Nvidia CEO Shares Company's CPU Strategy

Get them in the CPU market! More competition!!!

Killed the chipset division...hmmm, does this look to anyone else like the end of SLI on AMD platforms?

i know i am beating a dead horse but i would have loved to see Nvidia's X58 chipset offering.... F-ing Intel

Dam Intel with their hand on x86 technologie killing CPU competition!!

i dunno guys, i dont really feel like doubling my electrical bill... i probably would not need a furnace in the winter with couple of fermi's and nvidia cpu in my tower though...

I think I can see the future.....................................
Nvidia Quadriplex8 4.2ghz vs AMD phenomIVx8 4.8ghz vs Intel corei12 5.0ghz

it will be wise to merge with VIA or DM&P Electronics's "Vortex86", DNP is a much cheaper company who also own x86 lisences

...hell you wouldn't even need a stove/microwave...just fire prime95 up and watch those sausages sizzle. Dinner in 3 minutes.

...and as for intel, they're behaviour is obviously monopolistic. Surely there are antitrust laws against that sort of crap. And when is that license expiring?

It's a real shame that Intel is able to hold onto the x86 licensing... that effectively creates a monopoly. Granted they own the intellectual property of it, but it costs the market competition.

I assume those SLI engineer will just go work for the graphic division.

BTW, it make sense to target the ARM market instead of x86 consider how many things could have a simple processor inside. x86 is good for PC but the market is growing slowly.

x86 licenses are non-transferable. Intel isn't stupid.

AMD... Whats that?? lol

I think that nvidia is targeting the smartphone/handheld electronics market, and letting AMD and Intel duke it out on x86/64 Desktops until the end of time. I think that`s also probably a good idea because taking any market share from intel or AMD would probably be rather difficult, when there`s a burgeoning market that Intel and AMD have not dedicated much time/effort/money to yet.

its one thing to have a strategy.. its another to put it into full effect.. i honestly feel they'd lose money if they were to go full force into the cpu market.. look at the competition.. intels performance and amd's price/performance ratio.. they need to step thier gpu game up first then talk about expanding into cpu's..but thats just my opinon..

That should be today, but they gotta stretch their profits as far as they can with as old of technology as they can. If I see any processor manufactured to 5.0Ghz within the next 10 years, I will eat my shoe, it just won't happen as long as everyone thinks that more cores is what will speed their computers.

Actually they just settled in court, and now they are transferable.

Nvidia is making a smart move to take advantage of a market where they might actually gain some market share. Going up against Intel or AMD in the x86 market would be a losing proposition. This is actually a pretty decent strategy on Nvidia's part.

GOOD MOVE! Android takes down Microsoft, Nvidia/AMD take down Intel, thats 2 empires down in one day! But realistically, this will either be the best thing Nvidia did, or destroy them. If they focus less the gpu market, then ATI has a monopoly. Like ATI, but then they will be the new empire if that happens.

" . . . we're not expecting to ramp back up the thousand engineers that we had working on chipsets."

THOUSAND ENGINEERS!!!??? ok... is this guy bluffing?

I think what's being lost here is that NVIDIA probably can't build a competitive x86 processor even if they were legally able to. Making a GPU is relatively simple and doesn't approach the complexity of making an x86 CPU that is competitive with Nehalem based processors, and successors.

Even AMD, who has been in the processor market forever, can't make a competitive processor, and lives on the bottom like a catfish, eating the excrement and fallen algae. NVIDIA would have a problem even doing that, and they be battling AMD for the carrion. Already, AMD is lucky if they are profitable with their CPUs, so it's doubtful NVIDIA wants to even attempt that. It's a brutal market to be in, and the competition from Intel is extremely strong. NVIDIA wants no part of it.

That assumes a company is a person, and isn't more capable of doing more than one thing at a time. That's always the fallacy with that type of thinking. They were separate divisions.

Also, NVIDIA does not set the standard for GPUs, ATI does. Intel forcing NVIDIA out of the chipset market didn't make ATI make better GPUs, therefore your conclusion that it had a negative effect on Intel's GPUs is fallacious.

Also, Intel still sells more GPUs than NVIDIA or AMD. IGPs still dominate the market and probably will more and more.

It's definitely a better bet to move into a less occupied market, but Intel is also moving into the mobile sector. If they succeed or not is another story...

Could someone explain me why Nvidia stopped doing chipsets for AMD CPUs???

Slow down intel fanboy , the big profits are not in the high end market as you might think, it`s on the entry part but as usual ppl always go buy from the company that has the fastest producs even though they will not that buy that in particual. AMD/Nvidia > Intel GPU but still Intel outsells each of them in IGP sales. Same about CPUs the entry cheap CPUs makes the profit where AMD is better than Intel but they only lack marketing and huge founds for Advertising.

Given their problems with faulty GPUs and other bad management decisions over the past few years, Nvidia cannot blame Intel for their problems.

I'm saddened by the fact that technology is slowed because a company just doesn't like another enough(or is too greedy) to sell them a license(at least at a fair price) to give them the right to produce something.

It's time to fix the copy right system.

Oh and ta152h ever hear of larrabee? I've never designed a gpu or cpu, but if intel, the king of cpu's, failed at making a gpu then i would have to come the the conclusion that gpu's are harder to make then an cpu.

Not really not when is options to those who look for them.

To be honest most of Nvidia's chipsets sucked and still do while Intel charges a kings ransom for their over priced and limited X58. 12GB ram limit oh please and the i5 pci-e lanes are a joke some of us would like to tri fire or tri sli.

Hotter than Hell Edition

Regarding Ohim's comment "Same about CPUs the entry cheap CPUs makes the profit where AMD is better than Intel", whats AMD's answer to Intel Atom/Atom2 etc. power and performance-wise? If anything, the net-top market has very little left for AMD's Geode (or similar). Intel has been the king there right from the start. I remember AMD was hesitant in going into the net-top market, possibly due to fear of cannibalization (which Intel must have worried about too since their Atom chipsets are quite dumbed down).

x86 tech is getting pretty long in the tooth. Could Nvidia bring ARM to the desktop? Meaning as more and more can be written to the GPGPU, I would think that the CPU would become less needed for the system.

Four words that makes me feel like this is going south... "Does anyone remember Cyrix?"

More competition but I don't think they'll compete in the market without starting at the base. Changing tech to compete seems like a stretch.