Nvidia CEO Shares Company's CPU Strategy

Status
Not open for further replies.

silentq

Distinguished
Mar 9, 2010
58
0
18,630
0
i dunno guys, i dont really feel like doubling my electrical bill... i probably would not need a furnace in the winter with couple of fermi's and nvidia cpu in my tower though...
 

allenpan

Distinguished
May 4, 2001
73
1
18,635
0
it will be wise to merge with VIA or DM&P Electronics's "Vortex86", DNP is a much cheaper company who also own x86 lisences
 

L0tus

Distinguished
Jan 28, 2006
191
0
18,690
2
[citation][nom]silentq[/nom]i dunno guys, i dont really feel like doubling my electrical bill... i probably would not need a furnace in the winter with couple of fermi's and nvidia cpu in my tower though...[/citation]
...hell you wouldn't even need a stove/microwave...just fire prime95 up and watch those sausages sizzle. Dinner in 3 minutes.

...and as for intel, they're behaviour is obviously monopolistic. Surely there are antitrust laws against that sort of crap. And when is that license expiring?
 

jplarson

Distinguished
Jul 21, 2010
19
0
18,510
0
It's a real shame that Intel is able to hold onto the x86 licensing... that effectively creates a monopoly. Granted they own the intellectual property of it, but it costs the market competition.
 

Pei-chen

Distinguished
Jul 3, 2007
1,254
0
19,280
0
[citation][nom]jtt283[/nom]Killed the chipset division...hmmm, does this look to anyone else like the end of SLI on AMD platforms?[/citation]
I assume those SLI engineer will just go work for the graphic division.

BTW, it make sense to target the ARM market instead of x86 consider how many things could have a simple processor inside. x86 is good for PC but the market is growing slowly.
 

tommysch

Distinguished
Sep 6, 2008
1,165
0
19,280
0
[citation][nom]jtt283[/nom]Killed the chipset division...hmmm, does this look to anyone else like the end of SLI on AMD platforms?[/citation]

AMD... Whats that?? lol
 

tu_illegalamigo

Distinguished
Jul 26, 2010
147
0
18,690
1
I think that nvidia is targeting the smartphone/handheld electronics market, and letting AMD and Intel duke it out on x86/64 Desktops until the end of time. I think that`s also probably a good idea because taking any market share from intel or AMD would probably be rather difficult, when there`s a burgeoning market that Intel and AMD have not dedicated much time/effort/money to yet.
 

jesman1985

Distinguished
Nov 4, 2009
197
0
18,690
2
its one thing to have a strategy.. its another to put it into full effect.. i honestly feel they'd lose money if they were to go full force into the cpu market.. look at the competition.. intels performance and amd's price/performance ratio.. they need to step thier gpu game up first then talk about expanding into cpu's..but thats just my opinon..
 

superblahman123

Distinguished
Mar 26, 2009
144
0
18,680
0
[citation][nom]greghome[/nom]I think I can see the future.....................................Nvidia Quadriplex8 4.2ghz vs AMD phenomIVx8 4.8ghz vs Intel corei12 5.0ghz[/citation]

That should be today, but they gotta stretch their profits as far as they can with as old of technology as they can. If I see any processor manufactured to 5.0Ghz within the next 10 years, I will eat my shoe, it just won't happen as long as everyone thinks that more cores is what will speed their computers.
 

tokenz

Distinguished
Mar 11, 2006
328
0
18,780
0
[citation][nom]LORD_ORION[/nom]x86 licenses are non-transferable. Intel isn't stupid.[/citation]

Actually they just settled in court, and now they are transferable.
 

COLGeek

Cybernaut
Moderator
Nvidia is making a smart move to take advantage of a market where they might actually gain some market share. Going up against Intel or AMD in the x86 market would be a losing proposition. This is actually a pretty decent strategy on Nvidia's part.
 

ares1214

Splendid
Dec 15, 2009
4,471
0
22,960
90
GOOD MOVE! Android takes down Microsoft, Nvidia/AMD take down Intel, thats 2 empires down in one day! :D But realistically, this will either be the best thing Nvidia did, or destroy them. If they focus less the gpu market, then ATI has a monopoly. Like ATI, but then they will be the new empire if that happens.
 

7amood

Distinguished
Dec 11, 2005
288
0
18,790
2
" . . . we're not expecting to ramp back up the thousand engineers that we had working on chipsets."

THOUSAND ENGINEERS!!!??? ok... is this guy bluffing?
 

ta152h

Distinguished
Apr 1, 2009
1,207
2
19,285
0
I think what's being lost here is that NVIDIA probably can't build a competitive x86 processor even if they were legally able to. Making a GPU is relatively simple and doesn't approach the complexity of making an x86 CPU that is competitive with Nehalem based processors, and successors.

Even AMD, who has been in the processor market forever, can't make a competitive processor, and lives on the bottom like a catfish, eating the excrement and fallen algae. NVIDIA would have a problem even doing that, and they be battling AMD for the carrion. Already, AMD is lucky if they are profitable with their CPUs, so it's doubtful NVIDIA wants to even attempt that. It's a brutal market to be in, and the competition from Intel is extremely strong. NVIDIA wants no part of it.
 

ta152h

Distinguished
Apr 1, 2009
1,207
2
19,285
0
[citation][nom]zipzoomflyhigh[/nom]Intel basically screwed themselves out of the graphics market by forcing Nvidia out of the chipset business. Nvidia was able to concentrate on graphics and that made Intel cancel their gpu plans because they were too far behind to compete in gpu.[/citation]

That assumes a company is a person, and isn't more capable of doing more than one thing at a time. That's always the fallacy with that type of thinking. They were separate divisions.

Also, NVIDIA does not set the standard for GPUs, ATI does. Intel forcing NVIDIA out of the chipset market didn't make ATI make better GPUs, therefore your conclusion that it had a negative effect on Intel's GPUs is fallacious.

Also, Intel still sells more GPUs than NVIDIA or AMD. IGPs still dominate the market and probably will more and more.
 

jezzarisky

Distinguished
Nov 27, 2008
84
0
18,640
2
[citation][nom]COLGeek[/nom]Nvidia is making a smart move to take advantage of a market where they might actually gain some market share. Going up against Intel or AMD in the x86 market would be a losing proposition. This is actually a pretty decent strategy on Nvidia's part.[/citation]
It's definitely a better bet to move into a less occupied market, but Intel is also moving into the mobile sector. If they succeed or not is another story...
 

ohim

Distinguished
Feb 10, 2009
1,195
0
19,360
26
[citation][nom]ta152h[/nom]I think what's being lost here is that NVIDIA probably can't build a competitive x86 processor even if they were legally able to. Making a GPU is relatively simple and doesn't approach the complexity of making an x86 CPU that is competitive with Nehalem based processors, and successors. Even AMD, who has been in the processor market forever, can't make a competitive processor, and lives on the bottom like a catfish, eating the excrement and fallen algae. NVIDIA would have a problem even doing that, and they be battling AMD for the carrion. Already, AMD is lucky if they are profitable with their CPUs, so it's doubtful NVIDIA wants to even attempt that. It's a brutal market to be in, and the competition from Intel is extremely strong. NVIDIA wants no part of it.[/citation]
Slow down intel fanboy , the big profits are not in the high end market as you might think, it`s on the entry part but as usual ppl always go buy from the company that has the fastest producs even though they will not that buy that in particual. AMD/Nvidia > Intel GPU but still Intel outsells each of them in IGP sales. Same about CPUs the entry cheap CPUs makes the profit where AMD is better than Intel but they only lack marketing and huge founds for Advertising.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS