Nvidia reportedly talking with VIA about acquisition

[soonerproud]

Originally posted by: Modelworks
They have a license to produce chipsets, but not cpu.

It is no secret that Nvidia is talking with Intel about something. Are you absolutely certain that Nvidia hasn't licensed x86 technology behind closed doors? I submit that Nvidia has a x86 license already that neither Intel or Nvidia have publicly acknowledged. Nvidia doesn't necessarily need to produce x86 processors to benefit from x86 technology. They may have done it for IP protection in their GPU's and chipsets.

Unless you have a inside source, don't be so certain Nvidia doesn't have a x86 license.

 

[Idontcare]

Originally posted by: soonerproud

Originally posted by: Modelworks
They have a license to produce chipsets, but not cpu.

It is no secret that Nvidia is talking with Intel about something. Are you absolutely certain that Nvidia hasn't licensed x86 technology behind closed doors? I submit that Nvidia has a x86 license already that neither Intel or Nvidia have publicly acknowledged. Nvidia doesn't necessarily need to produce x86 processors to benefit from x86 technology. They may have done it for IP protection in their GPU's and chipsets.

Unless you have a inside source, don't be so certain Nvidia doesn't have a x86 license.

What you say is true...we can't be any more certain that Nvidia hasn't secured a license than we can be sure that Intel will sell/trade licenses in the future.

Absolutely none of us, not even employees of either company, are privy to the data and strategies swirling around in the minds of the handful of true decision makers at the upper echelons of both company's corporate ladders.

Having said that, of all the things I think Intel would absolutely require of Nvidia as part of a cross-licensing package I would expect SLi to be in the package and I don't see Intel letting that info sit on the sidelines without some kind of "leak" on digitimes.

I know this much - I refuse to underestimate the determinism of Nvidia's co-founder and CEO Jen-Hsun Huang.

This guy is going to run his company with all the passion that Andy Grove drove Intel, that Jerry Sanders drove AMD, that Bill Gates drove Microsoft, and that Larry Ellison drives Oracle.

Neither Hector Ruiz nor Paul Otellini have such passion as neither are co-founders of the corporations they operate. A job is just a job unless it is also the crowning acheivement of your life...Jen-Hsun Huang is not going to watch Nvidia slip away into oblivion, he'll work 24x7 like Andy Grove did in the 80's and 90's.

I don't see that passion in Hector or Paul. Barret is shining example of what an average american manager does in a CEO position of just about any company. Same could be said of Ruiz. But Jen-Hsun Huang? All bets are off.

 

[Auric]

Originally posted by: Idontcare
Having said that, of all the things I think Intel would absolutely require of Nvidia as part of a cross-licensing package I would expect SLi to be in the package and I don't see Intel letting that info sit on the sidelines without some kind of "leak" on digitimes.

Does Intel particularly care about SLI (if not for free) when AMD has committed to CF being free and open? For that matter, would it be worth licensing x86 to Nvidia? Intel is in a very strong position whereas Nvidia is looking rather weak since they are no longer getting a free ride as the primary supplier of AMD chipsets and additionally are facing increased competition in GPUs.

 

[soonerproud]

Originally posted by: Auric
Does Intel particularly care about SLI (if not for free) when AMD has committed to CF being free and open? For that matter, would it be worth licensing x86 to Nvidia? Intel is in a very strong position whereas Nvidia is looking rather weak since they are no longer getting a free ride as the primary supplier of AMD chipsets and additionally are facing increased competition in GPUs.

Actually, Nvidia is doing very strong in the markets right now simply because they own the discrete graphics industry. If I am not mistaken, Intel has already announced they are planning to support SLI in the near future. Do not underestimate Nvidia.

 

[Idontcare]

Originally posted by: Auric

Originally posted by: Idontcare
Having said that, of all the things I think Intel would absolutely require of Nvidia as part of a cross-licensing package I would expect SLi to be in the package and I don't see Intel letting that info sit on the sidelines without some kind of "leak" on digitimes.

Does Intel particularly care about SLI (if not for free) when AMD has committed to CF being free and open? For that matter, would it be worth licensing x86 to Nvidia? Intel is in a very strong position whereas Nvidia is looking rather weak since they are no longer getting a free ride as the primary supplier of AMD chipsets and additionally are facing increased competition in GPUs.

According to Francois Piednol (co-designer of Skulltrail platform) in many threads over at aceshardware (he posts under the screen name "who?") and at extremesystems (he posts under the screen name "DrWho?"), Intel desparately wanted/wants a SLi license but failed to negotiate one out of Nvidia despite many months of intense negotiations.

Of course Francois never said what Nvidia required that Intel simply wasn't willing to spend or part ways with...but he pretty well communicated Intel's desire for SLi license in all those on aces.

 

[Auric]

Originally posted by: Idontcare

Of course Francois never said what Nvidia required that Intel simply wasn't willing to spend or part ways with...but he pretty well communicated Intel's desire for SLi license in all those on aces.

Right, so SLI compatability would make a nice feature checkbox but not worth "buying".

 

[Idontcare]

Originally posted by: Auric

Originally posted by: Idontcare

Of course Francois never said what Nvidia required that Intel simply wasn't willing to spend or part ways with...but he pretty well communicated Intel's desire for SLi license in all those on aces.

Right, so SLI compatability would make a nice feature checkbox but not worth "buying".

Well apparently it is worth buying in that Intel buys two Nvidia MCP's for every Skulltrail mobo they build.

But I agree it is apparantely not worth paying more than 2X the chipset costs...whatever that turns out to be.

 

[v8envy]

SLI is more than a checkbox -- if the P35 chipset was licensed for SLI how much market share and mindshare do you think NV chipsets would have?

While the cost of licensing SLI across all boards (considering the vast majority are in boards without PCIe 16x slots) is no doubt prohibitive I wonder why Intel didn't manage to license SLI for a single chipset (call it P36 -- identical to the P35, but with an ID string which nvidia's drivers recognize and allow SLI for) meant for 'enthusiast' boards.

I don't have numbers, but judging from posters here it's pretty obvious that when faced with the choice of SLI vs Intel chipset a pretty overwhelming majority of enthusiasts choose the Intel chipset. So from that standpoint Intel is winning this pissing contest. End users are losing.

 

[Idontcare]

Originally posted by: v8envy
I don't have numbers, but judging from posters here it's pretty obvious that when faced with the choice of SLI vs Intel chipset a pretty overwhelming majority of enthusiasts choose the Intel chipset. So from that standpoint Intel is winning this pissing contest. End users are losing.

I imagine it's got to be a fairly small number of folks though who do SLi (or want to but feel like its not worth it enough to go i680/i780).

It would seem like a bigger deal from a marketing standpoint. But then again I would feel that way given that I jumped onto the early i680 bandwagon thinking (thanks to yummy marketing) that I was going to upgrade to SLi someday...but that day never came so now I am happily using an X38 Asus mobo.

 

[chucky2]

The most important thing if this happens is to ensure that nVidia drivers don't turn into the nightmare that is VIA.

It's really a wonder that VIA made it this far...I remember when nForce and nForce2 came out and just completely embarrassed the POS that were VIA's offerings.

Too bad AMD didn't have an nForce or nForce2 quality chipset when they went K6-3 and beyond...they'd be in a much stronger position now.

Chuck

P.S. Save the I'm a VIA fan boi flames...anyone that worked with VIA stuff back in the MVPS and KT133, KT133a, etc days knows exactly what I'm talking about.

 

[Auric]

Nvidia chipsets have been relatively poor too -suffering many compatability issues (audio, video, storage) and even flaky features (namely TCP/IP related). Sure, they may seem good in comparison to VIA but the standard remains Intel

Personally, if I had to choose otherwise it would be AMD.

 

[v8envy]

Originally posted by: Idontcare
It would seem like a bigger deal from a marketing standpoint. But then again I would feel that way given that I jumped onto the early i680 bandwagon thinking (thanks to yummy marketing) that I was going to upgrade to SLi someday...but that day never came so now I am happily using an X38 Asus mobo.

Things change. With low cost 9600GTs and 8800GTs x 2 performing as well if not better than $600 'single slot' video cards there is finally a compelling reason to SLI -- if you need that kind of performance today and can live with SLI solution drawbacks. Up until recently the only reason to do so was e-peen.

I was the proud owner of an SLI capable Asus nforce-something board for my Venice 3200+. And yeah, score another win for marketing -- never used it. Same story, figured I'd pick up two 7900GTs when they got cheap but wound up with an X1800XT at first and a 7600GT to replace it when it started overheating. By the time I got my 8800GT either the board or CPU gave up the ghost and I went Intel instead with 0 thought given to SLI.

I was briefly considering the EVGA 650i SLI board that was on fire sale at Tiger Direct for around $60, but I came to my senses.

In summary, this consumer considers SLI to be a checklist feature. Great if the feature is free or nearly free, but if there's a significant cost (read: having to use nv's chipset) I'll take a pass. Sooner or later AMD will have a competitive graphics solution again. Being locked into one platform vendor is a lose.

 

[richwenzel]

You are all fools, silly little fools.

If Nvidia buys Via it is not for its processors but for S3 technologies.

We will see Nvidia branded STB Lightspeed boards and nViRGE chips.

Done.

Now where is Hercules?

 

[Idontcare]

Originally posted by: richwenzel
You are all fools, silly little fools.

If Nvidia buys Via it is not for its processors but for S3 technologies.

We will see Nvidia branded STB Lightspeed boards and nViRGE chips.

Done.

Now where is Hercules?

That was worth a good chuckle...LOL!

S3 FTW baby!

 

[Modelworks]

hey now, Hercules rocked at one point.
It was so long ago I can't remember when it was , but it did

 

[Auric]

I think the story has been misreported. It is VIA which is aquiring Nvidia and will subjugate it to their mighty S3 Graphics unit. Let the savaging begin!

 

[CTho9305]

If there really were big x86 license issues, rather than "buying" Via, couldn't a "buyer" instead set up a contract so that Via just only designs & sells parts for that buyer?

What exactly needs to be "licensed"? The 80386 is more than 20 years old - shouldn't i386 be fair game? Wouldn't any major player have enough in their own patent portfolio to make any other major player suffer if necessary?

 

[richwenzel]

Originally posted by: Modelworks
hey now, Hercules rocked at one point.
It was so long ago I can't remember when it was , but it did

FOOOOOOL

Trident>SIS>Cirrus Logic>Hercules!!!!!

FOOOOOOL

j/k.....

Everyone knows Tsent Labs and Number Nine ruled all.

 

[Idontcare]

Originally posted by: CTho9305
If there really were big x86 license issues, rather than "buying" Via, couldn't a "buyer" instead set up a contract so that Via just only designs & sells parts for that buyer?

What exactly needs to be "licensed"? The 80386 is more than 20 years old - shouldn't i386 be fair game? Wouldn't any major player have enough in their own patent portfolio to make any other major player suffer if necessary?

That's actually an intriguing concept...basically Via would become a "foundry" for x86 designs.

Nvidia would design the chip and remain fabless (plays to their strong suit) and then they could either sell the design to Via with some structured residuals payment plan based on chip volume.

Cyrix did a sorta similiar thing with IBM. IBM got to sell the Cyrix designed chips as their own, and at times they actually undercut Cyrix on the pricing.

That would be one way for Nvidia to gain entry into the x86 market. I don't see it violating anything in the current contracts as discussed to date.