Nov-06-2009NVIDIA Uses Cartoons to Harass Intel
(topic overview)
CONTENTS:SOURCESFIND OUT MORE ON THIS SUBJECTFirst and foremost among the reasons cited for NVIDIA's alleged plans is the fact that we're about to make another turn on Sutherland's wheel of reincarnation, where graphics functionality will move back onto the CPU die. When this happens, NVIDIA's lucrative integrated graphics processor business is, of course, toast, which has to be one reason why the company went ahead and
euthanized it a bit early. This turn of the wheel is interesting because it's not just that the integrated graphics processors (IGP) will move from the chipset to the CPU, but retain their same basic degree of specialization. Both the integrated GPUs that go onto the CPU die and the more discrete models are essentially becoming many-core, general-purpose processors (albeit specialized for multithreaded throughput and floating-point). This makes the situation even more ominous for NVIDIA, because not only will Intel and AMD take their IGP market from them, but even in the discrete GPU market NVIDIA will also end up with a generalized processor that competes with x86. The ultimate point is that in both the discrete and integrated GPU markets, NVIDIA is already destined to compete directly with Intel and AMD, which means that an actual x86 product from NVIDIA means only that NVIDIA has decided to fight x86 with x86, as opposed to fighting it with some non-x86 architecture. The fact that NVIDIA has hired a bunch of ex-Transmeta guys doesn't necessarily mean anything at all for this supposed x86 processor. As the launch of Apple's Snow Leopard, with its pervasive use of LLVM, makes clear, just-in-time compilation (JIT) is the way that everyone is going to tackle the many-core problem, at least in the near-term.
[1] Having CPU/GPU hybrid chips is definitely the future, as proven by GPGPU applications. They won't be necessarily more expensive than current technology, it is only a matter of yield rates. If future motherboards have slots where you place these CPU/GPU hybrid chips instead of cpu sockets, there still exists room for SLI/Crossfire. We are so accustomed to having a dedicated CPU that these extreme ideas seem science fiction. As much as I love nVidia, I just can't picture them as a major player into the x86 processor market. I mean, they don't have experience with that sort of product, and with Intel's Core i7 processors, they have quite a challenge in front of them if there is any truth to this article. I could see them maybe doing stuff with micro pc's or something maybe HTPC related but they're never going to compete with Intel or AMD unless they come up with something neither company has been able to create. I'd prefer they focus on video cards and chipsets.
[2] It's less evil than that. Intel has a monopoly (from patents) on chipsets for intel processors starting with the i5/7 (maybe sooner I stopped caring and bought a mac) and the next atom. this is why Nvidia is taking yet another jab at them while OEMS sit silently and take it. What's Intel's rush for USB3? Most of the PC market CAN'T buy their chipsets anyplace else. What makes it doubly bad for anybody else is that in 2011 when Intel finally does release a chipset with USB3, whatever bugs or tweaks their product has will instantly become "de facto" standard everybody releasing products/chipsets NOW will have the "astroturf tech media" calling existing products "broken" the day blessed Intel's hits. This is just like Microsoft shut down the performance for 64bit processors when AMD was 3 years ahead on the desktop. until Intel started shipping 64bits now 32 & 64 is in the same box. Nvidia's got to be sore. they priced themselves out of AMD buying them and now nobody with the cash can touch them due to anti-trust concerns. (AMD/ATI can't, VIA doesn't have the cash, and Intel can't buy them and can just let them die off) Nvidia made the day for everybody else. their video cards keep pros and gamers buying expensive Intel processors for the last 10 years, their graphic chips help Microsoft found Xbox on sold ground. but like the "safety" prom date nobody's returning their calls now. I'm guessing it's because the northbridge is now on the CPU die.
[3] Intel may have stalled adoption of the USB 3.0 standard for as long as two years, NVIDIA spokesman Brian Burke
says. Following an apparent PC vendor leak which claims Intel won't have any USB 3.0-capable chipsets of its own until 2011, Burke tells TGDaily that NVIDIA has learned the same news. He contends that Intel has held the industry back by creating a near monopoly in demand for its chipsets but refusing to provide significant updates. "With no competition in chipsets, it seems Intel has decided that innovation is not needed for USB any time soon," he adds. "With no one to push Intel to innovate, PC enthusiasts are left with Intel chipsets and the features and performance they deliver, or lack." The statement effectively accuses Intel of abusing its control over chipset licensing to shut out competitors like NVIDIA that might threaten its business. Both companies are involved in
matching lawsuits over the scope of NVIDIA's existing license for Intel chipsets. Intel believes NVIDIA's license to make chipsets doesn't cover the Core i7 or any other processor with an integrated memory controller; NVIDIA has countered that its license is still valid and that Intel is fabricating an exception to shut out a competitor whose graphics performance and other features are much higher. Without a valid license, the GeForce 9400M, Ion and related chipsets are unlikely to support more recent Intel processors and could force companies like Apple to redesign their computers.
[4] I'm just hoping that GPGPU will be widely adopted by the time win8 is released. Tegra is maybe the most powerful and full-of features ARM CPU around, if they are focusing to create a x86 netbook-like CPU, for internet browsing, light office work, and multimedia with a low power print, they could affect seriously Intel's market share, by creating a winning CPU/chipset combination, or even better, a CPU with embedded chipset for easy integration and low power. I don't think they could affect in any way, Intel and AMD's market in medium and high performance computing market, at least not for the next 5 years or so. There's been grumblings of this for a while. They spiked with AMD bought ATi, with industry analysts figuring nVidia might have to do some catching up if the whole CPU/GPU melding direction became lucrative. With AMD pushing the integration envelope, and Intel pushing their own CPU/GPU integrated solutions along, how can anyone complain or doubt why nVidia would want to look at the CPU side of things to remain competitive? Keep in mind, there are massive potentials for this technology, in some of the largest growth sectors of the electronics marketplaces: console games & mobile computing. If nVidia just keeps doing what they've always done, their niche market will get smaller and smaller, as the technology train passes them by.
[2] Nvidia is moving into new territory?high-performance computing? that has traditionally used microprocessors instead of graphics. These forces have pushed Nvidia and Intel apart, which means Nvidia needs to develop new ways to make revenue. (For its part, AMD inherited the ability to make its own chip sets when it acquired ATI, which means it now relies less on Nvidia for chip sets.) In his research note, Freedman said there are several challenges to Nvidia making its own x86 processors, as the company does not own its own manufacturing facilities and foundries such as Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing do not have the facilities to produce leading-edge processors.
[5] It is starting to look like graphics chip maker Nvidia is building its own x86 development program using staff from Transmeta. AmTech analyst Doug Freedman said the only explanation for its vigorous headhunting is that it is considering a move into the x86 CPU market. Freedman thinks that the outfit needs to preserve both GPU and chipset revenue and pushing into the x86 market is the best way forward.
[6] Nvidia has taken on staff from one-time star of low-power processor design Transmeta, an analyst has claimed, to drive its own x86 core development programme. In a note sent to investment clients yesterday, Doug Freedman of research house AmTech said Nvidia has to be considering a move into the x86 CPU market "by necessity to preserve both GPU and chipset revenue".
[7] The story asserts that Nvidia has been quietly hiring former employees of Transmeta, a now-defunct producer of x86-based processors. The EETimes story is based on a report today by Broadpoint.Amtech analyst Doug Freedman, who asserts that the company "could become a supplier of x86 CPUs by necessity to preserve both GPU and chipset revenue." He says the company is more likely to develop the technology internally than to acquire a company with the capability, like VIA Technologies. "We believe Nvidia could (sooner rather than later) enter the x86 CPU business, with investor response largely a function of the market share opportunity given the CPU roadmap range," he writes.
[8] Freedman noted that around 30 per cent of Nvidia's revenue comes from chipsets, so getting out of the chipset business would simply put too much pressure on Nvidia's other products, not only GPUs but also mobile chips. Other analysts have forecast that Nvidia will
quit the chipset business. GPU revenue is also threatened by initiatives by both AMD and Intel to incorporate GPUs into their processors, a move that also tasks Nvidia's integrated chipset business.
[7] Serious calculation work can be done with either ATI's or Nvidia's GPUs. Nvidia may simply want control over the whole chipset graphics and CPU hardware to produce a more integrated and optimized product in certain markets like set top boxes, mobile internet devices, smart phones, netbooks etc. It will be a long time before an Nvidia x86 CPU based high end gaming machine will dethrown Intel or AMD.
[9] AMD's Radeon HD 2900XT can easily calculate 475 billion floating point operations per second (GFLOPS). CrossFire, and with a little overclocking, has yielded over one trillion FLOPS or 1 TeraFLOP (TFLOP) - typically this level can only be reached by expensive super-computers. Nvidia has a similar approach to super-computing using its G80 processor inside the GeForce 8800 series graphics cards. Deviating from traditional graphics, Nvidia is expected to make an announcement about a new utilization of this technology in combination with CUDA - the company's C compiling software - for combined GPU and CPU computing. There is also talk of Intel's approach using its special execution x86 architecture with graphics functionality, codenamed "Larrabee." Both veins of super-computing development are not without their theoretical pitfalls, as GPUs are not as deep as CPUs, which refers to the complexity of dynamic branching, and highly dynamic executions will not process as quickly as on a CPU. The opposite is true for GPUs, which are very wide yet shallow calculators. If they have a lot of similar tasks to get done and don't require a lot of branching, a GPU will outperform a CPU. While we wait pondering the advantages and limitations, new hardware is currently being "taped out", which could move development in a whole new direction.
[9] "In addition to the types of microprocessors Intel and AMD are now building, Nvidia is also involved in an ongoing legal dispute with Intel that centers on chip sets. Nvidia has now stopped making chip sets of next-generation Intel processors until the court case is settled. "Nvidia could lose leading access to emerging PCI express standards compatibility requirements for its peripheral discrete GPU cards," Freedman wrote. Intel is moving ahead with building its own type of graphics processor called "Larrabee," which could mean that Intel will no longer need any of Nvidia's graphics technology.
[5] The chip maker is currently caught up in a legal battle with Intel over the scope it has to develop chipsets for future Intel processors. Clearly, that could limit its ability to sell chipsets long term, as will AMD's increasing willingness to emphasise its own chipsets over third-party products. If Nvidia can't sell parts to go with Intel or AMD processors, arguably it has to develop its own CPUs which it can tie its own chipsets to.
[7] "I think the AMD processor lost share in the mainstream PC market." Nvidia said it was
discontinuing chipset development in its nForce product line on Oct. 7, and Huang said that the ongoing legal dispute with Intel made it "now impossible" to build a next-generation chipset supporting Intel's chips.
[10] With Intel and AMD moving toward microprocessors that combine the CPU and graphics on the same piece of silicon, Nvidia could see its chip-set business disappear. Nvidia could also start making its own x86 processors to target both mainstream PCs and low-end mininotebooks, according to one analyst.
[5] We've been hearing rumors of Nvidia's interest in entering the x86 CPU since last year, and now the rumblings are back. With Nvidia not having the license to produce chipsets for the latest generation of Intel chips, the graphics company may have a further reason to make its own. Intel is also moving towards integrating graphics cores onto its CPUs, providing another threat to Nvidia's graphics business. Putting both of those things together, analysts believe that could be enough for Nvidia to get into the x86 game.
[9] Broadpoint AmTech analyst Doug Freedman today revived talk of NVIDIA
making its own x86 processors in a new research note. He claims that the graphics company has been recruiting "extensively" from employees of the one-time chip designer Transmeta and is using these to speed along one or more unknown designs. It may also not need to use Transmeta-like code translation as many of the original x86 architecture patents lose their effectiveness.
[11] The nvidia x86 processor is inevitable. This could eliminate the need for normal Size motherboards, and possibly also make them cheaper, Imagine If they can implement RAM + GPU into the CPU die, The only use for a motherboard would be hosting the cpu, sound card, usb ports and that function, and dont forget SATA ports too, anyways this could reduze the price and size of motherboard by a lot once It's implemented. What a joke this is,,, according to "1" analyst man all I can say is just. why? The thing is that this analyst cant fathom is the possibility of NO CPU. This is what NVIDIA is planning, they want to make low power, low cost solutions for the masses ( kinda like what Apple did with the Iphone and Ipod) but Apple cant touch NVIDIA's R&D in fact not many can. NVIDIA is wanting to emulate an x86 architecture on the GPU so they can produce a system on chip with CUDA cores.
[2] A gpu company with no market except for enthusiasts. Take a look at nvidia's current offerings and their marketing terminology, they are pushing 'parallel processing' 'clusters' and'supercomputers'. This and the release of CUDA, why not get programmers accustomed to coding for your processing platform ? On their site they have a simple image of a traditional cpu with 4 cores next to their tesla (which is basically a processor in the pci bus) with 240 cores. Any layman will think "why am I not using the 240 core one?" They create great chipsets and powerful graphics solutions among many other products, why not go to the next logical step ? With a processor they'll complete the platform and give the company new viability.
[2] The industry is pushing forward to massively parallel computational computing architectures. Take a look at nvidia's current offerings and their marketing terminology, they are pushing 'parallel processing' 'clusters' and'supercomputers'. This and the release of CUDA, why not get programmers accustomed to coding for your processing platform ? On their site they have a simple image of a traditional cpu with 4 cores next to their tesla (which is basically a processor in the pci bus) with 240 cores. Get accustomed? They are catering to them. The thing about the Fermi architecture is that it is not just designed to play games it is also going to take GPGPU to the next level with the advancements NVIDIA has made with support for CUDA, C++, Direct Compute, DirectX 11, Fortran, OpenCL, OpenGL 3.1 and OpenGL 3.2 The big thing here is native support for C++ and OpenCl They create great chipsets and powerful graphics solutions among many other products, why not go to the next logical step ? With a processor they'll complete the platform and give the company new viability.
[2] 
An in-house x86 design may also be necessary for NVIDIA in the future if it hopes to continue developing and promoting integrated graphics. The company is embroiled in
countering lawsuits as part of a dispute over NVIDIA's license to make chipsets for Intel processors and, without a settlement, can't make such hardware for Core i5, Core i7 and most other Intel processors with integrated memory controllers.
[11] Graphics chip vendor Nvidia has halted development of chipsets for next-generation Intel processors that feature the direct media interface (DMI) bus, pending the outcome of current litigation between the two companies.
[12] The news got Nvidia fuming and sent out a press release insisting that Intel was stifling innovation. The graphics chip maker insists that Intel has quashed its abilities to enter the chipset market and that now that it does not have any competitors, Intel is slowing down its innovation. There might be something in this. Nvidia was trying to push its own nForce chipset and found that it was being beaten at every turn by Intel on development.
[13] The chip maker is currently caught up in a legal battle with Intel over the scope of a 2004 chipset licensing agreement. Clearly, this is already limiting its ability to sell chipsets and it's only expected to get worse for Nvidia once Intel and AMD start including graphics functionality onto the CPU die.
[2] In the long term it will be hard for Nvidia to sell chipsets and it can't turn to AMD because that owns ATI. Freedman reasons that if Nvidia can't sell parts to go with Intel or AMD processors it will have to sell its own chips.
[6] For a number of years, many speculated that Nvidia wanted to get into the x86 processors business by buying Via Technologies, the only other company that makes x86 CPUs. However, Freedman wrote in a Nov. 3 research note that Nvidia has recently hired engineers from Transmeta?a company that once challenged both Intel and AMD but recently sold off all of its intellectual property. "We believe internally developed x86 solutions are more likely than external acquisitions (i.e. VIA Technologies)," Freedman wrote in his research note.
[5] Nvidia (Santa Clara, Calif.) has been quietly hiring former employees of Transmeta, a now-defunct, x86-based processor supplier. ''We believe internally developed x86 solutions are more likely than external acquisitions (i.e. Via Technologies),'' he said in a new report, referring to rumors that Nvidia would acquire Taiwan's Via. ''We believe that Nvidia has hired former Transmeta staff extensively, and that instruction code "morphing" requirements have declined as more x86 instructions have come off of patent coverage,'' he said. Nvidia is also set to report its results. ''For October, we expect revenue and GAAP EPS (for Nvidia) to beat our estimates of $846.4 million and $0.06, in-line with the Street at $835.2 million and $0.06,'' he said in the report. ''We believe revenue growth expectations may be as high as up 14 percent quarter-over-quarter, or close to $885 million given the strong sales reports from both Intel and AMD.''
[12] In the case of a processor, "rapid innovation" can be extremely costly. especially if you venture into the corporate market. Given nVidia's problems getting "GT300" to market, going after the CPU market would be a bad move at this point. NVidia tends to attack their competition any time they feel threatened, so they've given Intel and AMD plenty of reason to fight any attempt they make at developing an x86 or x86-64 processor. and we all know a 32bit, x86 processor won't be competitive in the current market even if Intel loses the patent on x86.
[9] It's the NVIDIA rumor that won't die: no, not the one where the GPU maker buys tiny VIA, but the other one, where it jumps feet-first into competition with both Intel and AMD by producing an x86 processor of its own.
[1] Right now, Nvidia is the odd man out. Intel and AMD control their own platforms - CPU, GPU, and chipsets. @JieMan massively parallel computational computing architectures won't become the standard anytime soon 9at least for another decade) and until then nvidia needs all the experience they can get from making a few CPU's even if they're not successful.
[2] In other news, Intel has confirmed that AMD will not have a competitive CPU any time soon and AMD has confirmed that NVIDIA will not have DX11 GPU's on the market in the next few months.
[14] Rumors have resurfaced about Nvidia (NVDA) taking on Intel (INTC) and Advanced Micro Devices (AMD) in the x86-based microprocessor market, according to EETimes. The trade magazine's Web site says that that have been reports "for some time" that NVDA might move into the microprocessor sector to protect its core graphics chip business, which is now coming under threat from Intel and AMD, which are developing processors with more graphics capability.
[8] I have a hard time seeing Nvidia as a real competitor to Intel or AMD in the x86 space. Maybe they can focus on lower power, low end CPU/GPU combos for things like netbooks, but moving further up the line seems like a huge investment in time and effort ($$$). Maybe they have no other choice.
[2] Don't you understand that Intel has become too powerful? USB 3.0 seemed ready to go by early 2010, and it is being delayed and for no good reason. Almost every computer that ships uses chipsets made by Intel, so it's either Intel's way or the highway. I wish AMD and Nvidia would sue their asses. They killed off chipset development because there isn't much to be changed anymore.
[3] On the surface it would seem to show that there would be no reason to delay the release of USB 3.0 in a chipset. The other is that NVIDIA is currently in a legal battle with Intel over their manufacture of chipset for Nehalem, Lynnfield and future CPUs that do not use FSB. It would seem given these items to be little more than NVIDIA thumping their chests and saying they are better than Intel and that Intel is bad and stifling competition and innovation. Bu, is that what it really going on? As we have written many companies are finding ways to put USB 3.0 and SATA 3.0 on their boards.
[15] "With no competition in chipsets, it seems Intel has decided that innovation is not needed for USB any time soon. With no one to push Intel to innovate, PC enthusiasts are left with Intel chipsets and the features and performance they deliver, or lack there of," said Burke. The two companies have been at odds over a
licensing disagreement earlier this year that forced Nvidia out of the chipset market for Intel's latest CPU platform.
[14] The ongoing fued between Intel and Nvidia has now moved to the USB 3.0 support arena where Nvidia is calling out Intel for deciding that "innovation is not needed for USB any time soon". Nvidia has claimed that its nForce chipsets are "better" than Intel's.
[16] Bad news: Nvidia has confirmed Intel's stance on
USB 3.0 --no Intel chipsets will support the new standard until 2011.
[17] Intel and Nvidia might not be the best of chums at the moment, but it seems that the USB3'' standard is turning into a handbags at dawn fight between them. Last week Intel wrote that it was slowing down development on work integrating USB 3.0 technology into its mainboards.
[13] If AMD didn't scare Intel with the Athlon 64 a few years back, I doubt that we would have seen the same pace of CPU development that we've had since. Hopefully AMD will get USB 3.0 into their chipsets a lot sooner.
[14] There should be no noticeable delay in the uptake of USB in the market. Solutions from Asus and GIGABYTE will hit the market in the next month or so and like the implementation of USB 2.0 (and 1.0a before that) will be the entry for this new specification. It is also important to note that AMD does not have a USB 3.0/ SATA 3.0 chipset implementation yet either. I have been told this is because Intel is blocking it but, I am not so sure I buy into that.
[15] Not very ingenuous move by Intel, but thanks to Nec & Marvell's controllers there is some kind of support on new motherboards like ASUS P7P55D Premium or Gigabyte GA-P55A-UD4. I'm unsure how the laptop makers will respond, but USB 2.0 standard is almost 9 years old, and it's time for a new, faster one.
[14] Rofl, gotta love that nVidia comment. As was said, Intel can try and push their own tech all they want, but USB is an industry standard, it will take off as soon as they start support, regardless of what they achieve in the mean time.
[14] Nvidia, extreme veteran of the video game 3D hardware arena, accused former partner Intel of stifling innovation. Not quite as biting as an accusation of unfair business practices, Nvidia claims that as Intel has quashed its abilities to enter the chipset market, Intel is now going to sit on its hands. They claim that, with the absence of any major competitors, Intel is slowing down its innovation. Looking at the timeline of competition and developments by Intel while challenged by Nvidia, you can see their point. Intel made major advances keeping up with nVidia who was trying to push its own nForce chipset. The fierce competition and market turn has led nVidia to return to its mainstay and effectively exit the motherboard chipset race.
[18] An analyst used that development to argue that
Nvidia may enter the X86 microprocessor market in the near future. When asked for comment, Intel spokesman Chuck Mulloy acknowledged that he had seen the site, and asked why Nvidia did not place the site inside its own domain, or "a place where it clearly states that they are behind it." For his part, Sherbin said that the site is quite clearly linked to on the
Nvidia blog.
[19] Bob Sherbin, NVIDIA'''s head of corporate communication has even confirmed that the site will take aim at other targets in the near future. I'''d hate to burst their bubble but a site called IntelInsides.com isn'''t suited for taking a poke at Apple for example. The spotlight is on them regarding this issue, and so they are a very obvious target. He is referring of course at Intel'''s alleged use of market development funds and rebates in order to obstruct archenemy AMD. It's not cute, it's not accurate, it is Nvidia being Nvidia.
[20] The IntelsInsides.com site has only poked fun at Intel, although Bob Sherbin, Nvidia's head of corporate communications, said that other targets could be forthcoming. "The site is satirical in nature, and attempts to have a bit of fun with what is quite a serious issue," Sherbin said of the most recent topics, which have involved Intel's
alleged use of market development funds and rebates to illegally obstruct rival AMD. "The spotlight is on them regarding this issue, and so they are a very obvious target."
[19] The Teraflop Flip: Graphics Go Super-Computing There are some major changes for super-computing on the horizon, involving AMD, Intel and Nvidia. The scope of how these changes will occur is still under discussion, as well as development.
[9] A site featuring cartoons designed to mock a competitor, however, may be something new for the technology industry. Nvidia might be said to have an ax to grind, as an ongoing legal battle with Intel has caused
Nvidia to halt its nForce chipset development.
[19] More than 30 per cent of Nvidia's revenue comes from chipsets, so getting out of the chipset business would simply put too much pressure on Nvidia's other products. Freeman is going against others forecasts that Nvidia will quit the chipset business, but the recruitment drive seems to back up his idea. He said that Nvidia could soon enter the x86 CPU business targeting mainstream and low performance areas rather than the Core i7 end of the market.
[6] The Crusoe was more power efficient than just about any other CPU available at the time. It would be this talent and expertise that NVIDIA is probably after. Remember NVIDIA CEO Jen-Hsun Huang has already made it clear they want Tegra to be 50% of NVIDIA's revenue in the coming years. This means they need to continually offer more performance with a lower power envelope to make Tegra more attractive than it already is. Tegra has a small market penetration with a grand total of two devices available for consumers (the U.S. only Zune HD and an EU only MID) at the time of this writing. There are at least four more in the pipe and coming soon with more companies waiting until they see success with the current products before they sign on. Is NV making a bid for an x86 CPU? Well to be honest I highly doubt it, but I do see them adding to their stable of high-quality talent for Tegra if they really are hiring ex-Transmeta staff.
[21] Ah the x86 rumor mill has begun to rumble again. People are talking of NVIDIA making an x86 CPU of their own. This time the rumor centers around the hiring of some of the staff from the now gone Transmeta. Now while this hiring of the brains capable of creating an x86 CPU from the makers of Crusoe might be true, there is one nagging problem.
[21] At the moment, the standings are 15.7 percent (AMD) to 82.5 percent (Intel), with the remaining 1.8 percent divided among the marginal actors VIA and Transmeta. x86 CPUs Market Share Profit Margin Intel 82.5% 51 bis 54% AMD 15.7% loss VIA 1% no information Transmeta 0.8% loss The most important facts about the Athlon 64 and Athlon 64 FX-51 have been known for a long time from the workstation/server version of the Opteron (see article: Duel of the Elephants: AMD Hammer vs. Intel Xeon). The actual chief attraction of the Athlon 64 is that it was able to smooth out the bumps in the conversion from 32 bit to 64 bit software in this mass market of millions.
[9] Intel and AMD are cpu manufacturers looking to meld cpu and gpu because the long rein of the x86 cpu is coming to and end. They know this and it is the reason AMD bought ATI and Intel is developing larrabee.
[2] We keep hearing about x86 CPUs coming from Nvidia, but nothing more of it. Consumers on the whole are losing as long as we are bound to this architecture/instruction set. Once Intel loses it's grip on our computer progress, we can see greater leaps and bounds in computers.
[9] If Nvidia enters the x86 market, the company can target mainstream desktops and notebooks and low-end mininotebooks or netbooks with a combination of CPUs, graphics chips and chip sets.
[5] The company certainly took a new approach to processor design by creating a software-based chip that was specifically developed for combining PC compatibility with performance and low power consumption. It consists of a hardware engine that is logically surrounded by a software layer with the engine being a 128 bit VLIW (very long instruction word) CPU capable of executing up to four operations in each clock cycle. The VLIW's native instruction set bears no resemblance to the x86 instruction set, but the software layer gives x86 programs the impression that they are running on x86 hardware. Transmeta calls this software layer Code Morphing software because it dynamically morphs x86 instructions into VLIW instructions. In the underlying technology the Transmeta's designers have decoupled the x86 instruction set architecture (ISA) from the processor hardware which allows this hardware to be very different from a conventional x86 implementation.
[9] NVIDIA has hinted it would like to use x86 for future system-on-a-chip processors but hasn't set out any definitive schedules or product plans. Its Tegra chip used in the
Zune HD is based on ARM and runs quickly but is incompatible with most variants of Linux and Windows.
[11] Details of the second generation of Nvidia'''s Tegra platform are starting to emerge.
Fudzilla is reporting that the new chip will arrive in 2010 and will use the dual-core ARM 9 processor. This will give it twice the computational and graphics power of the current Tegra chip according to '''high ranking industry sources'''.
[22] MCP89 will not connect to Intel's upcoming "Arrandale" processor, however, Huang said, and Nvidia has no intentions of building a Direct Media Interface (DMI) chipset, the interface used by Intel's latest processors and chipsets. Nvidia also said it is involved with "50 projects" surrounding its Tegra mobile processor, including portable media players, cars, and smartphones.
[10] Nvidia is involved in a spat with Intel over rights to develop chipsets for future Intel processors.
[6] Nvidia has reportedly begun hiring former engineers from Transmeta and is looking to develop its own x86-compatible processor core in a bid to continue its lucrative chipset business.
[2] The idea has cropped up again in an analyst note from Doug Freedman of Broadpoint AmTech, in which Freedman claims that NVIDIA has been hiring former Transmeta engineers to work on a secret x86 processor that will appear sooner rather than later.
[1] ''We believe internally developed x86 solutions are more likely than external acquisitions (i.e. Via Technologies),'' Freedman said. What could make things even more interesting is the analyst's belief that Nvidia has picked up talent from Transmeta: ''We believe that Nvidia has hired former Transmeta staff extensively, and that instruction code "morphing" requirements have declined as more x86 instructions have come off of patent coverage,'' he said.
[9] The now-defunct microprocessor producer specialized in low-power, x86-compatible processors before turning into an intellectual property licensing firm and eventually closing doors in September of 2008. Similar rumors have surfaced and died several times over the last few years along with speculation about an Nvidia acquisition of VIA. However, Doug Freedman of research house AmTech feels an internally developed solution is more likely and a necessity to preserve revenue from its integrated graphics solutions.
[2] The main target is of course the smartphone market, but Nvidia won't tell no to the automotive industry, music player industry and anyone who wants to make a small portable device that can play audio, games and videos well. Jensen wants Tegra to account for more than half of Nvidia's revenue in the next few years, so let's hope for their sake that they can do good job agains Qualcomm, Texas Instruments and other players.
[23] Nvidia CEO, Jen-Hsun Huang, wants Tegra to account for over half of the company'''s revenues in the next few years. Whilst it'''s presence is likely to end up in high-end smartphones, they will also feature in smartbooks too.
[22] Although Nvidia reported higher revenue and profits both sequentially and compared to the same quarter a year ago, chief executive Jen-Hsun Huang expressed frustration that the company couldn't do better.
[10] Nvidia had previously developed a supporting Intel chipset, the MCP89, "which we expect to do quite nicely throughout next year and beyond," Huang said. [10] "Nvidia nForce chipsets have traditionally been full of innovative features, even better than Intel's own chipsets., Nvidia Ion has redefined the netbook category," Nvidia spokesperson Brian Burke explained in an e-mailed statement to TG Daily.
[16] Hardly. nVidia is more active than ever in the industry. They are working on the ion still and that is about the only thing that makes adom cpu's worth using. The GTX 300 series is their first real innovation in their graphics tech since the 8800 gtx. I personally love their MoBo's because they let you customize your computer in ways Intel doesnt. (overclocking my C2Q from 2.83 upto what intel would charge me 1000 dollars for). Right now intel is slowing down progress to make as much money as possible on the tech they will pushing.
[3] In the coming months and years, Intel and Advanced Micro Devices are looking to change the way the world thinks about computing by combining the CPU and graphics on the same piece of silicon.
[5] I'm not a big fan of integrating the CPU and GPU into one because that makes upgrading extremely expensive, plus it would eliminate SLI and CrossFire. It also decreases the longevity of your computer, because with every graphics enhancement, you have to upgrade your CPU as well. Transmetta was great in it's day but its technologies and IP are no longer current and better tech has come in it's place. While i think it's team could make a good CPU with Nvidia funding it and working with them it seems that Nvidia would be at a loss starting from the ground up. It's a shame VIA's processor unit isn't for sale, with nvidia's vision and VIA's tech that would be a competitor i would invest in.
[2] I wonder in how many years will we see the unification of the CPU with the GPU? 10-20? If NVIDIA is going to make a processor then it most likely compete with NANO or Atom. It seems obvious to me that Nvidia is coming to the cpu realm.
[2] As for whether NVIDIA is actually planning an x86 CPU, I have no idea. As I always say when this rumor crops up, the scuttlebutt from journalists who have sources is that NVIDIA is indeed going to bring such a beast to market. I don't have any sourcesjust a bit of senseand I think that anyone who jumps into the x86 market at this point is completely nuts, especially if they decide to roll their own instead of buying VIA.
[1] I also think that emulating x86 on the GPU isn't too far fetched. On one hand, all x86 CPU's translate x86 instructions to their own internal opcodes.
[2] "We believe Nvidia could (sooner rather than later) enter the x86 CPU business," said Freedman.
[7] Imagine a netbook with that kind of power. I'm sure it won't do amazing things to start as there isn't much of a push in OpenCl right now ( but its coming ) NVIDIA's future depends on the movement that more and more apps are moving to parallel processing and with NVIDIA puting more and more CUDA cores on every new generation it wont be long before they will have all the computational power your PC will need. Regenweald said: It seems obvious to me that Nvidia is coming to the cpu realm.
[2] There are some already famous rivalries between companies that inevitably lead to duels in court. We have AT&T vs Verizon, Apple vs Psystar and NVIDIA vs Intel. While the first lawsuits have recently been covered in the news, the NVIDIA vs Intel quarrel is not that fresh in our minds! But we did see the two giants fight each other for a while, so why stop now? Bring on the popcorn as this conflict is about to go to the next level. Although we haven'''t seen yet anything like this ladies and gentlemen! Or at least that'''s our first impression.
[20] Not the first time nVidia has been spreading complete BS about Intel lately.
[3] In the note seen by the EE Times, Freedman emphasizes that NVIDIA not will take on Intel's Core i5/i7 lineup.
[1] At least Nvidia would be the one to give us USB 3.0. Intel and their overinflated pricing needs some competition shoved up their ass right about now.
[9] I think Intel may be more focused on Light Peak or they're waiting until they get a more mature implementation of USB 3.0. Hope they do turn around and say they will do this before 2011. This is fairly typical Intel marketing. Do what you can to eliminate or reduce your competition, then decide for the consumers what hardware they will get, don't give them a choice. It's a smart plan that has worked in the past, but today's consumers are a bit more savvy, and a lot less apt to put up with being bullied into something like LightPeak. Sure, it's a great technology, but USB 3.0 is an industry standardized interface that is going to be widely adopted.
[14] I'm willing to bet that a big rash of USB 3.0 products will hit the market hard, suddenly Intel's board sales will droop as better (and cheaper) alternatives that natively support the 3.0 standard are sought after, and then Intel will be scrambling to support 3.0. It will all depend on how fast the USB 3.0 devices hit the marketplace, and how good they are.
[14] The absence of an Intel chipset doesn't preclude the use of USB 3.0 altogether during the interval, as controllers from NEC and other companies are reaching the market on production mainboards. It's likely to reduce adoption and may skew support towards
Light Peak, which could be in production devices later in 2010 and is theoretically twice as fast.
[4] I really wish Intel had some motivation to progress though. If they are working on something new it's going to be difficult to compete with usb 3.0, due to availability of usb 3.0 devices by the time they support it.
[14] With virtualization technology, backwards compatibility issues with non-x86 architectures could be overcome if nVidia pushed a new architecture design. There's room for improvement in the GPU sector around improved graphics and multimedia support in portable devices, such as smartphones and Netbooks.
[8] A new analyst note has revived a rumor that's a perennial hardware site favorite: the fabled NVIDIA x86 skunkworks project.
[1] Just to clear something up, "x64" that was know it as is really an abbreviation. It's full designation is "x86-64" since it just extends Intel's "x86" IP. Thus one could make the case that when people refer to nVidia making a "x86" processor, they are referring to x86 and its extensions thus including x86-64 or x64. Personally, if they are making a processor, given nVidia's tendency to go big or go home, I would be surprised if it's not x86-64 compliant.
[9] The nvidia x86 processor is inevitable. They are doing the logical step and the only thing inevitable about the x86 architecture is that it will end. I feel Nvidia should just stay making video cards, I feel they are of great quality but making processors? I think its not there business and they shouldn't go down that road.
[2] In part, that was due to Nvidia's chipset business for AMD processors slipped 27 percent, as AMD itself lost share, according to Nvidia.
[10] This sounds to me like it would be a huge mistake. I've heard the complete opposite infact, that they only plan on making more chips for smartphones and keep the rest of the business doing what it does best beat Intel and AMD at making discreet accelerated graphics.
[8] For some time, there have been reports that Nvidia would enter the x86-based fray to protect its bread-and-butter graphics chip business.
[12] If there was an underlying theme of the call, however, it was lost opportunities. Huang said Nvidia underestimated demand for its graphics chips, and as a result was supply-constrained for the entire quarter.
[10] "Nvidia will likely target mainstream and below performance," and not more powerful chips. Freedman maintains his Neutral rating on the stock, but cuts his price target to $14, from $17.
[8] GPU sales increased sequentially by 25 percent to $465 million, according to Nvidia; desktop sales were up by 19 percent, while the mobile business climbed by 41 percent. Nvidia's professional business, based on its Tesla series of GPUs, climbed by 11 percent to $129.6 million, while its Tegra-driven consumer business increased by 22 percent to $61.2 million.
[10] Something else to consider: nVidia has a big chunk of business in powerful workstations, and parallel processing is becoming exponentially more sought after. Could be that this looking at CPU development might be tied to creating a much more powerful workstation processing product, which is the area that nVidia makes much larger profit margins anyhow.
[2] As the owner of a very expensive paperweight, formerly known as an HP laptop computer with Nvidia GPU and chipset, I can only hope that the Nvidia name will be prominently featured on any computers using their CPU.
[8] As a system builder (for personal use) I really don't look forward to having to choose my cpu, gpu and chipset from a single manufacturer, I think this may actually be bad for competition in the long run.
[9] I am actually excited, i think the CPU business really needs another company to really improve pricing and competition. This is where rapid innovation will make its way over to us consumers.
[9] I think a Nvidia CPU would require a double check on your house insurance for fire damage. Not trying to be a rain cloud but they need to worry about getting the 300 series out and leave CPU's to the experts.
[9] Nvidia will need a pretty impressive CPU solution for people to want to switch from the normal.
[9] For a while, there was speculation that Nvidia would acquire or invest heavily into VIA Technologies for the company's CPU properties, but now Broadpoint AmTech believes it'll be an in-house job.
[9] Then buying some archaic company that failed the first time. This can turn out to be quite the challenge, but i stink nVidia will fail to use the right price, they will overprice it, no one will want to buy it, end of story.
[2] The notion that NVIDIA might produce a non-x86 processor but use binary translation to sell it as an x86 competitor appears completely ridiculous. Now, this doesn't mean it won't happenit just means that if it does, it'll fail miserably and we'll all have a laugh.
[1] Before unpacking the rumor, let's lay out the full rationale for the "NVIDIA goes x86, competes with Intel head-on" idea.
[1] As far as i know only 4-5 companies have it. nvidia is not one and you can be sure that intel lawyers won't let it see the light of day. That relationship is so bad they won't even let them make chipsets anymore.
[8] There are plenty of free PCIe lanes on boards to add integrated controllers or add in cards. Just because Intel won't put it into their chipsets for another year does not mean its the end of the world or they are purposely trying to kill the standard off.
[3] Just because the chipsets won't support it natively doesn't mean it won't be on Intel branded boards or boards from other manufacturers.
[3] A driver install is the simplest thing you can do and Engadget is correct in whining about this because its an artificial delay and Intel is the dominant chipset manufacturer in the PC space.
[3] Intel sells boards with 1394a and its not built into the chipset, what makes you think USB3.0 will be any different.
[3] Yes. eSATA is fast at home. but not exactly portable because of the power brick. and not everyone has eSATA yet. That lightpeak is all intel copyrighted? Needs an intel transceiver? Gives intel/sony the monopoly? And it seems others can at least make USB3 chips, so yeah if it's like that, nice try but the chinese run things now and will sell us USB3 and apple will be the only one pushing lightpeak since only their core fans can afford it if it's licensed the monopoly way.
[3] I'd be happy having to buy a USB 3.0 card for my computer. and for manufacturers to start making USB 3.0 flash drives and external hard drive enclosures now. That way, I can still get the benefit of USB 3.0. even if Intel is dragging their feet on the matter.
[3] After all if the information I have is accurate we should see USB 3.0 from AMD slightly before Intel. If Intel was blocking it then it would be the reverse.
[15] Short of Intel stating something different, USB 3.0 probably won't hit mass consumption until then. We've already seen an Intel motherboard hit the market
with USB 3.0, but it's technically manufactured by Asus, and it's running a third-party USB (3.0) controller.
[17] Intel trying to push lightpeak? If it comes out in early 2010 and is truly better then USB 3.0 then I won't be that upset.
[3] Somehow the line 'We learned that Intel is postponing USB 3 introduction until 2011' has become a confirmation of a delay of USB 3.0 by Intel. We contacted Intel to ask them and were told they have not announced any delay and that the delay talked about on TGDaily was a rumor.
[15] There's more drama today around Intel's recent
USB 3.0 announcement. Intel last week announced it is postponing work integrated
USB 3.0 technology into its mainboards.
[18] USB technology is the de facto connectivity standard for PC peripherals & consumer electronics; it has evolved from USB 1.1 to
USB 2.0,
Wireless USB and
USB 3.0. Everything USB takes an in-depth look at these products and other offbeat USB gadgets, and brings you information and reviews needed for you to make a purchase decision.
[18] Intel was one of the authors behind the XHCI specification and need USB 3.0 for LightPeak.
[15] Intel will do whatever the market says. if USB 3.0 becomes popular enough, Intel will push it on the front burner.
[3] The accumulated filth of Intels anti competitiveness and monopoly power will foam up about their waists and all the techies and USB 3.0 enthusiasts will look up and shout "Save us!".
[3] If intel doesn't support usb 3.0 then trust me, very few people will be using it.
[3] Lightpeak would not get attention with usb 3.0 out. If intel is looking to push lightpeak this was an ingenious move.
[3] Wow. let me try the first sentence again. The instruction set that is known now as "x64" is really an abbreviation; it's full designation is "x86-64" as it is a superset of Intel's "x86" IP. In other words, "x86-64" is really an extension of the "x86" instruction set.
[9] Each new CPU design only requires modifying the Code Morphing software to translate x86 instructions to the CPU's native instruction set.
[9] I wouldn't see much competition brought, because they are only limiting their options to 32 bit, the only way I can see this being affective is if they exceed or match the performance of Amd/Intel and be really really cheap, because why buy an x86 cpu when I can buy one that does x86 and x64.
[9] For x86 CPUs, the market leader stole an important share of the market from the former upstart AMD, especially in the past two quarters.
[9] There is still the issue of getting a x86 license from Intel and a "x86-64" license from AMD.
[9] Wouldn't they still need an x86 license from Intel? Once again, Intel has the upper hand here.
[9] The last thing Intel would want to do, is to be left out of the dominant market position of a popular standard. So. suddenly NVIDIA, one of Intel's competitors, is a spokesperson for them? This confirms nothing.
[3] Because the software side of the GPU is already headed towards a heavy reliance on binary translation techniques, it makes sense that NVIDIA is scooping up Transmeta guys regardless of any plans to produce a CPU. So, again, the Transmeta hires don't necessarily augur much of anything.
[1] People seem to be jumping to a conclusion that nVidia is acquiring Transmeta. They'd be getting people who worked for Transmeta, who know the x86 architecture and power savings methods, not the now defunct company. They wouldn't have the slow outdated clunky transmeta stuff, knowing nVidia it would be shiny and fast.
[2] While the information about NVIDIA hiring Transmeta staff is very interesting we do not feel it is x86 related. More likely this staff would go into the Tegra SoC section.
[21] A
source today claims the sequel to NVIDIA's Tegra mobile processor could muster double the performance of the original.
[24] Aerows on Acer unhappy with Intel CULV processor performance said: The problem isn't the CULV CPU. The problem.
[22] Advanced Micro Devices Inc. and Intel Corp. are separately developing processors with graphics capabilities.
[12] Combined with improvements to the graphics core, the updated Tegra would be roughly twice as fast overall. Its release window is only described by Fudzilla as sometime in 2010 but is unlikely to reach shipping products early in the year.
[24] Tegra one is slowly becoming popular and interesting, especially since it drives Zune HD, and it is doing it much faster than we expected, so it is just natural that there will be a new Tegra chip following up. The chip that we chose to call Tegra 2 should come in 2010 and it will basically have twice the computational and graphics power of its predecessor. This is something that has been confirmed by high ranking industry sources.
[23] All of the single-panel cartoons have been drawn by
Steven Lait, a freelance editorial cartoonist whose work has appeared in the Bay Area News Group. Sherbin said that topics for the strips are "discussed" over email, and that the collaboration goes both ways. The most recent parody shows Intel chief executive Paul Otellini claiming that "I did not have bribery, coercion, and kickback relations with the computer industry," a reference to President Clinton's denial that he did "not have relations with" Monica Lewinsky.
[19] First of all, I cringe every time I see the word "analyst" in a news title. Another person's opinion. We have lots of those. (That's why I stopped reading TG Daily.
[2] Does the GA-M790-DQ6, which will be the new top model in the Socket AM2 product line for Athlon X2 and Phenom X2/X4 processors. MSI: Back To Its Roots MSI's Circu-Pipe design offers a larger surface and works well according to our first test results. It looks funny, though.
[9] Revenue will be up by about 2 percent for the fourth calendar quarter, with the supply constraints, especially in 40-nm products, expected to continue. Huang flatly denied his company would raise prices, however. "There is no such thing as raising prices when demand is high," he said. "That's just bad mojo, man.
[10] Nvidia reported net income of $107.6 million on $903.2 million in revenue, versus $61.7 million in net income and $897.7 million in revenue for the third quarter of calendar 2008.
[10] "Nvidia will likely target mainstream and below performance, and not leading Core i7 like levels."
[7] I don't think Nvidia plans to fight Core I7's and Phenom 2 right off the bat. However they could debut with an Atom rival, coupling with an Ion "2" platform.
[9] Once performance is acceptable/phenomenal it is obvious that OEM will look to the simpler hardware solution for mainstream and multimedia pc's Whenever that happens and it IS going to happen Nvidia will be left in no-man's-land.
[2] If you're already using JIT by default to map code to hardware at runtime, then you can just target non-x86 cores as well, should any be present. This is how Snow Leopard is able to take advantage of GPU hardware alongside multicore x86 for general-purpose computing tasks.
[1] I'm not a big fan of integrating the CPU and GPU into one because that makes upgrading extremely expensive, plus it would eliminate SLI and CrossFire. It also decreases the longevity of your computer, because with every graphics enhancement, you have to upgrade your CPU as well.
[2] I hope they do make a GOOD cpu that is at least on par with AMD on fpu on a per clock bases with good I/O then they would be great for business and gaming use.
[9] You'll get a chip with, let's say, 4 in-order 1.5GHz cores and 4 DX11 pipelines (also capable of CPU use when not running graphics).
[2] DX11 cards already have integer math, shifts, bit field extraction, all useful things for general purpose use. While the current architecture bundles too many operations together to fit the CPU paradigm well, it's probably not too much of a departure to put 4 or 8 such pipelines separately on the chip.
[2] Tegra 2 will use ARM 9, a dual core ARM CPU, something that will push the CPU part even further.
[23] Ten years or so ago, when asked at a trade show when they were finally going to put Firewire on their motherboards, an Intel rep feigned ignorance and said, "Firewire? Isn't that some Apple thing?" with a smirk. Uh, no, dumb-ass, it's what every current video camera on the planet used at the time to get its recordings to the computer.
[3] USB 3.0 will be an high end part for an year or more and usb 3.0 devices will most likely be expensive until the market gets saturated.
[14] "I don't think we lost any share in the AMD chipset market," Huang told analysts. [10] Saying they have to make x86 chips is like telling NetApp that they have to start making servers to go along with their storage.
[9] Even though the chip is able to run any x86 code it does not support SIMD - yet.
[9] SOURCES1.
Are new rumors of an NVIDIA x86 CPU plausible? - Ars Technica2.
Nvidia x86 processor rumors surface once again - TechSpot News3.
NVIDIA confirms Intel chipsets won't support USB 3.0 until 20114.
NVIDIA: Intel delaying USB 3.0 chips until 2011 | Electronista5.
Nvidia Eyeing x86 Processor Market, Says Analyst6.
Nvidia may be moving into X86 market7.
Nvidia taps Transmeta team for x86 chip, claims analyst ''' Register Hardware8.
Will Nvidia Take On Intel In x86 Processors? - Tech Trader Daily - Barrons.com9.
Nvidia Making x86 CPU With Ex-Transmeta Brains? - Tom's Hardware10.
Nvidia Frustrated by Underestimated Demand - Reviews by PC Magazine11.
Rumors reappear of NVIDIA making x86 chips | Electronista12.
EETimes.com - Is Nvidia devising x86 processor?13.
USB 3 turns into handbag fight between Intel and Nvidia14.
Nvidia confirms Intel won't back USB 3.0 until 2011 - TechSpot News15.
NVIDIA "confirms" USB 3.0 Delay to chipsets :: TweakTown16.
Intel chipsets won't support USB 3.0 until 2011 - Legit Reviews17.
Nvidia Confirms Intel's Senseless USB 3.0 Delay Until 2011 - usb 3.0 - Gizmodo18.
Namecalling Begins Around Intel's USB 3.0 Slowdown, Slapfight Imminent19.
Nvidia Fires Back at Intel With Cartoons - Lab Notes by ExtremeTech20.
NVIDIA Brings New Weapons in the War Against Intel [NVIDIA Uses Cartoons to Enrage Intel; Will It Work?] » TFTS Technology, Gadgets & Curiosities21.
Is NVIDIA looking to make an x86 CPU? :: TweakTown22.
Nvidia Tegra 2 details emerge | Netbook Choice23.
Fudzilla - Nvidia impresses people with Tegra 224.
NVIDIA Tegra 2 twice as fast as the original? | ElectronistaGENERATE A MULTI-SOURCE SUMMARY ON ANY SUBJECTEnter your search query below. WAIT 10-20 sec for the new window to open.
Get more info on
NVIDIA Uses Cartoons to Harass Intel by using the
iResearch Reporter tool from
Power Text Solutions.
