http://www.tomshardware.com/2008/0 [...] u_market_/

Some of us predicted this would happen in a number of previous threads.

Looks like they are looking at the low end to start.

This is good news ... fabless no less !!

Since they have no scruples pinching technology from anywhere and anyone, and have an aggressive business model I hope they get what they deserve.

I imagine the first thing they will do is buyout a benchmarking outfit and make sure their new cpu's get the highest scores ... lol.

Then they will start e-mailing marketing firms in a week and claiming top spot.

Intel will need to take the physics company they bought off the ice and start them working on a decent GPU.

AMD will ... what will AMD do??

Comments?

Intel already has a GPU in the works.

It's GPGPU capable, the entire point in buying Havok was to screw over ATI/nVidia (who were using Havok to work on their GPGPU / Integrated PPUs on their GPUs).

It was supposedly going to debut Q408 at 45nm but speculation is now putting it at H209 at 32nm.

How was that underestimating them? I said they have a GPU in the market that was originally slated for Q408 and is now supposedly pushed back to H209 at 32nm because apparently the scope of it was insane and would cause issues at 45nm.

They have integrated solutions right now, they are working on a discrete solution.

I don't think it was just to keep nvidia/AMD away from physics either, I was just making a point.

They already have one failed video card, I doubt they want to have another failure and are putting everything into this one. It also could be that it will be GPGPU capable and they are holding off until some thing is out that supports that. I'm not speculating, I'm going off of news reports.

http://beyond3d.com/content/news/565

http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/po [...] oduct.html

http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/po [...] erbee.html

Nvidia won't venture into Intel's main territory any time soon. They simply don't have the manufacturing power, technological edge to make it a competition. Heck, I don't even think in 3 years time, Nvidia will be able to compete with AMD. Like BM said a couple months earlier, the barrier of entering CPU market is simply too great. (however, this does not mean monopolization)

To pitch Nvidia against Intel, I guess we won't see that at least 5~10 years later.

However, Tesla is not suitable for desktop use. Its RISC based architecture, and just like Intel's Itanium, incapable of running x86 efficiently.

Also, considering the heat Tesla system outputs, as well as the power it consumes.....

It'll be a long long while before Nvidia can be even remotely considered as AMD's competitor, let alone Intel's.

Intel and AMD's products are hybrids of CISC and RISC, but primarily CISC.

In order for Nvidia to compete in this sector, they will have to:

1. Obtain a X86 license (which is the hardest part)
2. Obtain enough resources
3. Hire enough engineers
4. Develop enough technologies (patents) to catch up to AMD and Intel.

This is not underestimation. Speculating that Nvidia will be able compete with Intel and AMD within a year is overestimation. It will take them considerable time to even catch up with AMD.

I believe Nvidia will stick to mobile sector, at least for a while, before they accomplished enough to venture farther into the water.

Well currently Nvidia is not jeopardizing any company in EU, so I guess they wouldn't care.

Seriously though, Nvidia have really faulty business practices. Its getting really ridiculous.