Intel vs Nvidia - whos right!

[unclefester]

That's the whole problem, if we don't buy into the latest greatest tech , well we might as well be living in a cave and they know it!! And man do they have todays kids hook-line-and-sinker. If you where to go the schools and see how much peer pressure is put on the have and the have-nots, you can see why the gimmicks are used as a tactical ploy.

 

[JAYDEEJOHN]

Thats too bad. Im old enough to remember nothing but white tee shirts, and ads on em were considered cheapo. From here http://www.digitimes.com/news/a20090327VL200.html

Again, its sounding more and more JUST like the AMD deal. Heres a quote:
"Henry went on to stress that Nvidia did not want to bring this case to the courts, but was forced to do so after Intel suddenly filed its original suit in February. Both companies have acknowledged that they have been working for over a year to resolve the dispute privately, and later through arbitration. Nvidia has previously stated that it believes the success of its Ion platform (which Henry today interestingly defined as any of Nvidia's MCP79- and MCP78-based chipsets for Intel CPU-series including Atom, Celeron and Core 2 – Ion originally only referred to chipsets designed for Atom CPUs for nettops and netbooks) was the main cause behind Intel filing the suit."

Im not sure, but it sure sounds the same.

 

[unclefester]

One has to wonder about the timing of this. A.) Can Nvidia say that sales are down as a direct acclusion of Intel's actions. (or B.) Can Intel say that a decline in sales for Nvidia, is a direct condition of the current economic climate.

 

[dragonsprayer]

lol!
your guys are both right on!

by the way i tried to get GD2 dot what ever and the main ones where taken - the cats out the bag now!

 

[jimmysmitty]

Check this out http://venturebeat.com/2009/01/28/jen-hsun-huangs-quest-to-spread-graphics-beyond-pcs/

Is this sounding very familiar? Think EU here now

Quote : " Q: Are they offering an outrageously low bundling deal of Atom and Intel’s own chip sets (so that if you buy them together, you get a big discount) that locks out the Ion platform?
A: I’m not an antitrust lawyer. But if you offer a product A and bundle it with a product B and price it in a way that people can’t succeed without the bundle, then that’s a problem. The product bundling prices we have heard from the market seem very alarming. If you buy product A and B, the price is lower than if you bought product A alone. That seems like a weird bundle pricing strategy. (Intel denies this claim) We don’t know anything directly. It’s worth some investigative reporting."

From here http://venturebeat.com/2009/01/28/jen-hsun-huangs-quest-to-spread-graphics-beyond-pcs/

So they think that Intel using thier current leway chipset for Atom is monopolistic? And setting a low price when Intel gets 2500 Atom chips per wafer is too?

I wounder if this guy realizes that Atom is destined to soon be a SoC and that when you can get 2500+ good CPUs per wafer the damn cost per chip is extremely low. Or maybe he just has a mind set that Intel is big and doing monopolistic crap.

So my guess would be that when Intel starts making SoC CPUs it will be monopolistic but if AMD does that same thing (and yes they plan to) it wont. I wounder why nVidia hasn't tried to get CF for their chipsets......

 

[fazers_on_stun]

I think its only fair to present both sides

That's not a "side" - that's just Jen-Hsun "Whoopass" shooting his big mouth off again

As was mentioned previously, nVidia screwed Intel over the SLI license on Intel chipsets, but now the table is turned Jen-Hsun is screaming like a stuck pig. Again.

 

[JAYDEEJOHN]

"That's not a "side" - that's just Jen-Hsun "Whoopass" shooting his big mouth off again" LOL
Who knows, but one things for sure, Jen-Hsun is intertaining to say the least heheh

 

[dattimr]

"That's not a "side" - that's just Jen-Hsun "Whoopass" shooting his big mouth off again" LOL
Who knows, but one things for sure, Jen-Hsun is intertaining to say the least heheh

Entertaining people are dangerous as CEOs when they bad mouth people much "bigger" in the market than them. Nvidia's shareholders are certainly not finding his performance that entertaining as of late. Besides, the only "funny" thing he said was the "whoop-ass" thing. BS, but a little funny. Everything else was just plain BS. Go read an interview with Otellini. That's a true business man speaking, not a clown.

Ballmer is both, though. : ) He's funny. I'd love to see him personally.

 

[JAYDEEJOHN]

I liked his comment on Intels igps compared to their cpus, he said something like, in 1 hand you have a gem, in the other crap, now mix them together heheh

 

[dattimr]

Well, they don't have a gem, since many Macs are reported to be failing due to the 9400, and they also don't have a CPU, so I don't know what they have.

 

[JAYDEEJOHN]

They have the fastest single core gpu, the fastest single slot gpu. Its not as tho their approach is complete fail

 

[fazers_on_stun]

Entertaining people are dangerous as CEOs when they bad mouth people much "bigger" in the market than them. Nvidia's shareholders are certainly not finding his performance that entertaining as of late. Besides, the only "funny" thing he said was the "whoop-ass" thing. BS, but a little funny. Everything else was just plain BS. Go read an interview with Otellini. That's a true business man speaking, not a clown.

Ballmer is both, though. : ) He's funny. I'd love to see him personally.

Have you seen the "fake Steve Ballmer" blog yet? Pretty funny, although the now-defunct Fake Steve Jobs blog was better, IMO. Maybe FSJ was too funny, and Apple shut him down...

Dunno what it is about tech companies and their flamboyant CEOs. It takes a huge ego to drive a company to success obviously, but once a certain level is achieved, better PR is just engage in dry humor and leave the bombast to the marketing dept. I think it was Otellini who said the classic "We prefer for all our cores to be working" when commenting on AMD's tri-core strategy .

 

[roofus]

Yes the tri-core was a product I mocked as well. Now I look at the 720's and there isn't much to laugh about.

 

[JAYDEEJOHN]

Unfortunately, Jen-Hsuns statement still holds tho

 

[roofus]

Indeed it does. He obviously didn't attend a finishing school or any corporate etiquette seminars but that doesn't remove the truth behind the comment.

 

[amdfangirl]

Well, they don't have a gem, since many Macs are reported to be failing due to the 9400, and they also don't have a CPU, so I don't know what they have.

Can't we just have working computers like in the old days... Nvidia with its failing notebook products, AMD with southbridge and I/O failures, Intel with lack of HD accleration (that works) you just wonder "What's going on?".

 

[JAYDEEJOHN]

How bout the ION powered you name it pc?

 

[fazers_on_stun]

Yes the tri-core was a product I mocked as well. Now I look at the 720's and there isn't much to laugh about.

Not from a customer viewpoint, I agree. However if X3's cut too deep into X4 sales, which in light of the 4th core enabling trick, they just might, then AMD's ASP would suffer. Since it presumably costs the same to manufacture the same CPU with all 4 cores working, vs. one with just 3, then that lower price represents lost profit. As the price for a tri-core is about 2/3rds that of a 4-core, then above a certain threshold (which depends on yields and TCM for the chip) AMD would start to lose more money.

Obviously only AMD knows its yields and manufacturing costs. We'd have to wait for the quarterly earnings statement plus marketshare numbers before being able to make informed guesses.

Of course, some people claim the Atom is hurting Intel's ASPs and thus their bottom line. The difference is, ASP is only half the equation - the cost to manufacture is the other side, and since Intel can get something like 2500 of these off one wafer, their cost per chip is much lower.

 

[dragonsprayer]

Yes the tri-core was a product I mocked as well. Now I look at the 720's and there isn't much to laugh about.

dude!

tri core is rejected quad


while the spun and marketed and i just bought a blk to oc and sell as a cheapy system - keep in mind:

amd stock is at $3 which is higher then last months $2

amd has lost money for over 2 years (or close to it)

amd is selling the chips at a loss that is why they are losing money!


ok i like amd new 3.8ghz capable tri and quad - first "true" quad or tri i have bought from AMD but intel could just drop the price of a q6600 to $100 and say bye bye to that advantage,

axe that i think acutally dual dual is more to make they a quad!

 

[dragonsprayer]

thx to every one who voted!

its fun! and interesting looks like no one loves intel!

 

[Stiffex]

If these companies start bankrupting each other it can only be bad news for ordinary component buying citizens (i hate that word `consumer`) because that will lead to monopoly and price making practices that will screw us all. A much better state of affairs would be if Nvidia start making CPU`s and Intel start making GFX cards and maybe CYRIX corp could resurrect and deliver some top class CPU`s and generally drive the prices down and create a situation that is ideal for the buying public because one thing is certain : litigation & monopoly stink.

 

[amdfangirl]

I doubt Cryrix will make more than an Atom killa.

 

[randomizer]

I feel sorry for the 23.7% who use NVIDIA chipsets.

 

[jimmysmitty]

I feel sorry for the 23.7% who use NVIDIA chipsets.

As do I. The got screwed out of a choice simply because when nVidia had a hands up on GPUs they had to get a nVidia chipset if they wanted SLI.

That doesn't seem right to me either way.

 

[amdfangirl]

I have a Nvidia chipset. Two actually.