Intel Begins Writing Nvidia’s Obituary
Posted 02/28/09 at 02:26:46 PM by Justin Kerr
Comments
Print
Email
The war of words and bad blood between Intel and Nvidia continues to spiral out of control, and Intel is back at it again. After making some rather pointed remarkets about Ions shortcomings, Intel decoded the time was right to warn the geek masses about Nvidia’s impending doom at the Goldman Sachs Technology conference in San Francisco. According to Intel’s CEO Paul Otellini, Nvidia is merely trying to defend the status quo, and that Larrabee will be the future choice for those in search of powerful dedicated graphics solutions. Oddly enough, Intel choose its words very carefully and mysteriously made no mention of AMD’s ATI division.
Most enthusiasts I’m sure see these statements as a bit overconfident, and the 2010 release of Larrabee is the real wild card in the equation. Even if Intel manages to churn out the most powerful GPU, it’s unlikely they would have the type of driver optimization, developer support, or backwards compatibility that have made the ATI/ Nvidia GPU’s the most important component in any gaming PC. Clearly however, dedicated GPU companies should be concerned over CPU+GPU solutions for mainstream users. If GP-GPU applications don’t take hold in time to win over the mainstream consumer, Nvidia and ATI risk find themselves severing a much smaller niche market that could be devastating to both companies.
What do you think? Is this just corporate posturing at its best? Hit the add comments link and let us know what you think.
AMD looses X86 license
Submitted by GDM40 on Fri, 05/22/2009 - 4:56pm
Yeah that will never happen regardless Why Because AMD and Intel are sitting in a position of MAD 'mutually assured destruction". Who do you think owns the patents on the emt 64 design. Who created the 64 bit cpu AMD. If Intel pulls its X86 liscense from AMD. Then Intel can go straight back to a 32 bit only CPU. Unless Intel can design its own 64 bit architechture which it has not so far then they are at a liscensing stalemate.
Ergo AMD can buy whoever they want and have whoever they want spearhead the effort. The only thing that would be accomplished by Intel pulling the X86 liscense from AMD is it's own demise no more 12 gb of Ram I7 gaming machines because they could no longer use AMD's64 bit blueprint..
Id personally love to see Nvidia get into the CPU market using AMD's true quad core platform as a spring board just to put someone obviously seeking a monopoly in it's place.
Ion simply proves to me that Nvidia can do it better, faster, and with less expense.
Intel just needs to back off and enjoy the cpu market while they are still ahead.
It is simple
Submitted by Baer on Mon, 03/02/2009 - 1:21pm
It will depend on how well it performs, how compatable it is and what it costs. Simplle. Without those answers the rest is pure gueswork.
If Intel's current onboard solutions are any indication
Submitted by Stry8993 on Mon, 03/02/2009 - 5:40am
I think nVidia has already won this one, and with the external graphics card from ATi, still in the works, both had best be considering their options.
nVidia might be........
Submitted by ghot on Sun, 03/01/2009 - 2:40am
....too big of a bite for Intel to chew :)
Take efficiency, and edit out all the intelligence and what you have left is a post-XP Microsoft operating system :)
Submitted by LatiosXT on Sat, 02/28/2009 - 7:00pm
If what Intel says does happen (That is, NVIDIA goes dead because everyone suddenly thinks ray tracing is the way to go) and NVIDIA doesn't make a product to counter anytime soon (which probably won't be likely unless a open API is made), then basically Intel will probably face monopoly suits left and right. Think about it: Intel Processor, Intel Motherboard, Intel GPU. All of which use an architecture patented by Intel. Intel's probably not going to let its x86 architure go without licensing fees to anyone else.
Way to go Intel. If you are correct, enjoy your brief stint of victory before you're forced to be broken up.
This should also apply to
Submitted by gatorXXX on Sat, 02/28/2009 - 8:03pm
This should also apply to the fact that microshaft was forced by law for consumers being able to install/uninstall IE. Or was it that you could install other browsers without any reprocussion? Either way, it became a monopoly that got shut down. I hope this happenes to Intel as well.
Submitted by chipzillaslaststand on Sat, 02/28/2009 - 4:27pm
the ion platform(+the 9400) is the only reason intel is doing what it does now.
They lost customers like aapl,acer,lenovo and more to follow.
Intel's graphic solutions are horrid and laterbee(aka laughabee) will not change that.
The netbook+mid market is still booming and that's where the ion and tegra come in.
nvda is already teaming up with via(the nano has 2 the power of the atom,ok it consumes a bit more power but still)
So who will be the loser in the end?
Rhetorical...
Chipzilla got greedy and is ready to get some (whoop ass) spanking...
8)
Submitted by comptech08 on Sat, 02/28/2009 - 8:25pm
you cant compare Intel;s past graphic solutions. It wasnt really dedicated. We all no onboard sux, so it doesnt make since to compare them to a dedicated video sector like ATI or NVIDIA
Submitted by chipzillaslaststand on Sun, 03/01/2009 - 3:48am
if you had informed yourself you'd know that.
Why do you think intel is putting out this trash?
Maybe it's because nvidia's solution was adopted by aapl(eg) over intel and gives the macbooks a 4x performance boost in graphics?Not bad huh?
Why do you think intel has postponed it's "mighty laterbee" in the first place?
Because they know they can't top that.
Ion+9400+atom=10x the graphics performance of intel's platform in netbooks...
Not 10% :10 times...
Could be more combined with the nano though...
Intel knows that when ion will be in netbooks they'll lose market share.
Wost of both worlds...
Submitted by Cache on Sat, 02/28/2009 - 3:24pm
The most concerning thing to me is a 'worst of all worlds' scenario where continued economic hits drive AMD out of the market completely, coupled with Intel's release of an integrated graphics chip that precludes the use of a video card except for higher-end gaming. I don't think nVidia could survive in an environment where the only market share it had was high-end.
Can you imagine the graphics needed for games where there were no high-end graphics cards to play them on? Where everything was dependant on integrated graphics? If this was happening 2-3 years ago I'd chalk it up to chest-thumping, but with the current economy there is a very real chance of someone in the video card market to go belly-up, and Intel has the relative safety of it's CPU's to fall back on. Nvidia has nothing, and AMD is already on the ropes selling of parts of itself to just survive.
Submitted by sasquatch42 on Sat, 02/28/2009 - 3:57pm
I don't see much hope for nVidia unless they do something remarkable, quick
AMD is on the return to competition in the CPU market, their delay in releasing 32nm will be less than that of their 45nm delay, right now, AMD could very well fund its GPU projects using CPU profits, reverse of what's happening now. ATi cards have more advanced technology that that of nVidia who royally messed up by not pushing for 55nm until now when ATi is preparing 40nm GPUs
Submitted by chipzillaslaststand on Sun, 03/01/2009 - 12:27pm
huge debt weighs like an anchor around the company's neck(haven't made a profit in over 2 years)
Nvidia's 40 nm cards coming in a good month or so,and has the lead now too(which you'll probably know)
amd/ati has nothing for netbooks btw and that's the only pc segment that's doing good nowadays.
Submitted by sasquatch42 on Sun, 03/01/2009 - 1:50pm
amd will have one before then though
April for ATi and in Q3 for nVidia
the 5xx0 is coming in Q3 though, the April card is hte 4890 or 49X0 or something
Submitted by chipzillaslaststand on Mon, 03/02/2009 - 5:48am
http://www.hexus.net/content/item.php?item=17104
Submitted by JK0000 on Sat, 02/28/2009 - 3:11pm
I've said it in other forums and I will say it here. If these companies nVidia & AMD/ATI want to survive and grow into the future they should do what they should have done two years ago and merge. Competition is great but the real competitors here are AMD, Intel & nVidia - Ati (a descent company) should have unfortunately been the odd man out. I'm not saying Ati can't compete today with nVidia i'm saying the heavyweights in graphics are ultimately are going to be nVidia (evidenced by their current market share) and Intel - because of their vast resources. AMD/ATI is simply too weak to split their resources and be competitive against both nVidia and Intel. To survive AMD and nVidia should still merge ultimately - nVidia SHOULD be the stronger partner in this too. AMD has proven itself too inept to be the dominant partner. Ati should just be rolled into nVidia, AMD division can then focus on CPU's, where they have had past success and nVidia/Ati does graphics against Intel and it's Larabee GPU. nVidia then gets it's x86 license and can move some of its resources AMD's way. All the companies are, or will be soon, fabless so it puts Intel at a little of a disadvantage as they have to maintain these extra fabs and that's expensive although it has not hurt them yet and possibly won't. Moving forward I just can't see how AMD and nVidia can survive by themselves againt Intel with all it's resources. All of these companies are good companies but it boils down to resources and something has to give. nVidia is the stronger graphics company and does not need extra resources to compete like ATI needed. To have true competition in the future it needs to be nVidia/AMD vs. Intel otherwise we will only have Intel to choose from by default.
If AMD is purchased by
Submitted by StormEffect on Sun, 03/01/2009 - 2:36pm
If AMD is purchased by another company, they lose their x86 license, so your plan doesn't work. You think they are going to licence it to Nvidia?
The only way this would work is if AMD bought Nvidia, and they are in no position to do that.
So now you have AMD/ATI/Nvidia, they only make GPUs, they can't make x86 processors anymore, and Intel has complete control of the processor market. It just doesn't work.
Submitted by JK0000 on Sun, 03/01/2009 - 5:25pm
Really? Let me tell you there is ALWAYS a way to make this work. I give you an example of this from the insurance industry - I know this because I held stock in these companies at the time of their merger. St Paul and Travelers insurance. Technically St Paul bought Travelers, I don't remember the technicals of the sale but St Paul was NEVER really the dominant company in that deal and in reality Travelers had to have known they wereultimately going to be the dominant partner as the deal was basically a bailout of St Paul. St Paul no longer exists and ALL operations are controlled by Travelers. Don't tell me that these two companies cannot do something similar as this is but one example. If AMD knew what was good for them they would approach nVidia. Actually AMD taking ATI kept it out of the hands of Intel which is good. A merger now would create a much more formidable threat to Intel. Anyone who thinks Intel today could not put AMD/Ati out of business in a quarter is dreaming. Intel can lower the margins on their core 2 line - take losses and put AMD out of business in no time & AMD better start realizing this - they are no threat to Intel as things stand. There is always a way to make a merger work and keep the x86 license, I have read other articles that also disagree that they would automatically lose their license even if nVidia was the buyer - ultimately it's for the courts to decide.
Submitted by sasquatch42 on Sat, 02/28/2009 - 4:00pm
ATi helped AMD in their notebook/chipset market, the Radeon HD 3200(AMD exclusive) made the world expect more from integrated graphics
I agree that nVidia and AMD should have merged though
Submitted by AndyYankee17 on Sat, 02/28/2009 - 2:52pm
now all that needs to happen is nvidea has to make a desktop CPU, then we can have a 3 way, CPU/GPU war bringing prices crashing down
Submitted by MeTo on Sat, 02/28/2009 - 6:54pm
Competition! I hope intel pulls it off then maby the price wars will realy kick in. Could you emagine top of the line video cards for $100.00?
Submitted by linkmaster6 on Sat, 02/28/2009 - 2:10pm
Here's an idea and its a wild one...... how about we wait and see the actual stats when its released! Mind blowing I know
Must Read Articles
Feature
Review
Feature
Feature
Feature
Most Popular Articles
This Month's Issue
FEATURE Build a Crazy-Fast $647 PCFEATURE Six Single-Band 802.11n Routers ReviewedHOW TOTweak BitTorrent and FirefoxFEATUREClose Look at ClarkdaleWHITE PAPERLCD Panel Technology
Technology News
Computer Cooling Fans
Computer Cases
PC Game Controllers
PC Games
Computer Hardware
Headphones
MP3 Players
Stream Video
Computer Mouse
Monitors
Motherboards
NAS Storage
Networking
Laptop Computers
DVD Burner
Digital Cameras
Portable Storage
Computer Accessories
Smartphone
Antivirus Software
Sound Cards
Speakers
Computer Systems
Thumb Drives
Video Cameras
Video Card Reviews
Water Cooling
Gadgets
- Keyboards
© 2010 Future US, Inc. All rights reserved.
