nVidia launches anti intel website?

[Dark4ng3l]

http://www.nvidia.com/object/nv_ftc.html

I saw this on fudzilla and it's actually pretty funny. I don't think I can remember a major company having a page on their website trashing their competition.

 

[AdamK47]

Evidently nVidia has a video from the future called "NVIDIA CEO to Intel: No settlement"

 

[zsdersw]

I really loathe whiney CEOs and whiney companies. No more nVidia products are going to be bought with my money.. ever.

 

[Kenmitch]

nVidia = tomorrows Rambus it's just a matter of time.

 

[LoneNinja]

I really loathe whiney CEOs and whiney companies. No more nVidia products are going to be bought with my money.. ever.

I decided that a couple years ago when they decided they didn't need to have good driver support, decent low power cards, and began rebadging everything they make into a new product.

From my point of view Nvidia never was able to compete with a 4670, and they can't compete with the 5670 now, at least not with a card that doesn't require a 6pin PCI connector from the PSU.

 

[Aquila76]

GPUs, or graphics processing units, are specialized processors first developed by NVIDIA in 1999.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! Wow, the first line in the first link has this load of BS in it. I'm pretty sure CTIA and S3 we around long before nVidia. Well, bye bye nVidia. You are getting no further support from me or my wallet.

 

[Dark4ng3l]

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! Wow, the first line in the first link has this load of BS in it. I'm pretty sure CTIA and S3 we around long before nVidia. Well, bye bye nVidia. You are getting no further support from me or my wallet.

GPU is an nvidia invented marketing thing. We never called graphics chips GPU's before. They launched geforce 256 along with the GPU marketing BS.

 

[DrMrLordX]

Some of the charges leveled against Intel are pretty serious. There's no telling what the FTC could wind up doing to them.

That being said, I would rather get my news about pending legal action against Intel from a source other than nVidia. Really, what is nV's angle here? Anything they hope to accomplish by running this site has to do with driving sales (and shareholder values).

Besides, isn't nVidia supposed to be going after AMD right now? I'm sure nVidia is still pissy at all the major CPU players for more-or-less pushing nV out of the mobo chipset market (and let's face it, nV's chipset I/O has been pretty bad for awhile now, so I'm not sad to see them go), but their bread-and-butter market is more threatened by AMD's graphics card lineup than it is by Larrabee . . . or so I would think. Maybe this is more about the IGP market where Intel is a serious competitor (not in terms of performance, but in terms of market penetration). I just don't see how nVidia hopes to push Intel out of the IGP market when nV can't really penetrate on their own seeing as how their share of the mobo chipset market has tanked. Do they really expect OEMs to include low-end nV cards if/when the FTC places restrictions on when and where Intel can include IGPs? Does nV really expect mobo manufacturers to try and integrate nV-made IGPs on motherboards utilizing Intel or AMD chipsets? The mind boggles.

Maybe they just want to get everyone using Ion (or some derivative thereof) in netbooks.

edit: after reading about nV's lawsuit with Intel in the Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware, this whole site seems to be primarily about Intel blocking nV from making Nehalem chipsets (which, in turn, reduces nV's IGP market share). I guess they want back in on the chipset biz.

 

[OCGuy]

Well this sure confuses the Zoners. Although most of them hate Intel much more than nV.

 

[extra]

While Nvidia *Does* have points here and is stating some factual information, IE Intel probably really did do some questionably legal things to hurt Nvidia...

This comes across as really cheesy and whiney. However, I sure won't say I'll never buy another Nvidia product...

I'm using a 5770 now but if Nvidia comes out with a mid-range fermi for $150 that is way better then sure, I'd consider switching (not going to happen though I'm sure).

The other thing is I get the feeling for some reason that if Nvidia were in Intel's position they'd be a helluva lot worse than Intel ever was or is.

 

[sxr7171]

It looks like Nvidia is in for a whole world of hurt at the hands of Intel. They got locked out of chipsets and they may get locked out of GPUs at the rate things are moving. I don't blame them at all for doing what they are doing and while I am no fan of any company I think it is wrong and anti-competitive to lock out companies through technological means.

Also let's not forget, as much as I love Intel CPUs and SSDs they are not the most ethical company out there and it hurts us - the consumers the most.

 

[Ben90]

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! Wow, the first line in the first link has this load of BS in it. I'm pretty sure CTIA and S3 we around long before nVidia. Well, bye bye nVidia. You are getting no further support from me or my wallet.

Its pretty clear you don't have a good grasp of the English language as that statement can read multiple ways.

GPUs, or graphics processing units, are specialized processors first developed by NVIDIA in 1999.

Interpretation 1: Nvidia was the first company to develop a GPU.
Interpretation 2: Nvidia started developing its first GPU in 1999.

Its pretty obvious that Nvidia was not the first to develop a GPU, so by default we need to use interpretation 2. Since your going to save money by not purchasing Nvidia anymore, I recommend this product. http://www.google.com/products/cata...ct=result&resnum=3&ved=0CBkQ8wIwAg#ps-sellers

 

[BD231]

lol
<~ pulls ben off Aquila76 ...

 

[jvroig]

Evidently nVidia has a video from the future called "NVIDIA CEO to Intel: No settlement"

I was a little confused by that as well. It should have been March 7, 2010.

Interpretation 1: Nvidia was the first company to develop a GPU. Interpretation
2: Nvidia started developing its first GPU in 1999.

That's correct, but most people who didn't know the history will read that statement and almost always think it is #1. Whether it was nVidia's intent to mislead or not, I have no idea, but there are quite a lot of ways to have better stated this "fact" so that it would not be mostly misleading for everyone who didn't know GPU history.

 

[Aquila76]

Its pretty clear you don't have a good grasp of the English language as that statement can read multiple ways.

Interpretation 1: Nvidia was the first company to develop a GPU.
Interpretation 2: Nvidia started developing its first GPU in 1999.

Its pretty obvious that Nvidia was not the first to develop a GPU, so by default we need to use interpretation 2. Since your going to save money by not purchasing Nvidia anymore, I recommend this product. http://www.google.com/products/cata...ct=result&resnum=3&ved=0CBkQ8wIwAg#ps-sellers

Easy, there. I'm well aware what nVidia did with the term 'GPU.' Since this was likely written by some marketing/PR troll, I'm inclined to believe they intended that statement to mean #1. Their NV1 GPU came out in '95, Riva 128 in '97, TNT in '98. The TNT2 came out in '99, as did the Geforce 256. So they didn't build their first GPU until '99? I stand by my claim of BS aka marketspeak.

 

[OBLAMA2009]

under "products" they have a "tablets and smartbooks" as if they actually had such products and if they did, people would buy their buggy overpriced junk. ion a pc and windows 7 was my idea

 

[Drenlin]

wtf?

So they're anti-intel, which means the're against the largest CPU/Chipset manufacturer/designer in the industry. They obviously can't side with AMD, who is currently wiping the floor with them despite their efforts to eliminate ATI form Nvidia-based systems. Do they plan on bringing IBM back into the CPU market? VIA?

The future of Nvidia is looking pretty grim...

 

[at80eighty]

wtf?

So they're anti-intel, which means the're against the largest CPU/Chipset manufacturer/designer in the industry. They obviously can't side with AMD, who is currently wiping the floor with them despite their efforts to eliminate ATI form Nvidia-based systems. What's that leave? IBM?

(i could be way off, but) iirc from some article/thread I read here in the forums, they have been touting the computing power of Nv cards for general use seeing as how cards today have more processing power or something - gunning for Intel's ground/marketshare basically from what I understand

 

[Acanthus]

I understand Nvidias argument.

Intel pulled nvidias license to make chipsets because "QPI is not FSB."

By stifling the competition in this way, Intel has gotten away with not updating chipsets for any of their platforms in quite a while.

Ion for Atom was disputed. And how old is X58 now?

 

[sxr7171]

Easy, there. I'm well aware what nVidia did with the term 'GPU.' Since this was likely written by some marketing/PR troll, I'm inclined to believe they intended that statement to mean #1. Their NV1 GPU came out in '95, Riva 128 in '97, TNT in '98. The TNT2 came out in '99, as did the Geforce 256. So they didn't build their first GPU until '99? I stand by my claim of BS aka marketspeak.

I remember they called it a GPU because it offloaded geometry calculations (AFAIK) from the CPU which at that time no other 3D accelerator did. They did launch it with a lot of hoopla. But back then they were very good. My first 3D accelerator was the TNT and it was undeniably the best then. It wasn't until the 9700pro that ATI had a clear win.

 

[sxr7171]

wtf?

So they're anti-intel, which means the're against the largest CPU/Chipset manufacturer/designer in the industry. They obviously can't side with AMD, who is currently wiping the floor with them despite their efforts to eliminate ATI form Nvidia-based systems. Do they plan on bringing IBM back into the CPU market? VIA?

The future of Nvidia is looking pretty grim...

Okay fine screw 'em. But what do you do when ATI is the only game in town for high-end discrete graphics? Do you really want to pay $1000 for a GPU?

I must admit though that whenever nVidia had an advantage over ATI they milked it really hard. They were the ones who tried to make $699 a "normal" price point for a high end GPU. What ATI is doing now is almost benign in comparison.

I suppose they deserve what they're getting but in the end it is not nVidia who will feel the pain. It will be us.

If the argument to allow AMD and ATI to merge was that such a merger would yield a faster increase in CPU and GPU technology by way of integration then it still has not borne fruit. So as consumers we have still not benefited from that. Instead we might see a previous viable competitor exit the market and as consumers we will not have benefited but rather have lost.

I think many people here like to personify these companies. They are not people. If you got a bad product from it, or it did something you don't agree with, it's not like you will "get revenge" when the company fails. It is a non-feeling entity and only the employees will feel the pain. As a consumer whether you prefer ATI or nVidia you too will feel the pain.

I don't care if allowing AMD and ATI to merge hurt nVidia, but it seems like it might have hurt us - the consumers. That's all I care about. But it really is too soon to say for sure. Maybe Intel could acquire all nVidia intellectual property and make a decent discrete GPU.

 

[Patrick Wolf]

Doesn't seem like an "anti-intel" page to me. It's just stating information about the lawsuits being filed against Intel by Nvidia and the FTC. How many of you actually read through it?

I think most of you are reading way too much into this.

 

[Lonyo]

Doesn't seem like an "anti-intel" page to me. It's just stating information about the lawsuits being filed against Intel by Nvidia and the FTC. How many of you actually read through it?

I think most of you are reading way too much into this.

So a web page talking about lawsuits filed by various parties against a single other party isn't an anti-single other party page?
Because most people would probably disagree with you.
Most companies don't go around with a special flashy page listing all the lawsuits against a competitor. They might have some plain text press releases talking about their own involvement in a lawsuit, but not a flashy page.

There have also been things on NVs website which are anti-CPU in a general sense (i.e. get a balanced PC with reasonable CPU and reasonable GPU instead of amazing CPU and no GPU), this just takes it one further and attacks Intel. JHH has also publicly talked trash about Intel before now.

 

[Tsavo]

I'm glad that Nvidia is mostly out of the chipset business.

As bad as Via, their chipsets are.

 

[faxon]

under "products" they have a "tablets and smartbooks" as if they actually had such products and if they did, people would buy their buggy overpriced junk. ion a pc and windows 7 was my idea

actually nvidia is already inside a ton of planned launches for upcoming products with variants of their tegra and tegra 2 ARM based SOCs for mobile devices. if you look at some of the stuff demoed at CES you will see that there's quite a few products coming down the pipe based on their chips, including yes, tablets and smartbooks (basically tablets with a keyboard). one of the smartbooks i saw demoed had something like a weeks battery life idle and a days battery life at load, and the entire system fit on an SO-DIMM module. all you need to make it snappy then is give the user a second slot for upgradable ram and laptop hard drive (default boot off integrated flash) and you can really get a nice platform going similar to apples phone/tablet OS, or chrome OS, which some of the planned devices may be running