Nvidia drops out of chipset business

[Genx87]

Originally posted by: munky

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: munky

Originally posted by: OCguy

Originally posted by: munky

Also, Intel has absolutely nothing to compete with AMD in the graphics market. Even AMD's integrated graphics trounces Intel's.

Isn't Intel working on this right now? They may never have something to compete in the high-end, but as well all know, the "high-end" is a niche.

They're working on it just like Nvidia was "working" on the FX-series while the r300 was sweeping the video card market. Until Intel has a competitive product out the gate, it's not gonna do them or the consumers any good.

Yes the glory days of the r300 nearly 8 years ago. If only Nvidia could stumble more than once a decade for ATI. Maybe ATI could do better than losing 2:1 against Nvidia on Steam.

Why, because the Steam survey directly generates profit for AMD or Nvidia? Steam matters about as much as 3dmock... As it stands right now, Nvidia better deliver with the g300, otherwise they're due for another FX-fiasco rerun.

I think Steam is a pretty good representation of the gaming market and what gamers are buying. AMD\ATI are basically losing 2:1 vs Intel and Nvidia in their respective markets.

Nvidia will probably deliver a part that is about as fast as a GTX 295 and they will push the rest of thier lineup south.

The only way this turns into an FX fiasco run is if it is slower than the ATI part and cooks eggs. I suspect it will do neither. But time will tell.

 

[Genx87]

Originally posted by: munky

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: munky

Originally posted by: OCguy
This puts the AMD fans in a pickle. They are defending the very company that may put AMD out of business (being taken over is much more likely) just to put down nV?

The graphics division, even if it starts making money, will not keep that company afloat. They need to start making some CPUs that people actually want to buy, or who knows what they will be called 3 years from now? IBM?

They (AMD) actually do make cpu's people want to buy. The kinda people who aren't interested in shelling out $200 on a cpu. In particular, the PhenomII X3 720 and the new cheap quad-core AthlonII's.

Also, Intel has absolutely nothing to compete with AMD in the graphics market. Even AMD's integrated graphics trounces Intel's.

I can pick up an E series Core 2 Duo for sub 200 that blows the doors off most anything AMD has right now. AMDs market has shrunk big time, especially among gamers.

They simply havent brought anything compelling to the table in nearly half a decade.

Intel doesnt need anything to compete with AMD on the graphics side of things. You ever look at the volume of low end garbage that ships with an Intel integrated chipset? There is a reason why Intel has nearly 70% of the overall graphics market. People dont need discrete graphics to cruise the internet and write a resume.

LMAO, maybe in single-threaded apps. You're not only pitting a dual-core against an X3 or an X4, but you're also talking about a dead end platform. Nobody in their right mind would build a brand new system around the lga775 platform these days.

And if Intel doesn't need to compete with AMD in graphics, then maybe someone outta inform them that Larrabee is a complete waste of resources, and they should abandon it asap.

Is upgradeability really that big of a deal? I havent reused a MB in a decade. By the time a CPU upgrade is ready newer faster memory, chipsets, and interfaces have shown up in the market.

It is only dead end in the fact it has been out classed in everything by the i7 series. But lets remember the the Core 2 duo is being relegated to the mid and low end while AMDs best still has troubles competing. If we are strictly speaking performance. AMD's high end is just as dead end as the core 2 duo. That is troubling.

AMD needs to innovate. They have been sucking off the Athlon 64 core for far too long and it is killing them.

Larrabee is as much about doing high end computing as it is an eventual successor to their integrated garbage. Larrabee will be competing with Fermi chip in the HPC space.

 

[Xcobra]

Originally posted by: Wreckage

Originally posted by: dguy6789
*Plays Nvidia a sad song on the world's smallest violin*

You have to love the ATI fan hypocrisy. When AMD goes bankrupt you guys will have to find something new to fill that void in your life.

Intel is merely shoring up their monopoly. A monopoly that will be built on top of AMD's bones.

Originally posted by: Wreckage
ATI fans will destroy their own company if it will hurt NVIDIA even a little. Havok is another prime example of this.

Siding with Intel against NVIDIA is like a mouse siding with a cat against a chipmunk.

At least the chipmunk knows to keep a distance.

Originally posted by: Wreckage
Larrabee will come out and crossfire will suddenly stop working on Intel chipsets.....

The question is, can YOU be any more of a fanboy?

 

[MODEL3]

From NVIDIA's statement:

http://www.pcper.com/comments.php?nid=7867

"We've received a number of inquiries recently about NVIDIA's chipset (MCP) business. We'd like to set the record straight on current and future NVIDIA chipset activity.

...

On AMD platforms, we continue to sell a higher quantity of chipsets than AMD itself. MCP61-based platforms continue to be extremely well positioned in the entry CPU segments where AMD CPUs are most competitive vs. Intel.

...

"

Is Nvidia still selling more chipsets than AMD itself?

 

[ShadowOfMyself]

Originally posted by: OCguy
They have the fastest single card still, I dont think they are doing too bad.

Originally posted by: OCguy

Isn't Intel working on this right now? They may never have something to compete in the high-end, but as well all know, the "high-end" is a niche.

Gotta love the double standard :laugh:

 

[Munky]

Originally posted by: Genx87
Is upgradeability really that big of a deal? I havent reused a MB in a decade. By the time a CPU upgrade is ready newer faster memory, chipsets, and interfaces have shown up in the market.

It is only dead end in the fact it has been out classed in everything by the i7 series. But lets remember the the Core 2 duo is being relegated to the mid and low end while AMDs best still has troubles competing. If we are strictly speaking performance. AMD's high end is just as dead end as the core 2 duo. That is troubling.

AMD needs to innovate. They have been sucking off the Athlon 64 core for far too long and it is killing them.

I remember dropping in an Opteron 165 to replace a single core A64, and that was the most long-lasting upgrade I've made to this day. So yes, to me upgradability is a big deal compared to the lack there of.

As for the Core2 series, AMD is well-competitive with them in terms of what you get for the money. Intel's cheapest quads are short on L2 cache... and that hurts their performance in games. Their dual-cores are no longer adequate for modern games either.

I don't know how you compare the PhenomII to the A64, but AMD have made vast improvements since the original K8. I personally tested an OC'd Opty165 against a stock X3 720, and the new PhemonII blew away the old K8 in everything, even apps which aren't multithreaded. It seems people still believe the PhenomII is basically the same old K8 with just more cores, but that's far from reality.

 

[Wreckage]

Originally posted by: ShadowOfMyself

Originally posted by: OCguy
They have the fastest single card still, I dont think they are doing too bad.

Originally posted by: OCguy

Isn't Intel working on this right now? They may never have something to compete in the high-end, but as well all know, the "high-end" is a niche.

Gotta love the double standard :laugh:

If NVIDIA has the high road and Intel takes the low road, that leave ATI the no road at all.

 

[OCGuy]

Originally posted by: ShadowOfMyself

Originally posted by: OCguy
They have the fastest single card still, I dont think they are doing too bad.

Originally posted by: OCguy

Isn't Intel working on this right now? They may never have something to compete in the high-end, but as well all know, the "high-end" is a niche.

Gotta love the double standard :laugh:

What?

Neither one of those statements is mutually exclusive.

 

[Schmide]

Originally posted by: Wreckage
If NVIDIA has the high road and Intel takes the low road, that leave ATI the no road at all.

Did you just complement AMD? The way I see this statement in the context of fair dealings.

NVidia plays high and mighty as if they can do no wrong, Intel pulls the rug out from under everyone, AMD doesn't take the unfair road.

 

[Schmide]

Hay. Didn't Novafora (company that bought Transmeta) just go out of business in early August? I'm sure nVidia could buy some of the IP to get an x86 license.

 

[Forumpanda]

Originally posted by: Xcobra

Originally posted by: Wreckage

Originally posted by: dguy6789
*Plays Nvidia a sad song on the world's smallest violin*

You have to love the ATI fan hypocrisy. When AMD goes bankrupt you guys will have to find something new to fill that void in your life.

Intel is merely shoring up their monopoly. A monopoly that will be built on top of AMD's bones.

Originally posted by: Wreckage
ATI fans will destroy their own company if it will hurt NVIDIA even a little. Havok is another prime example of this.

Siding with Intel against NVIDIA is like a mouse siding with a cat against a chipmunk.

At least the chipmunk knows to keep a distance.

Originally posted by: Wreckage
Larrabee will come out and crossfire will suddenly stop working on Intel chipsets.....

The question is, can YOU be any more of a fanboy?

As we say in Denmark - A thief thinks every man steals.

 

[Genx87]

Originally posted by: Schmide
Hay. Didn't Novafora (company that bought Transmeta) just go out of business in early August? I'm sure nVidia could buy some of the IP to get an x86 license.

I believe all x86 licenses are not transferable. Nvidia bought Via and the rumor was they would get an x86 license because of it. The other rumor was Nvidia buying AMD and getting an x86 license.

 

[heyheybooboo]

Originally posted by: Schmide
Is AMD really cutting them off? It seems like they put all their weight behind Intel solutions and got the shaft.

I think that would be just on the enterprise side --- AMD introduced a new sever/workstation chipset this month with many more to come through 1H-2010.

On the desktop I think they have been really struggling with the Phenom arch.

This presents a HUGE opportunity for AMD in OEM business (if they get their act together).

Originally posted by: MODEL3
From NVIDIA's statement:

http://www.pcper.com/comments.php?nid=7867

...

On AMD platforms, we continue to sell a higher quantity of chipsets than AMD itself. MCP61-based platforms continue to be extremely well positioned in the entry CPU segments where AMD CPUs are most competitive vs. Intel.
...

Is Nvidia still selling more chipsets than AMD itself?

I believe HP and Dell have pretty much been all nVidia mobo chipsets --- pretty much forever. Some newer models from HP (IIRC) have been using Foxconn 780Gs.

nVidia is in really big trouble if they are hanging their hat on MCP61/430. It literally has roots to like 2004, seriously, and predates SATA, PCIe, etc. AFAIK, the MCP61/4xx chipsets themselves actually debuted in 2006 with minimal refreshes.

Good luck with that going forward.

 

[allies]

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: munky

Originally posted by: OCguy
This puts the AMD fans in a pickle. They are defending the very company that may put AMD out of business (being taken over is much more likely) just to put down nV?

The graphics division, even if it starts making money, will not keep that company afloat. They need to start making some CPUs that people actually want to buy, or who knows what they will be called 3 years from now? IBM?

They (AMD) actually do make cpu's people want to buy. The kinda people who aren't interested in shelling out $200 on a cpu. In particular, the PhenomII X3 720 and the new cheap quad-core AthlonII's.

Also, Intel has absolutely nothing to compete with AMD in the graphics market. Even AMD's integrated graphics trounces Intel's.

I can pick up an E series Core 2 Duo for sub 200 that blows the doors off most anything AMD has right now. AMDs market has shrunk big time, especially among gamers.

They simply havent brought anything compelling to the table in nearly half a decade.

Intel doesnt need anything to compete with AMD on the graphics side of things. You ever look at the volume of low end garbage that ships with an Intel integrated chipset? There is a reason why Intel has nearly 70% of the overall graphics market. People dont need discrete graphics to cruise the internet and write a resume.

Pick a side and stay on it.

 

[Schmide]

Holding the IP that is cross licensed with Intel/AMD goes a long way to get a license, but you're right.

 

[WelshBloke]

Originally posted by: OCguy

Originally posted by: ShadowOfMyself

Originally posted by: OCguy
They have the fastest single card still, I dont think they are doing too bad.

Originally posted by: OCguy

Isn't Intel working on this right now? They may never have something to compete in the high-end, but as well all know, the "high-end" is a niche.

Gotta love the double standard :laugh:

What?

Neither one of those statements is mutually exclusive.

fastest single card=highend=niche

He's saying, that by your logic, Nvidia are a niche company.

*shrug*

 

[Wreckage]

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: Schmide
Hay. Didn't Novafora (company that bought Transmeta) just go out of business in early August? I'm sure nVidia could buy some of the IP to get an x86 license.

I believe all x86 licenses are not transferable. Nvidia bought Via and the rumor was they would get an x86 license because of it. The other rumor was Nvidia buying AMD and getting an x86 license.

Actually AMD may still lose their license because they sold of their fabs.

AFAIK, this is still in the courts.

 

[her209]

Originally posted by: Schmide
I vote for giving nVidia an x86 license.

The only way they're going to get one is if they get bought out by AMD or Intel.

 

[akugami]

Originally posted by: lopri
NVIDIA is right. It is Intel that has tangled everything w/ QPI (CPU and memory on X58, now DMI on P55) and this again shows how the current patent system slows innovation and how Intel abuses it. Its way of 'innovation' often means adding new patents to existing products so that others cannot compete with it.

I am not sure what the real story between AMD and NV, though. A mutual agreement, maybe?

Should anyone be surprised nVidia has been forced to exit the Intel chipset business? Intel is a company that recreated some available technologies like the Hypertransport (Intel Quickpath) so they can fleece others for licensing fees or block them altogether.

This is also the reason why it is a bad idea for AMD to support CUDA and PhysX. It'd give nVidia too much control over anyone competing with them. I'm not here to push open standards since a neutral proprietary standard works just as well. The thing is to have neutral standards with no one party in control of everything. Look how the audio card market has stagnated since Creative effectively crushed all competition.

I think nVidia needs to diversify its product line and platforms like Tegra are one way to do it. I actually think Tegra can be huge for nVidia. Apple and Linux based netbooks have paved the way and primed the public into buying non Windows based systems. In the case of Apple they have even gotten consumers to look at an app store and not necessarily trying to install any old app they find on the net. This bodes well for a closed Tegra portable device that sells all/most of its apps via an app store.

Originally posted by: Kuzi

Originally posted by: Schmide
I vote for giving nVidia an x86 license.

It wouldn't be very helpful at this time, if Nvidia wanted an x86 license they should have tried to get it a long time ago (maybe they did try).

To design a performance x86 CPU from scratch would take them at least 3 or 4 years, and it is highly unlikely it can compete with Intel and AMD stuff when it's released.

I think the problem isn't designing and fabbing an x86 CPU. I think the problem is that there have been a lot of improvements/changes in the x86 architecture that they would need to license from both AMD and Intel. It'll take a phenomenal effort to get that going. AMD and Intel have cross licensing agreements which I believe allows them to automatically incorporate new changes to the x86 architecture that the other produces such as the AMD 64 bit extensions to the x86 architecture.

 

[GaiaHunter]

As someone that is completely biased and total fanboi of the money that is in my wallet, these are bad news, although not new.

As someone that gets humored by fanbois and their stupid fanboi logic, keep writing please so I can laugh

Now changing to annoy fanbois mode:

"Do you guys really think NVIDIA should collect the rewards of the hard work Intel puts on making CPUs? If they want to sell chipsets they can make their own CPUs!"

 

[nitromullet]

Originally posted by: waffleironhead
Does intel have to pay a license fee or purchase something to enable crossfire on their systems?

No.

Intel doesn't pay NVIDIA for SLI either. Motherboard manufacturers pay NVIDIA for their motherboards to be 'certified' SLI. Although, IIRC a number of X58 that weren't certified actually are SLI compatible, they just don't come with a bridge or the SLI logo.

Originally posted by: Kuzi
I guess Nvidia are getting a taste of their own medicine.

Nvidia gave Intel a few headaches before eventually licensing SLI to them, so Intel may do the same here.

Big difference here... NVIDIA really sort of needed SLI on i7. It you're trying to sell a high cost solution to performance enthusiasts, it really has to work on the best platform.

Intel doesn't really need NVIDIA chipsets for anything.

 

[Schmide]

Originally posted by: Wreckage

Actually AMD may still lose their license because they sold of their fabs.

AFAIK, this is still in the courts.

Then Intel realized trying to revoke AMD's license would lock all the x86 players into a patent war and reign the DOJ cartel investigators down on them. Probably preventing the fabing of any x86 chips during the costly fight.

In the end - Paper Tiger PR Stunt.

 

[BenSkywalker]

If they can get smartphones and similar devices playing full hd video at low power cost, I bet they could make a lot of money.

nVidia has already done this, check out Tegra and the ZuneHD.

Should anyone be surprised nVidia has been forced to exit the Intel chipset business?

This is a move by Intel to protect Larrabee, I'm curious to see if it will work or not. There is no way Intel is dodging the mountains of patents nVidia owns for graphics chips, nVidia will be using that as a trump card to pull the rug out and remove Larrabee from the market unless Intel makes them an offer worth their time. This is a smart move by Intel, they are going to need the leverage.

This is also the reason why it is a bad idea for AMD to support CUDA and PhysX.

There is one staggering difference here, Intel makes chipsets. If AMD had an alternative to CUDA/PhysX it would help everyone out in the long run, but I'm not sure if they have the resources to be able to do that currently.

The only way they're going to get one is if they get bought out by AMD or Intel.

nVidia could easily be purchased by Intel, but if it came to AMD they would be the ones doing the purchasing. If the licensing agreement works out over the AMD split and them retaining their x86 license I wouldn't rule out nVidia acquiring them at some point in the future. They would be protected from anti trust as Intel already has the majority share of the graphics market, Larrabee will also put them into the discrete business(not that the courts would think of considering that an isolated market worthy of anti trust protection).

 

[ronnn]

Originally posted by: OCguy
Someone posts an article disputing the OP, but the same couple people who bash nV in every thread continue to post like it isnt there....

When did this forum turn into AMDzonelite?

And than the same couple of people start bashing them. Than nv pr step in to moderate.


I agree does get to be the same old at a certain point.

 

[thilanliyan]

As long as there are at least 2 competitors in the GPU (or CPU for that matter) market, I don't care who gets bought out by who.