NVIDIA Talks Competition

Heh, you said massively powerful cpus and gpus. That made me giggle. AMD + massively + powerful = meh
 
Not sure what benefit VIA is going to bring Nvidia. The Isaiah power usage is already meant to be higher that Intels Atom and my guess would be the performance would also be lower. So once Intel have atom rolling out, who would even consider a VIA cpu? Via simply wont be able to compete on power/TDP/form factor/price against Intel.

I have shares in Nvidia, but i cant really see any point in involving VIA at this stage, a few years back maybe, but with Intels plans for the future, i cant see a market for VIA stuff anymore.

In its latest report, MPR editor Tom H said: “Even the new Isiaiah microarchitecture from Via Technologies – formerly the low power X86 leaders – can’t match Atom’s TDPs.”
Click to expand...
 
"Intel seems to have no interest in partnering tightly with NVIDIA and is moving on to hammer out its own high-end graphics division."

This is what is likely to really hurt nvidia... and possibly kill off ATI/AMD ?
I mean, right now nvidia has a large advantage on ati, and there isn't really any evidence that will change anytime soon. Likely nvidia is sitting on some pretty impresive architecture for it's next gen cards.

However, with Intels complete dominance over AMD in the cpu arena... what if their graphics division had the same success... It wouldn't be great for consumers as we would be getting chipsets, cpu's and gpu's from the same company...

If only Intel and Nvidia would play nicely :)
 
Toytown said:
Not sure what benefit VIA is going to bring Nvidia. The Isaiah power usage is already meant to be higher that Intels Atom and my guess would be the performance would also be lower. So once Intel have atom rolling out, who would even consider a VIA cpu? Via simply wont be able to compete on power/TDP/form factor/price against Intel.

I have shares in Nvidia, but i cant really see any point in involving VIA at this stage, a few years back maybe, but with Intels plans for the future, i cant see a market for VIA stuff anymore.
Click to expand...

Well Nvidia's partnership in the mobile laptop section isn't with amd or intel, its with the people setting up the laptops buying their MXM video cards, selling them to the consumer.

I think NV wants to work with via in the mobile phone / ultra portible PC market, in direct competition with intel at that level, more so than AMD, and at this point NV has the advantage as far as graphics processing capabilities on cell phones. Its really their only chance to float in the market.

I don't think NV has anything to worry about on the "platform" area right now, they do need to work with more OEMs however.

They need to put their foot on the gas with R&D however, but they are more than capable at this point to meet the challenge at hand.
 
In its latest report, MPR editor Tom H said: “Even the new Isiaiah microarchitecture from Via Technologies – formerly the low power X86 leaders – can’t match Atom’s TDPs.”
Click to expand...

To comment on this....yes, that is true, but I don't think we are going to see Isiaiah bump up against Atom. Isiaiah should whip Atom's ass in the performance department, and I think the UMPC/superlight notebook. They are different products in my eyes. The products that Atom will be going into are not perfomance sensitive, they are power sensitive. It THINK Isiaiah will go into products that are both.

I think you will see Isiaiah in this soon. And Atom IMO is not built for this. Certainly the lines are grey when it comes to product segmentation.
 
Interesting stuff. Hard to imagine a company with billion dollar quarters looking over their shoulder.

It will mean some ghood stuff for us however.
 
Sounds like Nvidia is just trying to be modest and not seem like they own the world which they do in terms of graphic cards.

Intel will do something stupid like make the high end videocards built into their motherboards or not work with AMD processors. But after they do something stupid and fail microsoft vista style then they might give Nvidia some troubles.
 
K1tty said:
"Intel seems to have no interest in partnering tightly with NVIDIA and is moving on to hammer out its own high-end graphics division."

This is what is likely to really hurt nvidia... and possibly kill off ATI/AMD ?
Click to expand...

I dunno. To-date Intel has failed to deliver on any graphics promises. Unless they really pull a reversal I just don't see them delivering anything other that more mediocre solutions.

There can be a huge win with a powerful GPU and CPU on the same die for gamers and media junkies, but I just don't trust Intel to deliver that solution. I would have more confidence in their ability to deliver an integrated solution if they partnered with nvidia.
 
What is Nvidia going to do? Without any x86 products, they really can fall off the map. I screamed hell or high water on buying motherboards with integrated sound. And, eventually, there were no other choices. I very much wanted to believe that Creative had the best audio products, and at the time, they probably did. Then the first board I bought with integrated sound came along because I could no longer avoid it, and I found out that the audio was more than enough for what I do. Now, I simply have no use for Creative, and I know I am not the only one. Nvidia can very seriously face just this kind of a future.
 
It THINK Isiaiah will go into products that are both.
Click to expand...

They might, but if your buying a laptop based on battery life i'd buy an Atom based one. If i was going to go with one based on performance i'd go with a C2D/Turion. I still think that there isnt going to be much room left for Via and without the R&D money Intel has will soon be left with not much to offer, although i would like to see otherwise.
 
panhead said:
Intel doesn't have a good track record with graphics products, i740, G965, G35 so I wouldn't count NVIDIA out of business yet. It is good to see NVIDIA acknowledging the competition. Let's hope they start to release some new architecture GPUs.

http://www.theinquirer.net/gb/inquirer/news/2008/04/08/intel-g35-failure-needs-fix
Click to expand...

You do know these graphics chip arnt meant to game on right? There meant to provide every day users with the graphics power they need such as the desktop, web browser, word processors, spreadsheets etc.

Intel is entering the dedicated video card market though and I believe its due out this year. Its code name or core name is called Larabee (spelling may be off) and then we can make judgements on Intel track record with graphics products.
 
It will be interesting to see if Intel can pull out the stops in terms of SKU's that will cater to at least the Intel crowd. They will have to offer a graphics experience that will need to be on par or better than what Nvidia is providing now, but also be able to fit in along with compatibility of games and OS offerings. If they can hammer out those issues, they may start to build a following.
 
When they can make a stable motherboard chipset then I will take them seriously in terms of their branching out to other markets.
 
I'm actually interested in what will turn out for both camps. Wonder how well "Larabee" will perform.
 
Lazy_Moron said:
You do know these graphics chip arnt meant to game on right? There meant to provide every day users with the graphics power they need such as the desktop, web browser, word processors, spreadsheets etc.

Intel is entering the dedicated video card market though and I believe its due out this year. Its code name or core name is called Larabee (spelling may be off) and then we can make judgements on Intel track record with graphics products.
Click to expand...

Agreed that these products were not high performance products, BUT the problems Intel had and has with them indicates Intel has/had issues with their graphics products. Intel has problems executing with low-end GPUs and drivers, a high performance 'gaming' GPU might take a few iterations. I don't think I'll be getting one of Intel's new GPU's until the reviewers and bleeding-edge users iron out all the bugs. NVIDIA has been doing GPUs for a long time and look at the problems they have had with BSODs.
 
Lazy_Moron said:
You do know these graphics chip arnt meant to game on right? There meant to provide every day users with the graphics power they need such as the desktop, web browser, word processors, spreadsheets etc.

Intel is entering the dedicated video card market though and I believe its due out this year. Its code name or core name is called Larabee (spelling may be off) and then we can make judgements on Intel track record with graphics products.
Click to expand...

Whether or not they actually could perform in the gaming market, Intel has always marketed their products as being capable of doing so.
This is true not only of the i740, but of their newer stuff as well.
http://softwarecommunity.intel.com/articles/eng/1485.htm

This, to me, has always been what seemed so stupid about Intel's approach. If they never made such exaggerated claims, people wouldn't care.

Maybe not in the immediate future, but I can certainly see Intel eying an acquisition of NVIDIA somewhere down the road.
 
Sorry nvidia is light years ahead of intel on gfx chips, but intel does have some power. all I know that Intel has try high end GFX before Intel 740 AGP anyone? and ATI even has some really good tech as well, it's going to take a lot for intel to beat on nvidia imo...
 
nvidia is just a little too arrogant lately. I'd like to see Intel bitch slap nvidia just to knock it off it's pedestal.
 
The only problem I have with Intel is that they think that high end means they can charge over $1000 per part. I don't think that is going to fly in the GPU market.

At least they haven't screwed over their customers like AMD has in the CPU market ("What new socket should we make up this week...").
 
Intel will not be able to compete with NVIDIA, in the high-end GPUs market. Maybe in the mid-range, but definitely not in the high-end and I'm sure even Intel knows that.

As for the VIA deal, I think this is obviously a smart move by NVIDIA. VIA may not produce very powerful CPUs, but that's mainly because they are a small player it that market and they don't have much money to spend on R&D, marketing, etc. NVIDIA however, is swimming in money for the past couple of years and will certainly help VIA financially, so that VIA can improve their products, if the partnership goes as far as a merger.
 
I just finished reading that dailytech link and Huang's punch line aimed at Intel, was just brilliant:

Huang said:
How much faster can you render the blue screen of death?
Click to expand...

LOL
 
The way I see it, AMD are losing on the CPU front to Intel and on the GPU front to Nvidia.

I don't understand the benefits that naturally arise from having the 2 seperate products coming together, we're always going to want discreet GPU's and CPU's and as long as this is the case there is a market for Intel and Nvidia, and since they're producing superiour products they're going to get the sales.

If there is some benefit I'm not seeing, then a move for nvidia to merge with Intel would probably be bad in the long run, certainly enough potential to kill off AMD all togther, then we're stuck with no competiton and that's very bad for the consumer.
 
Toytown said:
Not sure what benefit VIA is going to bring Nvidia. The Isaiah power usage is already meant to be higher that Intels Atom and my guess would be the performance would also be lower. So once Intel have atom rolling out, who would even consider a VIA cpu? Via simply wont be able to compete on power/TDP/form factor/price against Intel.
Click to expand...

Atom is REALLY aimed at smartphones and MIDS, the performance is terrible.

Isaiah is aimed at UMPCS's, a step above the MID market, as the consequence is clear as Via's chip has much higher performance than Atom.
 
Lazy_Moron said:
You do know these graphics chip arnt meant to game on right? There meant to provide every day users with the graphics power they need such as the desktop, web browser, word processors, spreadsheets etc.
Click to expand...

again, Isaiah is aimed at the UMPC market, which at the end of the day is just a miniature PC with all the requirements that entails, including 3D graphics.

yes a UMPC is not expected to play Crysis, but the UMPC is not a MID which really doesn't need anything more than desktop and video rendering.
 
Intel will not be able to compete with NVIDIA, in the high-end GPUs market. Maybe in the mid-range, but definitely not in the high-end and I'm sure even Intel knows that.
Click to expand...

Eh? Never say never in the hardware industry.
 
Silus said:
I just finished reading that dailytech link and Huang's punch line aimed at Intel, was just brilliant:



LOL
Click to expand...

I would suggest that NVIDIA would know a LOT more about rendering BSODs than Intel ever has...
 
I'm going to post this here also.

Hardocp needs start disclosing what stocks they own at the end of every review. You guys obviously are deep in these stocks. MSFT, INTC, NVDA looks like your core holdings.
 
wilkinru said:
I'm going to post this here also.

Hardocp needs start disclosing what stocks they own at the end of every review. You guys obviously are deep in these stocks. MSFT, INTC, NVDA looks like your core holdings.
Click to expand...

+1.
 
wilkinru said:
I'm going to post this here also.

Hardocp needs start disclosing what stocks they own at the end of every review. You guys obviously are deep in these stocks. MSFT, INTC, NVDA looks like your core holdings.
Click to expand...

Well, I guess if we were irresponsible we would actually own tech stocks, but we don't. We do not invest in tech stocks as a general rule. Ethics all that, etc....


YOU are obviously talking out your ass and making accusations you have no proof of whatsoever. You are now permabanned. Criticise all you want, but baseless accusations attacking our ethics and integrity will not be tolerated. I have worked way too hard to have to endure idiocy of that level.
 
wilkinru said:
I'm going to post this here also.

Hardocp needs start disclosing what stocks they own at the end of every review. You guys obviously are deep in these stocks. MSFT, INTC, NVDA looks like your core holdings.
Click to expand...

Yeah [H] thats pretty much sums up your 'no love' for AMD. :D
 
Forr35t said:
Yeah [H] thats pretty much sums up your 'no love' for AMD. :D
Click to expand...

Guy needs to remember when Core 2 came out and Kyle pissed a lot of us off by saying it offered no "real world" advantages over AMD to gamers. Not sure where he [the guy saying otherwise] picked up that stupid opinion.
 
Not sure where he [the guy saying otherwise] picked up that stupid opinion.
Click to expand...

Well that's quite obvious from their reviews. They make it sound like AMD is a few light years behind the competition.
 
Forr35t said:
Well that's quite obvious from their reviews. They make it sound like AMD is a few light years behind the competition.
Click to expand...

Here is a good post for yourself, as you obviously are not up on reading a lot of our content or have forgotten or simply do not comprehend much of it.

http://www.hardforum.com/showpost.php?p=1032302959&postcount=58

I would suggest that the words "light years behind the competition" have never been used to describe AMD or its products and we have never suggested anything even close to that. It would seem that you are one of those guys that like to make up extremely bad paraphrasing of our thoughts and opinions then post them as if they are actually our words. Then you type it out enough that you begin to actually think you are right. Well, I am here to tell you that you characterization of our opinions are terribly off.

I have made the suggestion to forum goers for years now that they would likely be better off using quotes if they are going to be referring to our thoughts and opinions because their comprehension of those is just not up to what I would expect out of a hardware enthusiast.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top