Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in

Nvidia CEO Wants Further Action Against Intel

By - Source: Tom's Hardware US | B 41 comments

Nvidia's CEO says that additional measures need to be taken against Intel.

Even though Intel must now shell out a whopping $1.25 billion USD to rival AMD, Nvidia CEO Jen-Hsun Huang says that there needs to be further action taken against Intel. It's not the first time Nvidia has spoken out against the CPU giant: its complained about Intel's business practices for years, especially in the mobile sector.

As it stands, Intel currently owns 53-percent of the GPU market share, followed by a distant 24-percent with Nvidia. In the notebook integrated market, Intel commands a hammering 80-percent of the market. Nvidia claims that the latter number stems from Intel's "bundling" tactics, and that the company is impeding competition on two chipset fronts.

"Intel's tactics with Ion have been the most aggressive we've seen from a competitor. They have offered the Atom [a total of three chips] for $25, but when the one-chip Atom is used with Ion, it sells for $45," Nvidia CEO Jen Hsun Huang said in a statement provided to CNET. "A customer can't even choose to resell the chipset and use Ion instead. What's the point of Nvidia getting an Intel bus license if it's impossible to overcome Intel's pricing bundles?" he asked, referring the licensing fee that Nvidia pays Intel.

Huang told CNET that Nvidia will certainly keep growing as a company, but further action needs to be taken to protect the valued customer. Intel, according to CNET, disputes Nvidia's claims, saying that its a trick of numbers, a mix of apples and oranges. "We have scrubbed and continue to scrub our pricing practices as it relates to chipsets and processors," a spokesperson for Intel said. "It's all above cost. And that meets the legal standard worldwide."

Follow me on twitter to get inside scoops and updates even faster!

Display 41 Comments.
This thread is closed for comments
Top Comments
  • 29 Hide
    B-Unit , November 16, 2009 11:14 PM
    How does Atom+Chipset for $25, but Atom by itself for $45, not appear 'bad' to you? How is anyone suppose to sell a chipset for Atom with pricing like that.

    I still hate nV, but the point they raise here is quite valid.
  • 15 Hide
    anarchy4sale , November 16, 2009 11:37 PM
    Its bad business practice if they bundle their products at a loss, with the sole purpose of forcing competing companies out of business.
  • 11 Hide
    ravewulf , November 17, 2009 12:10 AM
    cheepstuffbut it isn't an unfair business practice. bundling is compiling several products together at a discount. it is a new product that is more attractive than any of the individual parts because it is cheaper for the buyer. please explain why it is unfair for intel to make a good deal.

    Simple. What Intel is doing is beyond bundling for a discount.

    Atom + Intel chipset = $25
    Atom alone = $45
    (Atom + Intel chipset) - (Atom alone) = -$20

    How on Earth is it fair that the Intel chipset costs NEGATIVE $20!

    Selling bundled products for a discount is fine. Inflating the cost of the processor alone so as to drive out competition is not!
Other Comments
  • 29 Hide
    B-Unit , November 16, 2009 11:14 PM
    How does Atom+Chipset for $25, but Atom by itself for $45, not appear 'bad' to you? How is anyone suppose to sell a chipset for Atom with pricing like that.

    I still hate nV, but the point they raise here is quite valid.
  • 15 Hide
    anarchy4sale , November 16, 2009 11:37 PM
    Its bad business practice if they bundle their products at a loss, with the sole purpose of forcing competing companies out of business.
  • 2 Hide
    zerapio , November 16, 2009 11:39 PM
    B-UnitHow does Atom+Chipset for $25, but Atom by itself for $45, not appear 'bad' to you? How is anyone suppose to sell a chipset for Atom with pricing like that. I still hate nV, but the point they raise here is quite valid.

    It seems Intel is selling the bundle at lower margins to push the platform. Why would Intel refrain from getting a better margin for the benefit of NVIDIA? That makes no sense.
  • 1 Hide
    nforce4max , November 16, 2009 11:40 PM
    Intel is a giant madoff that is yet to see it's colossal pyramid scheme implode.
  • 9 Hide
    Anonymous , November 16, 2009 11:43 PM
    Cheepstuff: what's wrong with the 'conservative' agenda. In quotes because it's pro big business- not actually conservative. It is an illegal tactic, but until late Intel didn't really fear being prosecuted for it.

    PS There's nothing good about unfair business practices guy, learn some damn history.
  • 9 Hide
    cheepstuff , November 16, 2009 11:44 PM
    Quote:
    Intel is a giant madoff that is yet to see it's colossal pyramid scheme implode.

    guess you need to stop buying Intel products... your specs tell me everything...
  • -9 Hide
    cheepstuff , November 16, 2009 11:51 PM
    Quote:
    Cheepstuff: what's wrong with the 'conservative' agenda. In quotes because it's pro big business- not actually conservative. It is an illegal tactic, but until late Intel didn't really fear being prosecuted for it.

    PS There's nothing good about unfair business practices guy, learn some damn history.


    but it isn't an unfair business practice. bundling is compiling several products together at a discount. it is a new product that is more attractive than any of the individual parts because it is cheaper for the buyer. please explain why it is unfair for intel to make a good deal.
  • 11 Hide
    ravewulf , November 17, 2009 12:10 AM
    cheepstuffbut it isn't an unfair business practice. bundling is compiling several products together at a discount. it is a new product that is more attractive than any of the individual parts because it is cheaper for the buyer. please explain why it is unfair for intel to make a good deal.

    Simple. What Intel is doing is beyond bundling for a discount.

    Atom + Intel chipset = $25
    Atom alone = $45
    (Atom + Intel chipset) - (Atom alone) = -$20

    How on Earth is it fair that the Intel chipset costs NEGATIVE $20!

    Selling bundled products for a discount is fine. Inflating the cost of the processor alone so as to drive out competition is not!
  • -9 Hide
    cheepstuff , November 17, 2009 12:22 AM
    Quote:
    Simple. What Intel is doing is beyond bundling for a discount.

    Atom + Intel chipset = $25
    Atom alone = $45
    (Atom + Intel chipset) - (Atom alone) = -$20

    How on Earth is it fair that the Intel chipset costs NEGATIVE $20!

    Selling bundled products for a discount is fine. Inflating the cost of the processor alone so as to drive out competition is not!


    dude, it's their product , they made it, they own it, and they can give it any price they want. if what they are doing is an out rage, people will stop buying it and get their teck somewhere else. they aren't a monoply, and if they are doing something unfair, it is your choice as the consumer to stop buying their products and go with the alternatives.

    the negative $20 your talking about is the discount, that is the price they gave it, and if that is unfair, dont buy atoms. simple as that.
  • -7 Hide
    darkknight22 , November 17, 2009 12:28 AM
    I see Nvidia likes to kick a man while he's down
  • -8 Hide
    megabuster , November 17, 2009 12:51 AM
    I don't see nVidia complain about Intel bundling onboard video on their desktop mobos. Make your ion platform + atom cpu x2 better than intel offering then charge accordingly and stop whining.
  • 5 Hide
    climber , November 17, 2009 12:55 AM
    It's only good business to dominate the market so that over the long term you can lead the consumer and the industry by the nose down the road you want to go, letting everyone else follow, where you are first to market with every new advance. Since people always want the newest tech first, they'll always follow intel. It's a good strategy but sometimes intel makes crap stuff, remember the i820 chipset and the Rambus fiasco? If intel is going to continue to dominate indefinitely, all competition will disappear and we'll be paying $500 for a loaf of bread (brought to you by intel).
  • 0 Hide
    liquidsnake718 , November 17, 2009 1:00 AM
    Ion will not do too well as the atoms are going to keep on changing thus when larrabee comes out ion should be dead by then.... the size and potential of larrabee would detirmine how fast the ion will whither away... Nvidia has already lost in the onboard battle with its motherboard gpus and not since the great 680's did we see their onboard gpus do well.... I guess hybrid SLI was a good idea and I wonder why Nvidia chose to take it out of their pipeline as it actually saves energy and resources as well as GPU lifespan....
  • -4 Hide
    dannyaa , November 17, 2009 1:07 AM
    B-UnitHow does Atom+Chipset for $25, but Atom by itself for $45, not appear 'bad' to you? How is anyone suppose to sell a chipset for Atom with pricing like that. I still hate nV, but the point they raise here is quite valid.


    The points are valid conceptually, but not legally. $25 is still above cost for Intel, and Intel is allowed by law to set their own profit margins. Massive discounts are very normal for bundling company items together, be it insurance, internet/tv/phone plans, etc.

    Businesses are free to sell whatever combo of chips they want (AMD, ATI, Nvidia) and the customer decides what they like and what they will pay. Currently Intel's prices are very competitive and their products are top notch. It's true that it can be "unfair" but it's the rules of capitalism... and honestly it is just as bad to penalize a successful business for taking risks and doing well as long as it is not an anti trust issues, and currently it is not.

    It would be different if no other options were available, but Intel partners have deemed the price/benefit ration of Intel's offerings are superior.
  • 0 Hide
    dannyaa , November 17, 2009 1:11 AM
    ravewulf

    Atom + Intel chipset = $25
    Atom alone = $45(Atom + Intel chipset) - (Atom alone) = -$20How on Earth is it fair that the Intel chipset costs NEGATIVE $20!



    You are misunderstanding. $25 is not the price of Atom AND the chipset together. It is the price of Atom when bundled WITH a chipset... they did not specify the price of the total atom/chipset bundle.

    It's a $20 discount.
  • 7 Hide
    ptroen , November 17, 2009 1:24 AM
    As if Nvidia hasn't been anticompetitive as well. Cough cough Ageia...
  • 2 Hide
    ravewulf , November 17, 2009 1:48 AM
    liquidsnake718Ion will not do too well as the atoms are going to keep on changing thus when larrabee comes out ion should be dead by then.... the size and potential of larrabee would detirmine how fast the ion will whither away...

    Ions are targeted mostly for netbooks and the like (hense why it is used with Atom).
    Larrabee is a discrete GPU and used in desktops.

    Completely different target platforms.
  • 5 Hide
    Anonymous , November 17, 2009 1:59 AM
    Atom and especially it's chipset are complete garbage anyways, it's only right that they PAY YOU to use the chipset.

    PS: AMD Congo/Yukon/Tigris got it right, to hell with netbooks... Netbooks set computing performance back 10 years, when I buy a new laptop in the year 2009, I don't want it running neck-and-neck with my Celeron 500mhz I had in the late 90's...
Display more comments