't been able to listen to the webcast yet to figure out just what NV said exactly...

edit: I'm going to add SunnyD's response from below to this OP so as many folks as possible don't waste their time reading this thread under the false impressions that thread title (copied directly from the source) creates:

Originally posted by: SunnyD

Originally posted by: nosfe
so charlie is exaggerating again? too bad, it would have been interesting to have 3 players in the desktop cpu market

Yes and no. Charlie is exaggerating regarding the here and now. The conference call does pave the way though that it sounds like nvidia will be looking into its x86 options within the next two years to achieve this goal. As it stands though, in no uncertain terms: Nvidia is NOT announcing the development of any sort of x86 CPU at this time.

Also, by what was said, I wouldn't expect so see any sort of competitive high-performing x86 part from nvidia when they finally do go down that road... they want to compete in the MID/SOC market... same place where Atom is - NOT the desktop market (though they would love to see Ion replace traditional desktops).

 

[RallyMaster]

This NVIDIA-Intel thing is getting interesting.

 

[SunnyD]

Listening to it right now - skip ahead to about 1:00:00 and you'll be at the x86 conversation... they don't say they are making an x86 CPU, they say eventually they may need to (within 2 to 3 years) to compete in the MID/SOC markets.

Bit-tech transcribes the relevant portion.

Everybody is blowing this out of proportion. Nvidia says it makes sense... not that they are currently doing so. It's not any sort of announcement at all.

 

[Kaido]

There's been rumors that Nvidia is going to buy VIA, which would be slick with their 9400m-based ION platform. The uses would be endless...low-power desktops, media centers, digital jukeboxes, kitchen computers, in-wall touchscreen systems, carputers, etc., all capable of playing 1080p.

 

[nosfe]

so charlie is exaggerating again? too bad, it would have been interesting to have 3 players in the desktop cpu market

 

[SlowSpyder]

So CPU's are important after all?

 

[SunnyD]

Originally posted by: nosfe
so charlie is exaggerating again? too bad, it would have been interesting to have 3 players in the desktop cpu market

Yes and no. Charlie is exaggerating regarding the here and now. The conference call does pave the way though that it sounds like nvidia will be looking into its x86 options within the next two years to achieve this goal. As it stands though, in no uncertain terms: Nvidia is NOT announcing the development of any sort of x86 CPU at this time.

Also, by what was said, I wouldn't expect so see any sort of competitive high-performing x86 part from nvidia when they finally do go down that road... they want to compete in the MID/SOC market... same place where Atom is - NOT the desktop market (though they would love to see Ion replace traditional desktops).

 

[apoppin]

http://phx.corporate-ir.net/ph...116466&eventID=2103014

yep

they are entering the x86 market

it is the last 5 minutes of the conference
[i posted this news early this AM after LISTENING to the call; unlike Charlie ]
... the C&P is from 'my' site:

In a Q&A session at the conference, Nvidia?s Michael Hara, senior vice president of investor relations and communications, was asked when Nvidia would want to get into the microprocessor business. Hara said that ?the question is not so much I think ?if?; I think the question is ?when?.?

?I think some time down the road it makes sense to take the same level of integration that we?ve done with Tegra,? said Hara. ?Tegra is by any definition a complete computer on a chip, and the requirements of that market are such that you have to be very low power, very small, but highly efficient. And so in that particular state it made a lot of sense to take that approach, and someday it?s going to make sense to take that same approach in the x86 market as well.?

Listening further, Hara pointed out that Nvidia?s x86 CPU would be mainly targeted at smaller system-on-chip platforms. He said, ?If you look at the high-end of the PC market I think it?s going to stay fairly discrete, because that seems to be the best of all worlds.? Clearly Nvidia is aiming for the MID and netbook-notebook markets.

Hara revealed that the combination of Intel?s Atom platform and Nvidia?s Ion are good enough for now, but that Nvidia might be looking at their own CPU in two or three years. ?There is no question it is on our mind?, he stated

 

[OCGuy]

Stop quoting the Inq!!!!!!

 

[taltamir]

Originally posted by: Ocguy31
Stop quoting the Inq!!!!!!

I have to agree with that.

 

[Idontcare]

Originally posted by: apoppin
yep

they are entering the x86 market

I wonder where they are going to get an x86 license considering that they can't convince Intel to let them have a license to produce LGA1366 chipsets.

Also your statement regarding NV entering the x86 market comes across as being present tense, not future tense with an indefinite timetable.

Later today, much later, I will be going to the grocery store. After I park my car in the parking lot and walk my ass to the front door I can call my wife and tell her "I am entering the grocery store".

If I called her right now while I am sitting here at home typing this post in front of my computer and told her "hey honey, guess what, I am entering the grocery store" she'd ask me what was wrong with me because for sure I am no where even close to the grocery store's doorway nor will I be in the near future.

I could tell her "later on today I intend to eventually enter the grocery store"...that properly communicates the fact it is a future tense event, not a present tense event.

I listened to the CC now and nowhere do I hear NV state they are entering the x86 market. I did hear them say they view it as something that will eventually happen, and when it does I am sure they will (at that time) announce they are entering the x86 market.

 

[Idontcare]

Originally posted by: taltamir

Originally posted by: Ocguy31
Stop quoting the Inq!!!!!!

I have to agree with that.

I intentionally put the source right there in the Topic Summary so you two ladies don't come into the thread and get your delicate sensibilities offended.

At least I didn't lead into the story by claiming "after Nvidia clearly dominated all market segments, the value is surely the world best, now with LN2 cooling the ION platform consumes highest purity silicon for breakfast..."

 

[taltamir]

Originally posted by: Idontcare

Originally posted by: taltamir

Originally posted by: Ocguy31
Stop quoting the Inq!!!!!!

I have to agree with that.

I intentionally put the source right there in the Topic Summary so you two ladies don't come into the thread and get your delicate sensibilities offended.

At least I didn't lead into the story by claiming "after Nvidia clearly dominated all market segments, the value is surely the world best, now with LN2 cooling the ION platform consumes highest purity silicon for breakfast..."

why not? its accurate ;p

 

[Nemesis 1]

Point is NV is discussing creating an X86 cpu. No doubt it would be easier to reverse engineer Intel cpu . Just as AMD did. Idon't think NV will be allowed to make X86 cpu's.

Soon to be OUT of Business is NV. AMD should split off ATI and allow them to build X86 . ATI has way better chance at X86.


NV price stock was run up by anaylst. Thinking Intel would buy NV. I really LOL at that idea. If NV is around in 2 years I will be surprised

 

[Idontcare]

Originally posted by: Nemesis 1
AMD should split off ATI and allow them to build X86.

I don't think it was up to AMD to decide whether a spun-off ATi would be allowed to build x86 chips. Isn't that Intel's decision?

Originally posted by: Nemesis 1
ATI has way better chance at X86.

This chance doesn't increase if ATI is simply spun-off from AMD.

As an integral part of AMD, the ATI division can produce x86 logic if for some reason AMD wanted to task their GPU design teams with such a charter.

As a spin-off they'd have the added barrier of needing to secure an x86 license combined with the loss of access to x86 design know-how that currently is available in-house with the AMD x86 design teams on the same payroll.

 

[Majic 7]

I think this may just be pre-damage control for the investors. After Intel announced the deal with TSMC, which basically deals with the tech Nvidia is interested in, systems on a chip stuff, they had to say something to seem current. Not that I don't think they would like their own processor.

 

[SunnyD]

Originally posted by: Idontcare
I wonder where they are going to get an x86 license considering that they can't convince Intel to let them have a license to produce LGA1366 chipsets.

They already have an x86 license through their previous acquisition of ULi (ALi) - the M6117. Their limitation of license is to the embedded space only however, and the CPU class used as the basis for the M6117 is the 386SX. BUT... if you read between the lines, this is essentially what nvidia hinted at in the conference call - MIDs and SOC designs ... "embedded" designs. They'll have a lot of work to do to bring a 386SX core to competitive levels with current embedded ARM and Atom CPUs, but with current process technology it shouldn't be too hard for them to ramp up the clock speed and bolt on what they need around what essentially is a 32-bit x86 CPU.

 

[magreen]

Originally posted by: Idontcare
At least I didn't lead into the story by claiming "after Nvidia clearly dominated all market segments, the value is surely the world best, now with LN2 cooling the ION platform consumes highest purity silicon for breakfast..."

Blasphemy! Only AMD PhII has the highest purity silicon!

I see it's entered the lingo around here and become synonymous with fanboi

 

[apoppin]

Originally posted by: taltamir

Originally posted by: Ocguy31
Stop quoting the Inq!!!!!!

I have to agree with that.

theInq doesn't say sh!t - there are no quotes of any worth in Charlie's lame article as the OP posted

anybody who says that about me is NOT paying any attention

i stand by what i posted it is a C&P from MY OWN article ... and i transcribed the Q&A session

In a Q&A session at the conference, Nvidia?s Michael Hara, senior vice president of investor relations and communications, was asked when Nvidia would want to get into the microprocessor business. Hara said that ?the question is not so much I think ?if?; I think the question is ?when?.?

?I think some time down the road it makes sense to take the same level of integration that we?ve done with Tegra,? said Hara. ?Tegra is by any definition a complete computer on a chip, and the requirements of that market are such that you have to be very low power, very small, but highly efficient. And so in that particular state it made a lot of sense to take that approach, and someday it?s going to make sense to take that same approach in the x86 market as well.?

Listening further, Hara pointed out that Nvidia?s x86 CPU would be mainly targeted at smaller system-on-chip platforms. He said, ?If you look at the high-end of the PC market I think it?s going to stay fairly discrete, because that seems to be the best of all worlds.? Clearly Nvidia is aiming for the MID and netbook-notebook markets.

Hara revealed that the combination of Intel?s Atom platform and Nvidia?s Ion are good enough for now, but that Nvidia might be looking at their own CPU in two or three years. ?There is no question it is on our mind?, he stated

argue with Mr Hara's own words, not me

I wonder where they are going to get an x86 license considering that they can't convince Intel to let them have a license to produce LGA1366 chipsets.

Also your statement regarding NV entering the x86 market comes across as being present tense, not future tense with an indefinite timetable.

in my news bit i also stated "Some of us have long ago suggested that Nvidia was probably considering buying or allying with VIA to purchase its SIS processor division, although these speculations were later denied by VIA."

RE READ what i posted .. Mr. Hara is speaking NEAR-future - "in 2 or 3 years" .. there is no "maybe" about it imo

?the question is not so much I think ?if?; I think the question is ?when?.?

:roll:

 

[Idontcare]

Originally posted by: SunnyD

Originally posted by: Idontcare
I wonder where they are going to get an x86 license considering that they can't convince Intel to let them have a license to produce LGA1366 chipsets.

They already have an x86 license through their previous acquisition of ULi (ALi) - the M6117. Their limitation of license is to the embedded space only however, and the CPU class used as the basis for the M6117 is the 386SX. BUT... if you read between the lines, this is essentially what nvidia hinted at in the conference call - MIDs and SOC designs ... "embedded" designs. They'll have a lot of work to do to bring a 386SX core to competitive levels with current embedded ARM and Atom CPUs, but with current process technology it shouldn't be too hard for them to ramp up the clock speed and bolt on what they need around what essentially is a 32-bit x86 CPU.

Interesting. So in this case the x86 license between Ali and Intel was allowed to transfer as a sellable asset from Ali to Nvidia? I thought Intel was keen to eliminate this possibility in their contracts.

 

[taltamir]

mmm, well this Nemesis 1 post doesn't require (much) translation (broken english-proper english), it does however require debunking...

Point is NV is discussing creating an X86 cpu.

Not quite

No doubt it would be easier to reverse engineer Intel cpu

No, it wouldn't

Just as AMD did.

AMD was licensed by intel to make x86 cpus because a major manufacturer refused to buy any part that had only one "manufacturer".. intel then tried to backstab AMD, but that backfired and a court ruled that in compensation AMD may keep the x86 license royalty and limitation free, since then AMD has entered into a cross licensing deal with intel allowing them to use each other extensions. So no, AMD did not reverse engineer intel, ever.

I don't think NV will be allowed to make X86 cpu's.

As has already been said, for the market segment they are targetting they are allowed to, and they can always aquire VIA for their pocket change (literally) to get one for the desktop segment.

Soon to be OUT of Business is NV.

Based on what?

AMD should split off ATI

Yes, throw away your only money making division, and axe fusion (while intel is rushing towards their own fusion) [/sarcasm]

and allow them to build X86.

They can't

ATI has way better chance at X86.

Because they use purer silicone? because they have more research funds? because they are just more uber?

NV price stock was run up by anaylst.

No, it naturally increased as their revenue increased. Stock have a "pure value" which is typically based on the value of assets and revenue. Although what it is exactly is up to debate, it exists and increases as revenue increases.

Thinking Intel would buy NV.

Did anyone other then the inquirer think that?

I really LOL at that idea.

Please don't use such terms.

If NV is around in 2 years I will be surprised

Even if larabee arrives next year, and completely annihilates the GPU market (aka AMD and nVidia), they will still have:
1. A role in the lower end
2. Contracts
3. other market segments which they provide products for...

They might be drastically reduced, but they will be around...

But intel has shown with the i7 that they intend to milk an advantage for all its monetary worth, not to destroy their opposition with it, instead of crushing AMD with cheap high performing chips, they just charge a ton for them and make a bundle... if larrabee is a huge success expect the same and nvidia will become a budget company.

 

[SunnyD]

Originally posted by: Idontcare

Originally posted by: SunnyD

Originally posted by: Idontcare
I wonder where they are going to get an x86 license considering that they can't convince Intel to let them have a license to produce LGA1366 chipsets.

They already have an x86 license through their previous acquisition of ULi (ALi) - the M6117. Their limitation of license is to the embedded space only however, and the CPU class used as the basis for the M6117 is the 386SX. BUT... if you read between the lines, this is essentially what nvidia hinted at in the conference call - MIDs and SOC designs ... "embedded" designs. They'll have a lot of work to do to bring a 386SX core to competitive levels with current embedded ARM and Atom CPUs, but with current process technology it shouldn't be too hard for them to ramp up the clock speed and bolt on what they need around what essentially is a 32-bit x86 CPU.

Interesting. So in this case the x86 license between Ali and Intel was allowed to transfer as a sellable asset from Ali to Nvidia? I thought Intel was keen to eliminate this possibility in their contracts.

I don't know the scope of ALi's original x86 license, but it apparently is limited to embedded applications. It would be surprising if Intel isn't concerned about this so much because A) it's limited to embedded and B) it's a 386SX. Though since Intel seems to be pursuing the embedded market real hard lately (TSMC deal for example), it wouldn't be surprising if half their spat with nvidia centers around nvidia pulling this card out of their hat - hence Intel suing to close ANY door nvidia may have into x86-land.

 

[Nemesis 1]

Originally posted by: taltamir
mmm, well this Nemesis 1 post doesn't require (much) translation (broken english-proper english), it does however require debunking...

Point is NV is discussing creating an X86 cpu.

Not quite Go to Utube listen

No doubt it would be easier to reverse engineer Intel cpu

No, it wouldn't

Ya it would Atom should be easy to Reverse.

Just as AMD did.

AMD was licensed by intel to make x86 cpus because a major manufacturer refused to buy any part that had only one "manufacturer".. intel then tried to backstab AMD, but that backfired and a court ruled that in compensation AMD may keep the x86 license royalty and limitation free, since then AMD has entered into a cross licensing deal with intel allowing them to use each other extensions. So no, AMD did not reverse engineer intel, ever.

Yes they did FACT.

I don't think NV will be allowed to make X86 cpu's.

As has already been said, for the market segment they are targetting they are allowed to, and they can always aquire VIA for their pocket change (literally) to get one for the desktop segment.

Wheres the link. To contract. That says If ULi or Via sellout. They can transferr X86 license

Soon to be OUT of Business is NV.

Based on what?

Based on fusion and whatever Intel does.

AMD should split off ATI

Yes, throw away your only money making division, and axe fusion (while intel is rushing towards their own fusion) [/sarcasm]

and allow them to build X86.

They can't
If NV can so can ATi . AMd only has to main tain what 35% ownership??

ATI has way better chance at X86.

Because they use purer silicone? because they have more research funds? because they are just more uber?
No because of AMD

NV price stock was run up by anaylst.

No, it naturally increased as their revenue increased. Stock have a "pure value" which is typically based on the value of assets and revenue. Although what it is exactly is up to debate, it exists and increases as revenue increases.
Again go back to ATI buy out and Check . Many thought Intel would buy NV. I even fed it to raise pricies so I could short the stock . Which I did . I still holding the short. Big Bucks . Good thing. I will give that to my wife. Because of Stock market loses she had.

Thinking Intel would buy NV.

Did anyone other then the inquirer think that?
LOTS

I really LOL at that idea.

Please don't use such terms.

If NV is around in 2 years I will be surprised

Even if larabee arrives next year, and completely annihilates the GPU market (aka AMD and nVidia), they will still have:
1. A role in the lower end
2. Contracts
3. other market segments which they provide products for...

They might be drastically reduced, but they will be around...

But intel has shown with the i7 that they intend to milk an advantage for all its monetary worth, not to destroy their opposition with it, instead of crushing AMD with cheap high performing chips, they just charge a ton for them and make a bundle... if larrabee is a huge success expect the same and nvidia will become a budget company.

Intel has done nothing but keep promisies for the last 3 years period

 

[taltamir]

the only one worth responding to is this:

Wheres the link. To contract. That says If ULi or Via sellout. They can transferr X86 license

They actually can't, which is why nvidia buys them, and then transfers nvidia staff to it while maintaining it as a seperate company. And making a contract with itself (aka, via under nvidia ownership makes a contract with nvidia) for future codevelopment.

 

[Nemesis 1]

Originally posted by: taltamir
the only one worth responding to is this:

Wheres the link. To contract. That says If ULi or Via sellout. They can transferr X86 license

They actually can't, which is why nvidia buys them, and then transfers nvidia staff to it while maintaining it as a seperate company. And making a contract with itself (aka, via under nvidia ownership makes a contract with nvidia) for future codevelopment.

Ok. Nv bought ULi. Didn't that cancel the contract x86?If not whats to stop AMd from doing same with ATi. Amd maintains control . The 2 companies work together. One on servers the other on desk netbooks ect. ect.
I will look for the contract.