|
 |  ChannelWeb -
Nov-06-2009Nvidia Lampoons Intel With Cartoon Site(topic overview)
CONTENTS:
SOURCES
FIND OUT MORE ON THIS SUBJECT
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. [1]
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.[2] First 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.[3] 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.[4] 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.[5]
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.[6] 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.[6] 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.[7] 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.[8] 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.[9] 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".[10] 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.[11]
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.[6] 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.[4]
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.[7] 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.[6] 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.[3]
"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.[7] Puiu said: 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. Not in 10-20 years, it is just a matter of time, the pace at which we are advancing is greater then ever and now is the perfect time to merge the two into one die, as both Intel and AMD have successfully made multiple cores, now all that is to be left is to put a couple of those cores on graphics or just take a chip from Nvidia and try to fix that on a CPU. We need mobility, we need small form factor, we need efficiency and we need processing and display/graphic power, and this need of the consumer market will eventually drive the giants to fulfill it in time. GPU/CPU integration is upon us and I can't imagine it will be long before this is a reality.[4] 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.[4]
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.[4] 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.[4]
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. [10] 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.[10] "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.[12]
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.[9] 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.[4]
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.[4]
"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.[13] "Intel's Insides," which is linked to Nvidia's corporate blog , features five cartoons in all from longtime editorial cartoonist Steven Lait. According to Lait's Web site, the cartoons are original works commissioned by Nvidia for the purposes of a "blog covering issues in the semiconductor industry with a focus on competition." The cartoon site adds a new level of vitriol to the squabble between Nvidia and Intel. Earlier this year, Intel sued Nvidia over allegations that Nvidia breached a contract by marketing its chipsets for Intel Nehalem-class processors. Nvidia countersued Intel over a patent-licensing dispute and is trying to end Intel's agreement to license Nvidia's patent portfolio.[14] The cartoons - which almost exclusively poke fun at Intel's president and chief executive officer Paul Otellini, point-blank accusing him of being complicit in the anti-competitive practices that the company is being sued for by the New York Attorney General - are done in the time-honoured political satire style by cartoonist Steven Lait. Images include a Godfather-style figure with a name plaque reading Otellini stating that " we'll make them a microprocessor offer they can't refuse, " and a Moses figure delivering the " Law of Moore " from atop a mountain marked " IDF " to an empty wilderness. Nvidia's corporate communications head, Bob Sherbin, claims that the site " attempts to have a bit of fun with what is quite a serious issue, " and claims that while current cartoons concentrate on Intel and their alleged actions to block rival AMD from competing fairly as " the spotlight is on regarding this issue, and so they are a very obvious target," other companies may find themselves immortalised in cartoon form in the future. Is this a case of Nvidia being childish, or are the cartoons a funny way of keeping abreast of the industry's twists and turns? Share your thoughts over in the forums.[15] Nvidia is taking aim at chip giant Intel in a new battleground - satirical cartoons. As reported over on ExtremeTech, the graphics specialist - who many believe is due to step on Intel's toes in the very near future with an x86 chip design of its own - has launched a new site called Intel's Insides which the company claims " is intended to be a parody of events occurring within the semiconductor sector, with particular focus on its largest, and most-commented-upon competitor[15]
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.[8] 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.[16]
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.[11] 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.[7] 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.''[16]
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.[4]
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.[13] I guess they are thinking the more attention off them the better. Though I am guessing when it's nVidia's turn this is going to look pretty funny in retrospect. It's funny how they are poking fun at Intel and AMD was mentioned as the next likely candidate - NVidia would be out of business without someone making CPUs to work with their GPUs.[17]
While the companies still do business together -- Intel licensed Nvidia's technology for linking multiple graphics processors -- the bitter legal battles are still raging, and so is the war of words. Intel seems bent on hammering the smaller Nvidia into submission, warning the company away from its turf in the CPU market.[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] Pretty much sums up nvidia nowadays. Throwing smack talk and cheap shots about, calling everyone out while they continue to offer NOTHING new to consumers and cause other companies grief (stopping MSI from launching their Lucid based boards anyone?). Their chipset busniess is all but dead (barring Ion) with their only "new" product being a renamed AMD chipset, they still haven't mentioned the words "fermi" and "gaming" in the same sentence, they have been accused of shady pracrices with developers to limit physX and other feautures for ATI users, they still think SLI is the 2nd coming ad want to charge silly money for the privilige and they won't be giving ATI any competition in DX11 hardware till Q1 next year at the earliest. How they made a $100m profit in the last quarter is beyond me.[15] 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.[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.[9] ''We believe Nvidia could enter the x86 CPU business,'' said analyst Doug Freedman of Broadpoint AmTech. ''Nvidia could become a supplier of x86 CPUs by necessity to preserve both GPU and chipset revenue.''[16] 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.[3] ''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.[6]
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.[20] 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.[21] As per recent speculations, Intel was believed to have pushed USB 3.0 supporting chipsets way beyond 2010. Nvidia won't be producing any chipsetse for Intel platform until the legal squabble between them is solved. At the moment, motherboard makers like Asus and Gigabyte are adding discrete USB 3.0 controllers for to their new Intel platform-based motherboards.[22] 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.[5]
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.[23] Bad news: Nvidia has confirmed Intel's stance on USB 3.0 --no Intel chipsets will support the new standard until 2011.[24]
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.[13] 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.[13]
While Intel takes it own time to chart out plans for USB 3.0 supporting chipsets, AMD should grab opportunity and roll out USB 3.0 supporting motherboards.[22] 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.[13]
While Intel is being rumored for delaying USB 3.0 chipset supporting chipsets, Nvidia has confirmed it and dropped a bomb.[22] 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.[6] 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.[13]
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.[21]
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.[20] Nvidia has stepped up the bitter rivalrywith a new Web site dedicated to mocking the world's largest chip maker with cartoons that feature not-so-subtle accusations of illegal activity. The Web site, dubbed "Intel's Insides," was apparently launched in September by Nvidia and features a series of black-and-white cartoons that poke fun at Intel. But it's highly unlikely Intel will find the jokes funny. Two of the five cartoons portray Intel CEO Paul Otellini as being complicit in the recent bribery and coercion charges brought against Intel by New York State Attorney General Andrew Cuomo this week in a federal antitrust lawsuit . Another more recent cartoon, dated Nov. 4, shows Otellini at a podium waving his finger and issuing staunch denials against the bribery and coercion charges in a manner reminiscent of former President Bill Clinton's denials about having sex with intern Monica Lewinsky.[14] Intel's Insides - Nvidia's new satirical site - features cartoons poking fun at chip giant Intel, including this Clinton-themed image.[15]
Originally about Intel's ability to produce processors on new manufacturing processes with great regularity, the cartoon reveals Otellini to be sitting on several sticks of dynamite labeled Larrabee. The Nvidia logo may have been placed on the site by the site's author, possibly a third-party making fun of both Intel AND Nvidia.[25]
Nvidia, on the other hand, is hell-bent on taking Intel down a peg or two and rarely passes up an opportunity to fire an attack against the big bad chip maker. With Intel and Nvidia already engaged in a legal battle, the cartoon site could lead to even more litigation between these two Silicon Valley giants.[14] Nvidia had responded to Intel's challenge of coming out with multi-core Larrabee chip sportingly. Intel spokesperson, Chuck Mulloy, acknowledged checking the site and asked why Nvidia did not host it on its domain.[26]
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.[27] Although the site's five cartoons currently focus on Intel, we wouldn't be surprise to see other companies soon featured in NVIDIA's firing line.[17] A small Nvidia logo also appears near the cartoon, along with the disclaimer that the Web site is not provided, sponsored, or endorsed by Intel.[20]
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.[27] 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."[20]
The site, dubbed 'Intel's Insides', hosts just a handful of images, mocking Intel's Larrabee, antitrust practices, chipset feud with Nvidia and CEO Paul Otellini.[28] With a dispute over the production of Intel chipsets ongoing, NVIDIA has opted to poke fun at the world's largest semiconductor manufacturer by launching a site dubbed Intel's Insides. Described by NVIDIA as "a parody of events occurring within the semiconductor sector, with particular focus on its largest, and most-commented-upon competitor," the site shows caricatures of Intel CEO Paul Otellini making Godfather-like offers that have recently come under the scrutiny of the law.[17]
Nvidia's squabble with Intel over production of nForce chipsets for Intel's Nehalem processors has heated up.[26] Nvidia is involved in a spat with Intel over rights to develop chipsets for future Intel processors.[9] 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.[12] Intel filed a suit against Nvidia for pushing Nvidia chipsets for Nehalem processors.[26]
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.[11] 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.[1] 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.[13] 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]
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. [6] 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.[7]
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.[6] 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.[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.[4] 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.[11]
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.[4] 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.[4] In the note seen by the EE Times, Freedman emphasizes that NVIDIA not will take on Intel's Core i5/i7 lineup.[3]
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.[6] 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.[4]
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.[19] 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.[3] 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.[4]
"We believe Nvidia could (sooner rather than later) enter the x86 CPU business," said Freedman.[10]
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.[8] 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.[3]
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.[6] 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.[4] 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.[4] In part, that was due to Nvidia's chipset business for AMD processors slipped 27 percent, as AMD itself lost share, according to Nvidia.[12]
"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.[23] Nvidia had previously developed a supporting Intel chipset, the MCP89, "which we expect to do quite nicely throughout next year and beyond," Huang said.[12] Burke boasted that Nvidia's nForce chipsets are "better" than Intel's chipsets.[22]
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.[2] Burke stated, "With no competition in chipsets, it seems Intel has decided that innovation is not needed for USB any time soon."[22] 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.[13] Brian Burke, an Nvidia spokesperson, in an email interaction with TGDaily, stated that Intel is postponing USB 3.0 introduction plans to 2011.[22] 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.[24] 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.[5]
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.[5] The specifications of the Light Peak technology aren't clear and Intel is getting it standardized through USB Implementers Forum. It's unsure whether the fiber optic cable would require a computer to work just like USB does.[22] A single optic fiber cable would serve as universal connector for the computer and other gadgets. Intel is looking forward to standardize this fiber optic technology that will replace several connectors like USB, HDMI, DVI, FireWire, DisplayPort, et al.[22]
Intel might be holding USB 3.0 to monopolize on Light Peak technology that was showed at the Intel Developer Forum 2009.[22] 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]
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.[2] 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.[2] Intel was one of the authors behind the XHCI specification and need USB 3.0 for LightPeak.[2] Intel will do whatever the market says. if USB 3.0 becomes popular enough, Intel will push it on the front burner.[5] 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!".[5] If intel doesn't support usb 3.0 then trust me, very few people will be using it.[5] Lightpeak would not get attention with usb 3.0 out. If intel is looking to push lightpeak this was an ingenious move.[5]
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. [6] Graphics firm Nvidia appears to have decided to develop a sense of humor and mock the mighty Intel with a web site it appears to sponsor called intelsinsides.[29] A new site Intel's Insides has been maintained since late September by Nvidia mocking the activities of semiconductor industry mainly pointing at Intel. Intel's Insides is intended to be a parody of events occurring within the semiconductor sector, with particular focus on its largest, and most-commented-upon competitor. The feud between these to silicon giants has just gone ugly with this.[26] A new analyst note has revived a rumor that's a perennial hardware site favorite: the fabled NVIDIA x86 skunkworks project.[3]
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.[4] 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.[6] 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.[6] 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.[6]
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.[6]
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.[7] 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.[11] For some time, there have been reports that Nvidia would enter the x86-based fray to protect its bread-and-butter graphics chip business.[16] 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.[12]
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.[11] In return, Nvidia filed a counter suit alleging that Intel lost license to access Nvidia's GPU patent portfolio.[26] Before unpacking the rumor, let's lay out the full rationale for the "NVIDIA goes x86, competes with Intel head-on" idea.[3] Don'''t expect NVIDIA vs Intel short funny clips now! NVIDIA decided to take an original approach and hired a cartoonist to reproduce various cartoons meant to take clear hits at Intel.[27] Nvidia should have either just stayed schtum and let Intel get clobbered, or welcomed "a diligent and impartial enquiry which can only help the consumer". Cartoons that aren't even funny just make them look silly. Sure intel and microsoft may not be the most moral companies but at least they dont have to belittle other companies to attempt to "get ahead".[17]
Along side the on going lawsuit, Nvidia has come up with a site called Intel's Inside that displays comic content alleging Intel for illegal activity.[26] Someone at Nvidia though it would be a good idea to launch comic site and make fun of Intel. Honestly, we don't find the comics too funny, but at least it's news. (Barely. sub.ed.)[28] The site has an Nvidia logo on the bottom of each page, but a search on whois.org doesn't reveal who the registrar of the domain is. Intel is notoriously litigious - particularly about sites which have the letters i+n+t+e+l in them.[29]
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.[5] Not the first time nVidia has been spreading complete BS about Intel lately.[5] Exactly, accused. A lot of the tech companies get accusations flying around, its normal. It is all about protecting your own interests. Is it really a major concern that nVidia does not have DX11 until Q1? Right now there aren't a lot of DX11 applications. arriving around Q1 won't be late, only that nVidia were not able to brag about it this time.[15] More companies in the same industry means more competition, which brings lower prices and better hardware! Hope it works out for Nvidia.[4] Pretty much sums up nvidia nowadays. Throwing smack talk and cheap shots about, calling everyone out while they continue to offer NOTHING new to consumers and cause other companies grief (stopping MSI from launching their Lucid based boards anyone?).[15] Global corporations attempting to belittle one another is nothing new, of course - the likes of Apple have been doing it for years - but in all good conscience, we couldn't say we didn't find NVIDIA's caricatures to be just a touch amusing.[17] 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.[12] 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.[6] 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.[4] 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.[3] 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.[4] 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.[19]
There is still the issue of getting a x86 license from Intel and a "x86-64" license from AMD. [6] Wouldn't they still need an x86 license from Intel? Once again, Intel has the upper hand here.[6] 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.[5] 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.[20] For the last few days the site has posted cartoons intended to show Intel in a bad light. One, for example, has a cartoon of what looks like Marlon Brando in the Godfather but with a name place marked Otellini, saying to his associates: "We'll make them a microprocessor offer they can't refuse." Another has a picture of someone who looks something like Paul Otellini, CEO of Intel, sitting on a pile of dynamite sticks and wired to a timer labelled Larrabee captioned: "Here at Intel, we are all about tick-tick execution, we are an execution machine.[29] The website, called Intel's Insides, says "it is intended to be a parody of events occurring within the semiconductor sector, with particular focus on its largest and most-commented-upon competitor." One cartoon has Intel president and CEO Paul Otellini made to look like Marlon Brando in The Godfather and saying: "We'll make them a microprocessor offer they can't refuse." Another cartoon pokes fun at Intel's "tick-tock" marketing message.[25]
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. [5] 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.[5]
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.[5]
Intel sells boards with 1394a and its not built into the chipset, what makes you think USB3.0 will be any different.[5]
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.[5] I am actually hoping Intel would join in the GPU competition soon, should make things interesting. How they made a $100m profit in the last quarter is beyond me.[15] 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.[12] "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.[11]
Nvidia will need a pretty impressive CPU solution for people to want to switch from the normal.[6] 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.[4] "Nvidia will likely target mainstream and below performance, and not leading Core i7 like levels."[10] 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.[6]
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.[4]
Advanced Micro Devices Inc. and Intel Corp. are separately developing processors with graphics capabilities. [16] 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.[6] Each new CPU design only requires modifying the Code Morphing software to translate x86 instructions to the CPU's native instruction set.[6] For x86 CPUs, the market leader stole an important share of the market from the former upstart AMD, especially in the past two quarters.[6] 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.[6]
"I don't think we lost any share in the AMD chipset market," Huang told analysts.[12]
Many more questions arise of which major is whether Intel is trying to replace all possible connection interfaces with Light Peak technology. Let's wait and see what Intel has on its Agenda. [22] 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.[6] 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.[4]
SOURCES
1. NVIDIA: Intel delaying USB 3.0 chips until 2011 | Electronista
2. NVIDIA "confirms" USB 3.0 Delay to chipsets :: TweakTown
3. Are new rumors of an NVIDIA x86 CPU plausible? - Ars Technica
4. Nvidia x86 processor rumors surface once again - TechSpot News
5. NVIDIA confirms Intel chipsets won't support USB 3.0 until 2011
6. Nvidia Making x86 CPU With Ex-Transmeta Brains? - Tom's Hardware
7. Nvidia Eyeing x86 Processor Market, Says Analyst
8. Rumors reappear of NVIDIA making x86 chips | Electronista
9. Nvidia may be moving into X86 market
10. Nvidia taps Transmeta team for x86 chip, claims analyst ''' Register Hardware
11. Will Nvidia Take On Intel In x86 Processors? - Tech Trader Daily - Barrons.com
12. Nvidia Frustrated by Underestimated Demand - Reviews by PC Magazine
13. Nvidia confirms Intel won't back USB 3.0 until 2011 - TechSpot News
14. Nvidia Lampoons Intel With Cartoon Site - Hardware - IT Channel News by CRN
15. bit-tech.net | Nvidia prods Intel with satire site
16. EETimes.com - Is Nvidia devising x86 processor?
17. HEXUS.net - News :: NVIDIA puts Intel in the funny papers : Page - 1/1
18. Namecalling Begins Around Intel's USB 3.0 Slowdown, Slapfight Imminent
19. Is NVIDIA looking to make an x86 CPU? :: TweakTown
20. Nvidia Fires Back at Intel With Cartoons - Lab Notes by ExtremeTech
21. USB 3 turns into handbag fight between Intel and Nvidia
22. Techtree.com India > News > Hardware > No USB 3.0 for Intel Chipsets till 2011: Nvidia
23. Intel chipsets won't support USB 3.0 until 2011 - Legit Reviews
24. Nvidia Confirms Intel's Senseless USB 3.0 Delay Until 2011 - usb 3.0 - Gizmodo
25. EETimes.com - Anti-Intel cartoon site carries Nvidia logo
26. Techtree.com India > News > Hardware > Nvidia Mocks Intel with New Cartoon Site
27. NVIDIA Brings New Weapons in the War Against Intel [NVIDIA Uses Cartoons to Enrage Intel; Will It Work?] » TFTS Technology, Gadgets & Curiosities
28. Fudzilla
29. Nvidia taunts Intel with cartoon parody site
GENERATE A MULTI-SOURCE SUMMARY ON ANY SUBJECT
Enter your search query below. WAIT 10-20 sec for the new window to open.
Get more info on Nvidia Lampoons Intel With Cartoon Site by using the iResearch Reporter tool from Power Text Solutions.
 |
|  |
|
