Is Nvidia having trouble acquiring a Intel Common Serial Interface License?

Quote:

---

If rumours about Nvidia’s inability to get a license to produce Intel Common Serial Interface (CSI) bus compatible chipsets are correct, its multi-GPU technology SLI may either disappear from the market or Nvidia may change its SLI licensing policy and open up the technology for others.

At present Nvidia SLI multi-GPU systems may feature two, three or even four graphics processing units (GPUs) by Nvidia Corp. to speed up graphics rendering speed in games. One substantial peculiarity of Nvidia SLI multi-GPU technology is that several graphics cards have to be installed on a mainboard that is based on Nvidia nForce SLI core-logic.

Even though two graphics cards may technically function on any mainboard with any chipset provided that there are several PCI Express x16 slots, Nvidia does not allow system logic sets developed by companies like Advanced Micro Devices or Intel Corp. to power multi-GPU systems carrying two or more Nvidia GeForce-based add-in-cards. In order to enable SLI technology for its Intel Dual Socket Extreme Desktop Platform (DSEDP) Intel had to install certain PCI Express hub chips from Nvidia onto its Intel Desktop Board D5400XS mainboard. By contrast, ATI CrossFire and CrossFire X multi-GPU technologies that allow several ATI Radeon graphics cards to work in cooperation can be enabled on any third-party chipset, but not Nvidia’s (due to prohibition of Nvidia)...

According to a news-story by The Inquirer web-site, Intel “is refusing to provide Nvidia with a vital piece of CSI technology”, which may indicate that Nvidia loses ability to produce Intel-compatible chipsets late in 2008, which may be a huge blow to Nvidia’s chipset business division.

With no in-house developed Intel-compatible chipsets, Nvidia will have to either allow SLI technology to function on third-party chipsets, or its multi-GPU technology will only function on chipsets supporting microprocessors by AMD, which currently cannot offer the same level of performance as Intel’s CPUs and are usually not gamers’ processors of choice. As a consequence, Nvidia SLI multi-GPU platform may find itself unpopular or may even cease to exist. On the other hand, even if Nvidia fails to get CSI license at any cost, the company may focus on creating graphics cards with several GPUs on them, which do not require any special chipsets.

---

Source

amd give money to control ati's moves but intel is trying to use its power instead of money to control nvidia

This is the same thing intel did to via to get it's way, but in this case I'm for it. I don't want to have to use a Nvidia chipset just for SLI.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by safan80

This is the same thing intel did to via to get it's way, but in this case I'm for it. I don't want to have to use a Nvidia chipset just for SLI.

---

I do agree with that last part yeah, although I won't believe this until I see it....

All I can say is "Good" Intel stick it to them and lets see if they ( Nvidia ) open's up SLI on all MB's not likely but "Good". Now AMD do the same that put Nvidia in a pinch.

So if Intel gets nVidia to surrender its hold on SLI, would this allow for some older Intel chipsets to use SLI? I would like SLI on my P35 :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ABXG

So if Intel gets nVidia to surrender its hold on SLI, would this allow for some older Intel chipsets to use SLI? I would like SLI on my P35 :)

---

yeah I would imagine so..

I simply cannot understand nvidia holding out on intel. If SLI were available on intel chipset motherboards they would sell more video cards. Yes. The motherboards would take a hit but i think selling more video cards would make them more money in the long run.

Look at AMD. They allow intel to run crossfire.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ABXG

So if Intel gets nVidia to surrender its hold on SLI, would this allow for some older Intel chipsets to use SLI? I would like SLI on my P35 :)

---

No. It's at the hardware level. Skulltrail has SLI capability only because of special chips from nvidia(nforce 100). Existing P35/X38 motherboards do not have these chips so no. You will never see SLI on your P35/X38 based motherboard.

Quote:

---

Nvidia loses ability to produce Intel-compatible chipsets late in 2008, which may be a huge blow to Nvidia’s chipset business division.

---

I thought they already had, 650i (wont boot with E8400) & 680i (not stable over ~1250MHz) are terrible at dealling with 45nm chips, 780i isn't much better. 750i ASUS P5ND seems to be the best nVidia board out at the moment. Apart from SLi and the now ageing 8800 series and Physx and a killer midrange card what have they got?

so xbit decided to folow the ways of some well established yellow e-pages... rumours are the only thing that's lefto for today e-IT-news sites for spining the couters...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GripS

I simply cannot understand nvidia holding out on intel. If SLI were available on intel chipset motherboards they would sell more video cards. Yes. The motherboards would take a hit but i think selling more video cards would make them more money in the long run.

Look at AMD. They allow intel to run crossfire.

---

Intel ran crossfire before AMD was even in the picture.... since the 955X and 945P chipsets. :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GripS

No. It's at the hardware level. Skulltrail has SLI capability only because of special chips from nvidia(nforce 100). Existing P35/X38 motherboards do not have these chips so no. You will never see SLI on your P35/X38 based motherboard.

---

the only thing stopping SLI on intel chipsets is the drivers. not hardware. hacked drivers way back when would allow it to work and actually worked better on intel chipsets.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by zabomb4163

the only thing stopping SLI on intel chipsets is the drivers. not hardware. hacked drivers way back when would allow it to work and actually worked better on intel chipsets.

---

yup, all the bridge chips do is split 16 pcie 2.0's into 32 pcie 1.0's.

and on topic, I would be glad to see this happen.

:toast: A prost to making Nvidia sweat.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GripS

No. It's at the hardware level. Skulltrail has SLI capability only because of special chips from nvidia(nforce 100). Existing P35/X38 motherboards do not have these chips so no. You will never see SLI on your P35/X38 based motherboard.

---

no, it's a software thing, SLI is blocked in drivers, not the hardware.

FYI hacked drivers= SLI on P35 .

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by xlink

no, it's a software thing, SLI is blocked in drivers, not the hardware.

FYI hacked drivers= SLI on P35 .

---

Hacked Drivers for the X38 would be better.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by [cTx]Warboy

Hacked Drivers for the X38 would be better.

---

well duh you'de have raped PCI bandwidth due to the 4x slot.

from my understanding though hacked drivers = it works for any board

though with the cost of the 8800s/9600s and with the hacked drivers out only working for GF7 ad under... well it's not really worth it to not just go with the latest and greatest.

seems like I'm not the only one to say: haaahaaaaa

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GripS

No. It's at the hardware level. Skulltrail has SLI capability only because of special chips from nvidia(nforce 100). Existing P35/X38 motherboards do not have these chips so no. You will never see SLI on your P35/X38 based motherboard.

---

you must be confused. if nvidia gives intel the license, then those special chips aren't required anymore as nvidia will include intel chipsets on the "allowed" chipset list.

So NVidia is finally getting their just desserts...good. I hope Intel really bends them over hard and demands huge money and SLI interoperability on Intel chipsets for a license...NVidia was more than willing to do it to us and to Intel when it came to SLI, forcing the use of their inferior chipsets on us. Even now, with the use of the NForce 100 bridge chips on Skulltrail, NVidia is arrogantly not allowing the use of more than 2 graphics cards in SLI on a board that clearly supports it.:mad:

What goes around comes around...NVidia will learn that you don't whiz on the leg of the big dog and expect him to help you out in the future. NVidia is very lucky Intel didn't just decide to swallow them whole...;)

Seems abit stupid them both fighting with each other over this. They could both gain huge amounts from cooperating.

Intel chipsets with SLI capabilities would no doubt massively boost nvidia GPU sales. Forcing us to buy nVidias crap attempt at a chipset just for SLI really isnt doing them any good at all, they were doing fine without it before the 680i chipset.

They simply need to allow Intel to have SLI on their chipsets, so what if nvidia lost sales on its own chipset, they could still make their own chipset providing they did a decent job of it unlike their current crappy offerings.

nVidia will have to buckle i feel. Its either they allow Intel to have SLI capabilities on their chipset or they wont be able to use their GPUs in conjunction with Intels highend CPUs. Meaning Nvidia will have to make cards for budget systems which i really cant see them wanting to do as they would lose billions in profit.

Nvidia deserves this several times over. SLI should not be limited to their chipset alone (Skulltrail doesn't really count).

Both companies would do well to cooperate, but Nvidia through the first stone. Now they are just basically going to have to realize what an idiotic business move that was.

Even funnier is the likely fact that Nvidia should have offered SLI when they had the chance. When Intel starts making GPU's, and probably will have a version of SLI itself, I'd bet they won't even need Nvidia's SLI. And at that point Intel is probably going to grind the screws harder, cutting off Nvidia at every turn not giving them anything to let Nvidia's chipsets work with Intel products. Then Nvidia will realize (too late) that they have nothing to trade (that Intel wants) and everything to lose as they can no longer make a chipset that works with Intel products. They made a short term decision that will really kill off their business in the long run. And, in fact, now that Intel is officially pissed off at them, it's probably too late as Intel is likely more happy to kill them off than to deal at this point.

Whoever made this choice at Nvidia wasn't worth their MBA, that's for sure.

*wait for NV to play the "scream monopoly card" against intel*

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hornet331

*wait for NV to play the "scream monopoly card" against intel*

---

Since NV's purpose would be to lock out competition on SLI, they don't have a leg to stand on. Intel's lawyers aren't stupid.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GripS

No. It's at the hardware level. Skulltrail has SLI capability only because of special chips from nvidia(nforce 100). Existing P35/X38 motherboards do not have these chips so no. You will never see SLI on your P35/X38 based motherboard.

---

There's nothing technically different between sli and crossfire, they're the same pci express functionality. What's probable is that Nvidia wrote their drivers to require identifying a nvidia chipset to run, and rather than rewrite their drivers to ignore this requirement, they make vendors buy their chipset instead, which gets the drivers past the nvidia check; it's like old software dongles. They could have added some unecessary hardware process, but it's more likely they're relying on legal and software means to inflicting their nvidia requirement.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ugly n Grey

Since NV's purpose would be to lock out competition on SLI, they don't have a leg to stand on. Intel's lawyers aren't stupid.

---

Best post in the thread!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ugly n Grey

Since NV's purpose would be to lock out competition on SLI, they don't have a leg to stand on. Intel's lawyers aren't stupid.

---

Yep, as far as bundling and lock outs go, Intel are completely innocent. What Intel could have done is forced everyone to use intel motherboards and cpus together. This would have huge antitrust implications.

But instead they simply release the best chipsets :p:. And its the fact they cant lock nvidia/amd out of this ensures this level of innovation. If nvidia had any sort of market share in the motherboard market, theyd get in trouble because of their stranghold on the graphics market.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ghost101

Yep, as far as bundling and lock outs go, Intel are completely innocent. What Intel could have done is forced everyone to use intel motherboards and cpus together. This would have huge antitrust implications.

But instead they simply release the best chipsets :p:. And its the fact they cant lock nvidia/amd out of this ensures this level of innovation. If nvidia had any sort of market share in the motherboard market, theyd get in trouble because of their stranghold on the graphics market.

---

All nVidia is doing is helping AMD indirectly. I didn't want to depend on nVidia and went with a 3870. Even if it isn't the best, it is the best option for INTEL chipsets and I don't want a nVidia chipset anyway. nVidia knows that if they don't have a monopoly on SLI, their prices on their overpriced motherboards get a more realistic price.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by keiths

There's nothing technically different between sli and crossfire, they're the same pci express functionality. What's probable is that Nvidia wrote their drivers to require identifying a nvidia chipset to run, and rather than rewrite their drivers to ignore this requirement, they make vendors buy their chipset instead, which gets the drivers past the nvidia check; it's like old software dongles. They could have added some unecessary hardware process, but it's more likely they're relying on legal and software means to inflicting their nvidia requirement.

---

Actually they're a little bit different. Yeah they both depend on PCI Express, but they rely on different portions. nVidia locked out the portion that ATI requires for CrossFire and locked out all other chipsets in their drivers.

nVidia only stands to gain by allowing SLI on Intel chipsets.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bobsama

nVidia only stands to gain by allowing SLI on Intel chipsets.

---

No they dont. nVidia will sell less motherboard chipsets at a time when they are trying desperately to gain market share. There is no way this would work.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by [cTx] Raptor22

No they dont. nVidia will sell less motherboard chipsets at a time when they are trying desperately to gain market share. There is no way this would work.

---

well if this is true, then they can have fun gaining AMD chipset share:p:

really SLI is going to be a bit limited on Intel platforms anyway. All the performance and mainstream stuff have integrated PCI lanes. What are they gona do? add extra chips on the board that aren't needed for anything and only serve to add power requirements and hamper overclocking?

Nvidia is facing a loosing game and they need to do something friendly for someone.

I can't see Nvidia being all that interested (in AMD market share). That fact is they'd be competing head to head with the ATI division for share on that platform and frankly the odds suck considering they want to pull their IGP on every NB crap on a system that may have IGP on CPU in the not so distant future. (Assuming we're talking the mass market segment). The mere thought of where this is all going is confusing, but I know Nvidia is desperately searching for ways to not get locked out.

I dunno. I think they'd love to make a deal with Intel and I don't see why Intel should to be honest. :/

serves em (nv) right, & i still think intel should only let nvidia chipsets use 1 core of their cpu's... thats (close enough for sake of arguement, ie not full potential) what nvidia are doing to intel.

Nox

haha lock all but 1 core :) That would be pretty fun to watch!

Seriously, Nvidia didn't pay to get rights to make Intel chipsets, did they? Yet they made money selling the chipsets without paying a royalty on the connection.

Now along comes SLI. They say "hey you can't use that tech unless you pay us".

Intel says "you're dreaming"

Nvidia refuses to change their tune, and now they see just what that feels like when the other side treats them the way they treated everyone else.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Anemone

haha lock all but 1 core :) That would be pretty fun to watch!

Seriously, Nvidia didn't pay to get rights to make Intel chipsets, did they? Yet they made money selling the chipsets without paying a royalty on the connection.

Now along comes SLI. They say "hey you can't use that tech unless you pay us".

Intel says "you're dreaming"

Nvidia refuses to change their tune, and now they see just what that feels like when the other side treats them the way they treated everyone else.

---

QFT! Why aren't folks seeing this? Do folks here trying to blame Intel have short memories or what?

I can't wait to see NVidia's balance sheet in a year if Intel is firm in denying a license...those record profit quarters will be a thing of the past. NVidia will be receiving a double whammy...their chipset profits will be in a freefall, as they'll be unable to make chipsets for Intel processors, and they'll be suffering a decline in video card sales due to no SLI on Nehalem (if NVidia doesn't begin permitting SLI on Intel chipsets).

It gives me a warm, fuzzy feeling to think of NVidia's situation in a year (if no license is granted). There is no reason whatsoever why Intel should permit them to build a chipset for Nehalem...and I hope they don't. What is needed now is a competitive ATI...I think many people would snap up a product from ATI that offers comparable performance. The 3870 X2 is promising if driver refinements can be made to enhance Crossfire performance and allow the card to hold it's own against the 9800GX2, which is still a largely unknown quantity.

nvidia doesnt need chipset sales, their GPU sales are still their bread and butter and still outsell ATi at an ever growing rate.

nvidia could lose their contracts with companies like dell gateway etc etc since they use nvidia SLI boards for their upper end gaming rigs...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bobsama

Actually they're a little bit different. Yeah they both depend on PCI Express, but they rely on different portions. nVidia locked out the portion that ATI requires for CrossFire and locked out all other chipsets in their drivers.

nVidia only stands to gain by allowing SLI on Intel chipsets.

---

Ummm, no.....have you seen the HP blackbird which uses the Asus 680i striker board, you can configure it with SLI or CF. It was ATI/AMD that allowed CF to run on SLI chipset.

What you guys forget is that NV sells chipsets to "complete" their platform. This strategy has worked VERY well. Even though it's probably ATI to blame for not having competitive products for so long until the RV670 and R680. Big SIs and OEMs prefer platforms, (hence the reason why AMD bought ATI to provide a complete platform) so if anything goes wrong, they just talk to 1 vendor instead of being bounced between 2 vendors. Despite the success of RV670 and R680s, from now till late this year, you will still be seeing Yorkfield being paired up with 780i and 790i on SLI platform rather than seeing X38/48 with CF.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bobsama

Actually they're a little bit different. Yeah they both depend on PCI Express, but they rely on different portions. nVidia locked out the portion that ATI requires for CrossFire and locked out all other chipsets in their drivers.

nVidia only stands to gain by allowing SLI on Intel chipsets.

---

You're a retard. It's well documented that ANY PCIe chipset can run both SLI and CF. There were hacked Forceware drivers that proved it but they're ancient so no one uses them anymore.

http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...cked+forceware

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by thephenom

Ummm, no.....have you seen the HP blackbird which uses the Asus 680i striker board, you can configure it with SLI or CF. It was ATI/AMD that allowed CF to run on SLI chipset.

What you guys forget is that NV sells chipsets to "complete" their platform. This strategy has worked VERY well. Even though it's probably ATI to blame for not having competitive products for so long until the RV670 and R680. Big SIs and OEMs prefer platforms, (hence the reason why AMD bought ATI to provide a complete platform) so if anything goes wrong, they just talk to 1 vendor instead of being bounced between 2 vendors. Despite the success of RV670 and R680s, from now till late this year, you will still be seeing Yorkfield being paired up with 780i and 790i on SLI platform rather than seeing X38/48 with CF.

---

Ummm no;) Blackbird is great now. If nVidia can't get an Intel license, it becomes an also-ran when Nehalem ships. Sorry, but they're greedy Bas^$%#@s. They want free licenses for other's IP while they want everyone to pay them for their IP. I don't know but that sounds like BS to me.:rolleyes:

As Intel launches newer products, nVidia's share will get smaller and smaller. We might get to a point where nVidia becomes VIA back in 2000. Reverse engineering for Intel products and using none Industry standard products with horrible results.

Sure they'll do great in the Discrete Card market. But it's not like ATI/AMD is sucking LOL!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Donnie27

Ummm no;) Blackbird is great now. If nVidia can't get an Intel license, it becomes an also-ran when Nehalem ships. Sorry, but they're greedy Bas^$%#@s. They want free licenses for other's IP while they want everyone to pay them for their IP. I don't know but that sounds like BS to me.:rolleyes:

---

It's actually worse than that, as nvidia isn't offering any IP, but requiring a fee to allow using an inherent pcie function on their hardware by anyone not nvidia. It's like the toll roads in Texas that have been added to tax payer built roads. It's crap.

Chipset IGP's are going to be gone after the current generation of chipsets, so other than multiple sli lanes what can nvidia really offer? If they surrender sli exclusivity their chipset will at best be the same as intels. So the choice is either surrender sli and make a chipset no one will buy, or keep sli exclusivity and not be able to make an intel chipset. Either way their chipset business is gone.

At least by allowing sli on intel platforms they have the potential to sell more graphics cards, so they don't really have a choice to do anything else.

My problem with nvidia's chipsets is they're power hogs. If they made them to sip power, it'd be a selling point.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by keiths

My problem with nvidia's chipsets is they're power hogs. If they made them to sip power, it'd be a selling point.

---

i agree, nvidia chipsets run hotter as well, they're not as experts in designing chipsets since intel know their cpu best. Although intel's design is not much faster (except superpi) they somehow managed to get the best performance/watt

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Donnie27

Ummm no;) Blackbird is great now. If nVidia can't get an Intel license, it becomes an also-ran when Nehalem ships. Sorry, but they're greedy Bas^$%#@s. They want free licenses for other's IP while they want everyone to pay them for their IP. I don't know but that sounds like BS to me.:rolleyes:

As Intel launches newer products, nVidia's share will get smaller and smaller. We might get to a point where nVidia becomes VIA back in 2000. Reverse engineering for Intel products and using none Industry standard products with horrible results.

Sure they'll do great in the Discrete Card market. But it's not like ATI/AMD is sucking LOL!

---

The VIA Apollo 133T chipset was legendary... got Tualatins to 2GHz, the fastest CPUs for many years afterwards. Here's mine on air: http://valid.x86-secret.com/show_oc?id=166913

(im actually posting this on that pc, lol)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lestat

nvidia doesnt need chipset sales, their GPU sales are still their bread and butter and still outsell ATi at an ever growing rate.

nvidia could lose their contracts with companies like dell gateway etc etc since they use nvidia SLI boards for their upper end gaming rigs...

---

Apparently that is what they want.
I se no other reason for it.

why can't someone just hack the drivers again?

i imagine it can't be that hard

and its not like the legality of something stops anything on the internet *cough* piratebay

You people are all acting like Nvidia is a cornered rat or something. What you fail to see is that they have one BIG option. How about, if it gets real dirty and Intel refuses to let them make any more chipsets, they take a 3bil loan and they buy AMD? And they make their cards AMD exclusive. Who is gonna make cards for the high-end intel systems then? With ATI under their wing and no other real option on the market, what will Intel do then, eh? Make their own? I'm writing this on an all out Intel machine and I can tell you one thing: Intel DO NOT know how to make a decent video card. Can't wait for my GeForce to get back from repairs...

Wouldn't happen..that would be creating a monoply and using it to influence another market, IMHO. It;'s not wrong to havea monoply, but using it is such situations would be highly illegal, and would really spell thier doom..hence noone even considering such.

Drivers have new bit encryption that makes it near impossible iirc

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BullGod

You people are all acting like Nvidia is a cornered rat or something. What you fail to see is that they have one BIG option. How about, if it gets real dirty and Intel refuses to let them make any more chipsets, they take a 3bil loan and they buy AMD? And they make their cards AMD exclusive. Who is gonna make cards for the high-end intel systems then? With ATI under their wing and no other real option on the market, what will Intel do then, eh? Make their own? I'm writing this on an all out Intel machine and I can tell you one thing: Intel DO NOT know how to make a decent video card. Can't wait for my GeForce to get back from repairs...

---

Think about it.

It wouldn't happen, they would have an anti trust case shoved in their face quicker than you could say Intel CSI.

Also, Intel don't make discreet GPU's so I don't know what you're on about there.

Quote:

---

why can't someone just hack the drivers again?

i imagine it can't be that hard

---

The encryption is supposed to be very strong and you would have to re hack for each driver release.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BullGod

You people are all acting like Nvidia is a cornered rat or something. What you fail to see is that they have one BIG option. How about, if it gets real dirty and Intel refuses to let them make any more chipsets, they take a 3bil loan and they buy AMD? And they make their cards AMD exclusive. Who is gonna make cards for the high-end intel systems then? With ATI under their wing and no other real option on the market, what will Intel do then, eh? Make their own? I'm writing this on an all out Intel machine and I can tell you one thing: Intel DO NOT know how to make a decent video card. Can't wait for my GeForce to get back from repairs...

---

Intel has the most skilled semiconductor engineers in the world. Engineers who designed a multiplier lock over a decade ago that was never successfully broken, and have created such a powerful CPU with the Core Duo and Core 2 Duo/Quad lineup that they have single-handedly made AMD's CPUs look woefully inadequate. Not to mention the fact that Intel has such a vast array of resources that if they really wanted to build a high performance graphics card, they could easily and quickly do it. They are, however, the world's largest semiconductor manufacturer and would likely draw very considerable antitrust attention if they used their position in the industry to purchase dominance in that field.

Intel's strategy here is impeccable...use your opponent's business plan against them. NVidia's business plan uses SLI as a lever to force people to buy their inferior chipsets...if NVidia has no chipset, their business plan falls to pieces. This forces NVidia to open SLI to all chipsets if they wish to continue to market it.

NVidia is used to being the 2000lb gorrilla and doing the bullying...their "our way or the highway" mantra on SLI confirms this. Unfortunately for them, Intel is a 20000lb gorilla...that NVidia tried to bully into paying hefty license fees to have SLI enabled on Intel chipsets. Intel is simply treating NVidia how NVidia has been treating the entire industry. I'm personally relishing the prospect of seeing NVidia officially cry uncle and be humbled before the entire industry it had no hesitation of pushing around when it suited them. What goes around comes around and I'll be eagerly watching when it comes around on NVidia when Nehalem ships.:)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 3NZ0

Think about it.

It wouldn't happen, they would have an anti trust case shoved in their face quicker than you could say Intel CSI.

Also, Intel don't make discreet GPU's so I don't know what you're on about there.



The encryption is supposed to be very strong and you would have to re hack for each driver release.

---

Intel do make embedded video cards though. So they couldn't make a point in a court of law. If that "merger" would happen, Nvidia would be practically just like them. A company that produces CPU's, chipsets and graphics cards. Also the big thing here that you people fail to see is not this chipset business but rather Intel's and AMD's plan to embed video cards into their CPU's that"s what has gotten Nvidia so angry now. I can imagine that if a single core from one of those 6 cores processors that everyone is talking about would be optimized as a GPU and another one as a northbridge, taking into consideration that they work at 3Ghz and up, it would make a killer machine. That's the real threat here, but frankly I think it's a bit tricky to pull off. And I don't like the idea in general, I think that for now the graphics aspect of the PC should stay as it is...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BullGod

Intel do make embedded video cards though. So they couldn't make a point in a court of law. If that "merger" would happen, Nvidia would be practically just like them. A company that produces CPU's, chipsets and graphics cards...

---

except 1 problem... if amd is sold off, the x86 license is no longer valid... as has been stated on this forum many many times.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by [cTx] Raptor22

The VIA Apollo 133T chipset was legendary... got Tualatins to 2GHz, the fastest CPUs for many years afterwards. Here's mine on air: http://valid.x86-secret.com/show_oc?id=166913

(im actually posting this on that pc, lol)

---

Sure, but look at how many tries it took to get it right?:down: My Abit 133A Rev 1 stunk up the place and took two more revisions to get close to what anyone would call stable. Rev 1 & 2 686B should have been recalled FCOL! So about 6 out 10 I've owned. nVidia is where they are with Chipsets because VIA stunk so bad. The first few nVidia based boards sucked as well but were still a breath of fresh air compared to VIA. Sure there were a few good Chipsets that worked. The problem for VIA was that too many of them sucked.:D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BullGod

You people are all acting like Nvidia is a cornered rat or something. What you fail to see is that they have one BIG option. How about, if it gets real dirty and Intel refuses to let them make any more chipsets, they take a 3bil loan and they buy AMD? And they make their cards AMD exclusive. Who is gonna make cards for the high-end intel systems then? With ATI under their wing and no other real option on the market, what will Intel do then, eh? Make their own? I'm writing this on an all out Intel machine and I can tell you one thing: Intel DO NOT know how to make a decent video card. Can't wait for my GeForce to get back from repairs...

---

Heard of the Larrabee? Link

That's basically Intel's first step into GPU, while it probably won't be top of the line in its first one or two year, but don't be surprised when they make a monster GPU in the next few years.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rozzyroz

except 1 problem... if amd is sold off, the x86 license is no longer valid... as has been stated on this forum many many times.

---

So what? They could just make up a new CPU like AMD and Intel tried many years ago. If I've learned one thing is that people will buy whatever Nvidia feeds them. Just look at the 8600 card... But whatever this is pointless anyways, I've never really liked speculations. I for one wish that things stay exactly the same in the PC world for at least another 4 years.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BullGod

So what? They could just make up a new CPU like AMD and Intel tried many years ago. If I've learned one thing is that people will buy whatever Nvidia feeds them. Just look at the 8600 card... But whatever this is pointless anyways, I've never really liked speculations. I for one wish that things stay exactly the same in the PC world for at least another 4 years.

---

You make it sound like designing a new CPU architecture is as simple and cheap as a walk in the park. :ROTF:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by thephenom

You make it sound like designing a new CPU architecture is as simple and cheap as a walk in the park. :ROTF:

---

Well it IS darn it, I mean they grow on trees :)

To another posters point, speculation can drive you mad sometimes, however the landscape of computing is changing rapidly and Nvidia is scrambling to offer more shareholder value. Being locked out of everything but discrete graphics would be bad for business, especially since Intel is driving forward with its GPU program. I'd be crapping bricks if I were Nvidia's chairman. I mean, my bonus would hinge on the stock price and they need to compete on as level a playing field as they can create.

While this thread and it's title are speculation, they are important questions to consider before you invest your money in chip maker stock. :p: . Of course, it should play no role in what video card you buy really, I mean most us buy after we chose a m/b or whatever camp we like best.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by thephenom

You make it sound like designing a new CPU architecture is as simple and cheap as a walk in the park. :ROTF:

---

Well it should take less than 25 years now shouldn't it? But at this rate in 10 years time we will still have that old architecture only with 30 cores. Because people usually run more than two intensive applications at a time now don't they? But yeah whateva... just let this die for now.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BullGod

You people are all acting like Nvidia is a cornered rat or something. What you fail to see is that they have one BIG option. How about, if it gets real dirty and Intel refuses to let them make any more chipsets, they take a 3bil loan and they buy AMD? And they make their cards AMD exclusive. Who is gonna make cards for the high-end intel systems then? With ATI under their wing and no other real option on the market, what will Intel do then, eh? Make their own? I'm writing this on an all out Intel machine and I can tell you one thing: Intel DO NOT know how to make a decent video card. Can't wait for my GeForce to get back from repairs...

---

That'll be tantamount to shooting itself in the foot... Nvidia sells more video cards on Intel platform than both Nvidia and AMD platforms combined.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BullGod

So what? They could just make up a new CPU like AMD and Intel tried many years ago. If I've learned one thing is that people will buy whatever Nvidia feeds them. Just look at the 8600 card... But whatever this is pointless anyways, I've never really liked speculations. I for one wish that things stay exactly the same in the PC world for at least another 4 years.

---

But what OS would it run and what games would it play?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BullGod

So what? They could just make up a new CPU like AMD and Intel tried many years ago.

---

if Nvidia decides to make a new CPU, what instruction set would it be using? It can't be x86 as they don't have license.

without x86, it won't on windows (or insert your favorite i386/x64 distro here).

you do understand now that your reply is very silly. right?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jarthel

if Nvidia decides to make a new CPU, what instruction set would it be using? It can't be x86 as they don't have license.

without x86, it won't on windows (or insert your favorite i386/x64 distro here).

you do understand now that your reply is very silly. right?

---

Sidebar... How did AMD get an x86 license? How long is it for?

I have no experiences beyond Nforce4 so i cannot say anything about them, but it sounds like their chipsets nowadays are crap.

So if i understood correctly, Nvidia would be better off making and selling GPU's only.

And letting atleast Intel use their SLI and maybe AMD too.

Lately they've been releasing mediocre products at best. Nvidia, forget the chipsets and give us something to drool on and make our e-penises big again!!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BullGod

You people are all acting like Nvidia is a cornered rat or something. What you fail to see is that they have one BIG option. How about, if it gets real dirty and Intel refuses to let them make any more chipsets, they take a 3bil loan and they buy AMD? And they make their cards AMD exclusive. Who is gonna make cards for the high-end intel systems then? With ATI under their wing and no other real option on the market, what will Intel do then, eh? Make their own? I'm writing this on an all out Intel machine and I can tell you one thing: Intel DO NOT know how to make a decent video card. Can't wait for my GeForce to get back from repairs...

---

That sums it up nicely , isn't it ? :ROTF: :clap:

Nvidias sli seems to be a lost cause.
unless they open up the drivers.

I wouldnt get sli since in the future and amd dont have the goods for speed, however crossfireX on the Intel chipset is good enough.

I am a power user, and those who are even worse the 30inch people needs speed and pretty pictures.
Nvidias sli seems like it aint gonna be good due to a solo chipset.
who wants warmer, more issues with a motherboard?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BullGod

Intel DO NOT know how to make a decent video card. Can't wait for my GeForce to get back from repairs...

---

Irony....:rofl:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 2000army

Irony....:rofl:

---

That's not funny man. It's over a month now and the only decent game I can play is Sins of a Solar Empire. Of course I'm kinda angry at Intel and Nvidia right now. They are both good companies though. ATI was too...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by virtualrain

Sidebar... How did AMD get an x86 license? How long is it for?

---

When Intel won the contract to be the CPU supplier for IBM's PC, IBM required that there was at least one more supplier of x86 CPUs. AMD won that contract. A few years later Intel tried to revoke AMDs licence. AMD sued and won the lawsuit and they now have a permanent non-transferable x86 license. BTW Nvidia could try to buy Via or at least their Centaur CPU division if they wanted to enter the x86 CPU market although im not sure if VIA's parent company would want to sell.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BrowncoatGR

When Intel won the contract to be the CPU supplier for IBM's PC, IBM required that there was at least one more supplier of x86 CPUs. AMD won that contract. A few years later Intel tried to revoke AMDs licence. AMD sued and won the lawsuit and they now have a permanent non-transferable x86 license. BTW Nvidia could try to buy Via or at least their Centaur CPU division if they wanted to enter the x86 CPU market although im not sure if VIA's parent company would want to sell.

---

That license is also non transferable. IBM ALSO has a license that goes beyond just x86 instructions. They can produce Pentium clones (not their own chip, Intel's actual Pentium) . I think this was granted to make the US military feel good about the (radiation) hardened Pentium CPU's they use in their equipment so there would potentially be a second source of supply.

Coming up to modern times I have no idea what it means in practice except that Nvidia can't buy an X86 license by acquisition, they pretty much have to beg Intel for their own if they want to get into compatible CPU production. The bar is so high I just can't see any company wanting to get into building desktop style CPU's. We all know AMD is not on top in the performance class, but they do have some very good tech in play in this arena at the moment both on server and consumer sides.

Anyhow, there is just no reason for Intel to grant Nvidia license to anything. In fact just thinking as a shareholder, I'd scream blue murder :) as there's nothing in this that would increase profits to Intel. There's other areas for the green team to grow, games, consoles, physics, parallel processing, handheld device chips and the list goes on. Nvidia has a bright future if they choose where they go carefully and they are definitely a tech savvy company. But mixing it up with Intel is not a great idea.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BullGod

Intel do make embedded video cards though. So they couldn't make a point in a court of law. If that "merger" would happen, Nvidia would be practically just like them. A company that produces CPU's, chipsets and graphics cards. Also the big thing here that you people fail to see is not this chipset business but rather Intel's and AMD's plan to embed video cards into their CPU's that"s what has gotten Nvidia so angry now. I can imagine that if a single core from one of those 6 cores processors that everyone is talking about would be optimized as a GPU and another one as a northbridge, taking into consideration that they work at 3Ghz and up, it would make a killer machine. That's the real threat here, but frankly I think it's a bit tricky to pull off. And I don't like the idea in general, I think that for now the graphics aspect of the PC should stay as it is...

---

They make IGP's, IGP != Discreet GPU.

Merger wouldn't happen, again.