Nvidia to license Kepler to everyone who can pay

[SirPauly]

You can write off Apple, Samsung, Intel, and Qualcomm from this list as these have good GPU developments here and they count on it as competitive advantages. They also have the money to buy Nvidia N times if needed. Companies that don't need bleeding edge graphics will stick with Mali.

In the end the TAM Nvidia is aiming is *far* smaller than billions of SoCs.

Intel has a license agreement with nVidia -- and with the technology sector being as disruptive, volatile and the technology landscape ever changing --- may be wise to not write off anything with a sweeping blanket view.

 

[AnandThenMan]

I can't decide if this is a good move, or is a move borne out of desperation. Who exactly is going to license Nvidia GPU tech?

--- may be wise to not write off anything with a sweeping blanket view.

Or it may be wise to make a blanket statement, such is the nature of the word "may".

 

[mrmt]

Intel has a license agreement with nVidia -- and with the technology sector being as disruptive, volatile and the technology landscape ever changing --- may be wise to not write off anything with a sweeping blanket view.

No, they have a settlement enforced by the FTC.

 

[Imouto]

I can't decide if this is a good move, or is a move borne out of desperation. Who exactly is going to license Nvidia GPU tech?

How can it be anything else than desperation? Tegra sales dropped a whopping 51% last quarter and Tegra 4 is a major flop. That's what you get when you can't deliver for 4 Tegra spins and you're getting far behind in development.

 

[SirPauly]

No, they have a settlement enforced by the FTC.

No, it was a six year licensing agreement and the legal dispute was dropped between the two.

NVIDIA announced today that it has signed a new six-year cross-licensing agreement with Intel.

http://pressroom.nvidia.com/easyir/...CE9F579F09&prid=706607&releasejsp=release_157

It's even mentioned in you original post:

And we receive more than $250 million a year from Intel as a license fee for our visual computing patents.

http://blogs.nvidia.com/blog/2013/0...ves-nvidia-room-to-expand-its-business-model/

 

[AnandThenMan]

How can it be anything else than desperation?

At first blush is sounds like desperation to me, yes. I'm just trying to think of an upside, but can't imagine who exactly would license tech from Nvidia that is not doing so already.

 

[mrmt]

No, it was a six year licensing agreement and the legal dispute was dropped between the two.

Let me refresh your memory:

- In 2009 Intel dropped FSB for Nehalen and 2010 with Westmere, effectively shutting Nvidia out of their lucrative chipset business.

- Nvidia sued Intel for their IGPU IP, while Intel sued Nvidia to not allow them to develop chipset products for their brand new processors.

- Nvidia complained to the FTC, which was behind Intel at the time and had lost AMD once they settled with Intel.

- The FTC then started to build a case against Intel, with Nvidia collaborating.

- Intel settled with the FTC and Nvidia by paying Nvidia 1.5 billion in five years *and* not giving them the much coveted x86 license.

So I don't think it's fair to say that this is money out of a license agreement. This was an agreement done with the FTC holding a gun on Intel's head, it would be pay or go through a lenghty judicial fight with unpredictable outcome.

 

[sontin]

Intel has a settlement with nVidia and not with the FTC. The FTC forced them only to support PCIe at least until 2016 or so.

 

[Genx87]

I doubt Apple will be moving away from PowerVR anytime soon. nVidia would have to offer something far better than what they have been to get Apple to switch. PowerVR has been blowing nVidia out of the water in pure GPU performance.

Things change is all I can say. To think otherwise is rather short sighted. Samsung and Apple are two targets in that list that could be wooed away from their current SOCs to use one or parts of one from Nvidia, Intel, AMD, or Qualcomm.

 

[AnandThenMan]

Intel is paying "go away" money to Nvidia to avoid a potentially long and drawn out legal battle. Plus 1.5 billion is chump change to Intel.

 

[Genx87]

I have no idea what msg your picture is meant convey other than to reiterate my point the difficulties breaking into new and emerging markets. Nvidia has been down this road multiple times before and has had quite a lot of success doing it.

 

[notty22]

Intel also paid 'go away' money to AMD to the tune of 1 billion. There is a difference between settlement without finding money and liscening agreements. And they are claimed as such when legally needed.

 

[AnandThenMan]

So is anyone going to address the elephant in the room, who out there is going to license Kepler tech?

 

[sontin]

How can it be anything else than desperation? Tegra sales dropped a whopping 51% last quarter and Tegra 4 is a major flop. That's what you get when you can't deliver for 4 Tegra spins and you're getting far behind in development.

Aha. And we ignore the fact that Tegra 4 is only shipping at the end of Q2? :\

 

[Imouto]

I have no idea what msg your picture is meant convey other than to reiterate my point the difficulties breaking into new and emerging markets. Nvidia has been down this road multiple times before and has had quite a lot of success doing it.

Not this time. That's what that graph means.

 

[Genx87]

Aha. And we ignore the fact that Tegra 4 is only shipping at the end of Q2? :\

Shhhh, small technicality

 

[tviceman]

So is anyone going to address the elephant in the room, who out there is going to license Kepler tech?

Ask yourself this more easily answered question: if no one had already expressed interest, or if Nvidia does not think they will gain any licenses out of this move, why would they announce such a thing in first place?

 

[Genx87]

Not this time. That's what that graph means.

One quarter is sufficient in your eyes to make the claim Nvidia wont have success in this market?

 

[AnandThenMan]

Ask yourself this more easily answered question: if no one had already expressed interest, or if Nvidia dors not think they will gain any licenses out of this move, why would they announce such a thing in first place?

Can you answer that question for me, because I have no idea. And that still does not answer the question, who will license Kepler?

 

[Imouto]

One quarter is sufficient in your eyes to make the claim Nvidia wont have success in this market?

The Tegra division has been posting overly negative results since its inception. Even at its revenue peak it was still posting crazy negative balances.

 

[boxleitnerb]

The Tegra division has been posting overly negative results since its inception. Even at its revenue peak it was still posting crazy negative balances.

Ever heard the saying "you have to spend money to make money"? Not saying everything is rosy over there, but you have to invest if you start at zero. The Tegra chips don't fall into Nvidia's laps by magic, you know?

 

[Imouto]

Aha. And we ignore the fact that Tegra 4 is only shipping at the end of Q2? :\

Nvidia lost all of the high volume Tegra 3 design wins. The Nexus 7 or the MS Surface for example. So please tell me how Nvidia will make up for that with a handful of irrelevant design wins.

 

[sontin]

And nVidia won other designs: HP.
They have more revenue from cars. They have Shield. They are still in one of the Surface tablets. They support Windows RT.

The N7 was a hit because it had the fastest Android tablet SoC. The next version will be outperformed by Tegra 4 devices at the same price point. And the 10" cost $399 - $499 with a docking station (HP and Asus, Toshiba with bluetooth).

 

[SiliconWars]

Yes the problem for Nvidia is all of their design wins lead to worse financial losses.

 

[sontin]

Sorry, but what? Their Tegra business grew last year.

Let me guess you have no clue and doing viral marketing for a certain company, right?