Page 5 of 7 FirstFirst ... 234567 LastLast
Results 101 to 125 of 155

Thread: Intel Files Lawsuit Against Nvidia

  1. #101
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Downers Grove, IL
    Posts
    78
    I have an nForce 4 board at the moment. Can't wait to burn it after I upgrade.
    Rig:Intel Core i7 920 @ 4.2 (200x21) w/TRUE // Evga x58 // 6GB Corsair Dominator DDR3 1600 // Evga GTX 285 // WD VeloctiRaptor 150gb x2 Raid 0 & WD Cavier black 1TB // Antec 1200

  2. #102
    Xtreme Enthusiast
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    617
    no reason why NV couldn't get motherboards made that have 128/256mb GDDR2/3 soldered to the board along with a GPU (eg 9400) that connects to the existing PCI-e connections when activated in the BIOS, and passes the PCI-e lanes to a PCI-e x16 connector when disabled, basically like the ATI rage chips with their 4 or 8mb vram that you get on server boards

    personally i'd buy a board like that over a motherboard with a GPU that accessed system memory in a second. i hope they lose this case just so they'll go ahead and do it!

  3. #103
    Xtreme X.I.P.
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    Shipai
    Posts
    31,147
    Quote Originally Posted by ghost_recon88 View Post
    Why the heck would anyone want an nVidia i7 chipset anyways? With X58 supporting both Crossfire and SLI.
    hmmm lets see, lower qpi multipliers for higher bclocks, possibly higher than 4ghz/8GTs qpi clocks, much much better pciE overclocking...

    im not saying nvidias chipsets are great, but if intel managed to lock them out then intel owns the whole platform, and they can do whatever they want.

    apart from beeing able to force some crazy drm onto us, pushing prices to ridiculous levels, limiting or locking overclocking on at least some segments, the most important thing is: innovation and diversification!

    if your the only chipset provider for 90% of the markets cpus, then there is almost no pressure ot diversify or innovate. it doesnt mean intel wont diversify their products and wont innovate to meet all segments demands, but it makes it very likely that sooner or later innovation and diversification will get worse, worse and worse.

  4. #104
    I am Xtreme zanzabar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    SF bay area, CA
    Posts
    15,871
    i would like to see via, or ati. ati wont happen but the r600 was great and they actually unlinked the memory from the FSB without using variable multis something that NV could never do. and via would be great but i doubt that they could pay for a license
    5930k, R5E, samsung 8GBx4 d-die, vega 56, wd gold 8TB, wd 4TB red, 2TB raid1 wd blue 5400
    samsung 840 evo 500GB, HP EX 1TB NVME , CM690II, swiftech h220, corsair 750hxi

  5. #105
    Xtreme Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    473
    Quote Originally Posted by SNiiPE_DoGG View Post
    I never had a 790i but I had a 680 and let me tell you, that was PLENTY of nvidia crap for me.

    seriously though, in what ways was the 790i the best board for 775? I can think of none.

    Quote Originally Posted by 16floz470ml View Post
    Well right off the bat it has 3 pcie x 16 slots. Your motherboard for example only has two.
    Your joking....? I can't tell.
    Last edited by drizzt5; 02-18-2009 at 10:57 PM.
    Quote Originally Posted by Bobbylite View Post
    with great MHZ comes great responsibility
    CPU:Q6600 G0 @ 3.825
    Motherboard:Asus P5E X38
    Memory:2x2GB OCZ Reapers DDR2 1066
    Graphics Card:Asus 4850
    Hard Drive:2xSegate 500gb 32MB Cache raid0
    Power Supply:Xion 800W
    Case:3DAurora
    CPU cooling: D-tek Fuzion V2 (Quad insert removed)
    GPU cooling: mcw60
    Monitor:24" LG

  6. #106
    Xtreme Addict
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    1,326
    Quote Originally Posted by zanzabar View Post
    and apple is replacing the mac book with amd gpu and intel chipsets in q3, when the NV contract expires. they are only using it now becouse they have to
    Source?

    Also, vanilla macbooks with discrete GPUs? I find that hard to believe..

  7. #107
    Xtreme Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    .ID
    Posts
    320
    "We are confident that our license, as negotiated, applies," said Jen-Hsun Huang, president and CEO of NVIDIA. "At the heart of this issue is that the CPU has run its course and the soul of the PC is shifting quickly to the GPU. This is clearly an attempt to stifle innovation to protect a decaying CPU business."
    Just wondering what is the word "GPU" stands for in Huang's mind ? General Processing Unit ?

    How bout the "CPU" ? Prolly for him is Crappy Processing Unit ??

    Just can't believe this dude, what a joke !
    Last edited by bing; 02-19-2009 at 01:09 AM.

  8. #108
    Xtreme Mentor
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Evje, Norway
    Posts
    3,419
    Quote Originally Posted by hollo View Post
    no reason why NV couldn't get motherboards made that have 128/256mb GDDR2/3 soldered to the board along with a GPU (eg 9400) that connects to the existing PCI-e connections when activated in the BIOS, and passes the PCI-e lanes to a PCI-e x16 connector when disabled, basically like the ATI rage chips with their 4 or 8mb vram that you get on server boards
    That sentence is freaking impossible... i get a headache halfway through it.
    Quote Originally Posted by iddqd View Post
    Not to be outdone by rival ATi, nVidia's going to offer its own drivers on EA Download Manager.
    X2 555 @ B55 @ 4050 1.4v, NB @ 2700 1.35v Fuzion V1
    Gigabyte 890gpa-ud3h v2.1
    HD6950 2GB swiftech MCW60 @ 1000mhz, 1.168v 1515mhz memory
    Corsair Vengeance 2x4GB 1866 cas 9 @ 1800 8.9.8.27.41 1T 110ns 1.605v
    C300 64GB, 2X Seagate barracuda green LP 2TB, Essence STX, Zalman ZM750-HP
    DDC 3.2/petras, PA120.3 ek-res400, Stackers STC-01,
    Dell U2412m, G110, G9x, Razer Scarab

  9. #109
    I am Xtreme zanzabar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    SF bay area, CA
    Posts
    15,871
    Quote Originally Posted by ToTTenTranz View Post
    Source?

    Also, vanilla macbooks with discrete GPUs? I find that hard to believe..
    sorry cant give one, but NV is being dropped. if u look back im like 99% on calling things like this, but sometimes a month or so off

    but its going to go like this, apple is switching the newer intel platform with ddr3 sodimm then in the same time frame or just affter they will ofter the 46xx mobile
    Last edited by zanzabar; 02-19-2009 at 02:25 AM.
    5930k, R5E, samsung 8GBx4 d-die, vega 56, wd gold 8TB, wd 4TB red, 2TB raid1 wd blue 5400
    samsung 840 evo 500GB, HP EX 1TB NVME , CM690II, swiftech h220, corsair 750hxi

  10. #110
    Banned
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    696
    Quote Originally Posted by zanzabar View Post
    sorry cant give one, but NV is being dropped. if u look back im like 99% on calling things like this, but sometimes a month or so off

    but its going to go like this, apple is switching the newer intel platform with ddr3 sodimm then in the same time frame or just affter they will ofter the 46xx mobile
    sigh... if only you knew..

  11. #111
    Banned
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    696
    Quote Originally Posted by Shintai View Post
    No..the GPU is multifold more simple than a CPU. Its like comparing a toy car with a real car. GPUs are simple in construction and contains alot of "copy/paste" logic. It takes about 4-5 years to develop a CPU with 1000s of people. A GPU is usually made in 1-1½ years with 100s of people. The record for a GPU is about 3 years I think. With completely new architecture. G80 costed about 475mio$ to develop according to nVidia. K10, K8, Core 2, i7 etc is multi billion$ research pieces.
    This statement more than any other makes it completely clear that you make things up when you don't know the answer.

    The GPU is just as complex if not moreso to design. It does *not* take 1-1/12 years for a new architecture. It takes 3-4 years. It also cost $1 billion for developing G80, not 500 million.

    Additionally, 70% or so of the CPU die area is cache, not fundamental logic. This is contrasted with the GPUs relatively high % of logic vs. cache.

    If you want to talk copy-paste logic you can probably look at multi-core on-die in a CPU.

    Since it's so cheap, so fast, and so easy to design a GPU according to you, why hasn't Intel just made a directly competitive traditional GPU ASAP to put ATI and NV out of business? Why are they taking the larrabee/x86 route and risking a lot on something that doesn't have an ecosystem to support it? Do you think it will be easy to thread applications 16-64 ways?

    They're making an awfully big bet on an unproven technology. Even if it works well, winning over developers to move to a GPU which has no installed base is a whole other struggle on top of that.
    Last edited by Sr7; 02-19-2009 at 03:36 AM.

  12. #112
    Xtreme Addict
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    1,326
    Quote Originally Posted by Sr7 View Post
    This statement more than any other makes it completely clear that you make things up when you don't know the answer.

    The GPU is just as complex if not moreso to design. It does *not* take 1-1/12 years for a new architecture. It takes 3-4 years. It also cost $1 billion for developing G80, not 500 million.

    Additionally, 70% or so of the CPU die area is cache, not fundamental logic. This is contrasted with the GPUs relatively high % of logic vs. cache.


    If you want to talk copy-paste logic you can probably look at multi-core on-die in a CPU.
    So according to you, every engineer who works in Intel and AMD must be pretty stupid, if they only come up with a new design every 5 or 6 years, they're more in number and spend more money on R&D.

    Tell me, what's the difference between each of GT200's 240 SPs? And each of RV770's 40 TMUs? There's no copy/paste in there?




    Quote Originally Posted by Sr7 View Post
    Since it's so cheap, so fast, and so easy to design a GPU according to you, why hasn't Intel just made a directly competitive traditional GPU ASAP to put ATI and NV out of business?
    Because they lack:

    1 - Engineering experience for 3D-oriented hardware;
    2 - Engineering experience for driver development;
    3 - Patents for for efficient 3D architectures. nVidia and ATI have been registering those for more than 10 years now.




    Quote Originally Posted by Sr7 View Post
    They're making an awfully big bet on an unproven technology. Even if it works well, winning over developers to move to a GPU which has no installed base is a whole other struggle on top of that.
    Thank god for those guys who don't "fear the unproven". If everyone had that, we would still be using the fingers in our hands to make calculations.

    Some people just don't get the point of science at all...
    Last edited by ToTTenTranz; 02-19-2009 at 04:31 AM.

  13. #113
    Xtreme Legend
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    17,242
    i'm pretty sure they had little support from Intel to develop their chipsets and still managed to do a cracker job....not perfect but considering their improvement over older gen and issues with support nvidia did pretty good with their chipset. It's a real shame that 790i had some issues from previous gen otherwise as it shown amazing improvement to previous gen particularly overclocking and clock for clock performance wise against Intel chipsets. i never thought i'd see the day nvidia beat intel boards in SuperPi efficiency for example. That takes some serious skill on their part.

    i really hope intel lose this lawsuit for everyone's sake because once we start losing that competition we will LOSE......WE WILL LOSE......that is correct. Remember this, companies dont innovate as much when they have a big advantage, they get lazy and y and just work their old tech to death until someones flies past them in a huge way....all manufacturers have been in this position including the three companies being discussed here.

    Why do you guys think ATI sells their cards and CPUs at these prices now.......do you remember the days of 9800 cards and K8.......FX CPUs etc......how the time changed hey

    well kiss all that goodbuy if you want Nvidia to die. That's an incredibly foolish thing to say, incredibly foolish. I dont think some people are stopping to think before they post here.
    Last edited by dinos22; 02-19-2009 at 04:42 AM.
    Team.AU
    Got tube?
    GIGABYTE Australia
    Need a GIGABYTE bios or support?



  14. #114
    Xtreme Addict
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    The Netherlands, Friesland
    Posts
    2,244
    How little support did they have?
    I can remember how Intel screwed DFI in the past by giving them 2 chipsets to develop there boards while ASUS received 100.
    If nVidia also get screwed like that, then I can't blame nVidia for the quality.
    As as customer that doesn't change much, I won't buy anything bad. That's how things work.
    >i5-3570K
    >Asrock Z77E-ITX Wifi
    >Asus GTX 670 Mini
    >Cooltek Coolcube Black
    >CM Silent Pro M700
    >Crucial M4 128Gb Msata
    >Cooler Master Seidon 120M
    Hell yes its a mini-ITX gaming rig!

  15. #115
    Xtreme Cruncher
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Denmark
    Posts
    7,747
    Quote Originally Posted by Sr7 View Post
    The GPU is just as complex if not moreso to design. It does *not* take 1-1/12 years for a new architecture. It takes 3-4 years. It also cost $1 billion for developing G80, not 500 million.
    Nope, 475million.

    http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=2870&p=5

    And a CPU is multitude times more complex in instruction handing, logic complexity, validation etc. And your cache arguement doesnt hold water. Your multicore is like shooting yourself in the foot. Each TMU, shader etc is a pure copy of the other, and there tend to be alot of that in GPUs.

    Just because you make a GPU with x amount of transistors doesnt make it complex in any way besides manufactoring.
    Crunching for Comrades and the Common good of the People.

  16. #116
    Xtreme Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Chicago, Illinois
    Posts
    114
    Maybe I'm missing something here but what's the big deal? This obviously isn't over the Atom\Ion platform right? Does this mean Nvidia are getting ready to release an i7 based chipset?
    Intel Core2Quad Q6600 4.1Ghz@1.68v 3.6Ghz 24\7|EVGA nForce 680i SLI|BFG Tech 8800GTX 675Mhz\1566Mhz\2106Mhz|Team Group Xtreem PC2-9600 1266Mhz|Custom WC Kit CPU\GPU\PA120.2|

  17. #117
    Xtreme Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Spring Texas (near Houston)
    Posts
    135
    Competition is normally a good thing for consumers. The move by Intel doesn't appear to be a good thing in the long run for consumers. Hopefully Intel will prove me wrong on this!!
    Primary rig:
    e5200 @3.875 (12.5x310) / Gigabyte EP45-UD3R / Sapphire 4830 @720/940 / OCZ Platinum 2GB DDR2-1100 /
    Water cooled- CPU: Fuzion v1 / Laing D4 / Bonnieville Heatercore + MCR120

    For sale: AMD 4200+ Toledo / ASROCK DUAL SATAII

  18. #118
    Xtreme Addict
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    1,326
    Quote Originally Posted by Mr Roboto View Post
    Maybe I'm missing something here but what's the big deal? This obviously isn't over the Atom\Ion platform right? Does this mean Nvidia are getting ready to release an i7 based chipset?
    What you're missing is that the lawsuit isn't because of i7 only. It's about every Intel CPU with a memory controller, and i7 just happens to be the first.
    The next CPU with IMC in schedule is Atom Pineview, hence the Ion discussion.

  19. #119
    I am Xtreme
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Little Rock
    Posts
    7,204
    Quote Originally Posted by ToTTenTranz View Post
    What you're missing is that the lawsuit isn't because of i7 only. It's about every Intel CPU with a memory controller, and i7 just happens to be the first.
    The next CPU with IMC in schedule is Atom Pineview, hence the Ion discussion.
    Thank you!

    Quote Originally Posted by Linux_Box
    Competition is normally a good thing for consumers. The move by Intel doesn't appear to be a good thing in the long run for consumers. Hopefully Intel will prove me wrong on this!!
    No, that's not true at all. No one's stopping nVidia from paying for license. If Intel was shutting nVidia out by keeping them from PAYING like any one else, then all the talk of squashing competition might be valid.

    If I'd invested Billions in MY IP, I'd want to collect license fees to recoup some of my expenditures as well. No matter what Socialist and Communist say, that's what truly drives innovation. To continue to grow, Intel has to compete with itself.
    Quote Originally Posted by Movieman
    With the two approaches to "how" to design a processor WE are the lucky ones as we get to choose what is important to us as individuals.
    For that we should thank BOTH (AMD and Intel) companies!


    Posted by duploxxx
    I am sure JF is relaxed and smiling these days with there intended launch schedule. SNB Xeon servers on the other hand....
    Posted by gallag
    there yo go bringing intel into a amd thread again lol, if that was someone droping a dig at amd you would be crying like a girl.
    qft!

  20. #120
    Xtreme Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Chicago, Illinois
    Posts
    114
    Quote Originally Posted by ToTTenTranz View Post
    What you're missing is that the lawsuit isn't because of i7 only. It's about every Intel CPU with a memory controller, and i7 just happens to be the first.
    The next CPU with IMC in schedule is Atom Pineview, hence the Ion discussion.
    OK I see thanks. I didn't think Nvidia was releasing anymore Intel based chipsets.

    Just saw this at VR-Zone

    NVIDIA has responded to a Monday court filing in which Intel alleged that the 4-year-old chipset license agreement the companies signed does not extend to Intel’s future generation CPUs with “integrated” memory controllers, such as Nehalem. Nvidia's CEO Jen-Hsun Huang reiterated that they are confident that their license, as negotiated, applies and that this is clearly an attempt to stifle innovation to protect a decaying CPU business.

    Update #1 (19th Feb) : http://forums.vr-zone.com/news-aroun...ng-update.html

    Update #2 (19th Feb) : The News has managed to scan a copy of the court filing.

    Update #3 (19th Feb) : It looks like a reenact of the saga between Intel and VIA where Intel tried to block VIA on having the Pentium 4 FSB license back in 2001. As a result, many board makers were reluctant to make motherboards based on VIA chipsets, fearing of getting involved in the lawsuit. Therefore, we asked the same question if the motherboard makers will make boards based on Nvidia's Nehalem chipset. Most makers replied that they are waiting for further instructions from both sides and one of the makers is reluctant citing poor support from Nvidia as one of the reason.
    Poor support from Nvidia you say, eh?
    Last edited by Mr Roboto; 02-19-2009 at 06:41 AM.
    Intel Core2Quad Q6600 4.1Ghz@1.68v 3.6Ghz 24\7|EVGA nForce 680i SLI|BFG Tech 8800GTX 675Mhz\1566Mhz\2106Mhz|Team Group Xtreem PC2-9600 1266Mhz|Custom WC Kit CPU\GPU\PA120.2|

  21. #121
    Engineering The Xtreme
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    MA, USA
    Posts
    7,217
    Quote Originally Posted by Mr Roboto View Post


    Poor support from Nvidia you say, eh?
    that would be foxconn IIRC, they scrapped the dreadnought citing that the 790 chipset was so awful they couldn't work with it any more.

  22. #122
    Xtreme Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    169
    Dumb question here, does a company that owns a X license for A part allowed to ban other company that make supporting tech for that A part?
    The way i see it, if it does allowed, then its possible in the future we will have an all intel parts from gfx to usb stick. Banning other chipset other than theirs is just a beginning.

    -tam2-

  23. #123
    Xtreme Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Chicago, Illinois
    Posts
    114
    Quote Originally Posted by SNiiPE_DoGG View Post
    that would be foxconn IIRC, they scrapped the dreadnought citing that the 790 chipset was so awful they couldn't work with it any more.
    Yeah once my 680i was up and running it was great but when there were problems it was a nightmare. These chipsets are SO quirky and just have really weird issues unlike anything I've ever experienced. I imagine the 790i is similar since it's just a derivative of these early chipsets.

    I remember hearing about Foxconn ditching the 790i. Gigabyte pulled their in house designed 680i because of these quirks. Most of the other big motherboard companies made sure NOT to follow Nvidia's reference design. Asus seems to be the only ones who created a successful in house version.

    Too bad because with some work they could have been really good, although take SLI out of the equation and Intel based chipsets are clearly better.
    Intel Core2Quad Q6600 4.1Ghz@1.68v 3.6Ghz 24\7|EVGA nForce 680i SLI|BFG Tech 8800GTX 675Mhz\1566Mhz\2106Mhz|Team Group Xtreem PC2-9600 1266Mhz|Custom WC Kit CPU\GPU\PA120.2|

  24. #124
    I am Xtreme
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Little Rock
    Posts
    7,204
    Quote Originally Posted by Mr Roboto View Post
    Yeah once my 680i was up and running it was great but when there were problems it was a nightmare. These chipsets are SO quirky and just have really weird issues unlike anything I've ever experienced. I imagine the 790i is similar since it's just a derivative of these early chipsets.

    I remember hearing about Foxconn ditching the 790i. Gigabyte pulled their in house designed 680i because of these quirks. Most of the other big motherboard companies made sure NOT to follow Nvidia's reference design. Asus seems to be the only ones who created a successful in house version.

    Too bad because with some work they could have been really good, although take SLI out of the equation and Intel based chipsets are clearly better.
    VIA lost that court battle though. They didn't have to pay Intel because they'd changed it (tech) enough that it almost didn't infringe anymore.
    Quote Originally Posted by Movieman
    With the two approaches to "how" to design a processor WE are the lucky ones as we get to choose what is important to us as individuals.
    For that we should thank BOTH (AMD and Intel) companies!


    Posted by duploxxx
    I am sure JF is relaxed and smiling these days with there intended launch schedule. SNB Xeon servers on the other hand....
    Posted by gallag
    there yo go bringing intel into a amd thread again lol, if that was someone droping a dig at amd you would be crying like a girl.
    qft!

  25. #125
    Xtreme Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    498
    If anyone feels like doing a lil' reading:

    Intel court filing Vs. Nvidia:

    http://www.itexaminer.com/images/Int...0Complaint.pdf
    Last edited by Face; 02-19-2009 at 10:59 AM.
    Faceman


Page 5 of 7 FirstFirst ... 234567 LastLast

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •