Nvidia Launches Site for Intel-Nvidia Battle

Good information! Nice to know Nvidia if fighting for a better future!

I guess that if Intel paid off AMD to go away & now Nvidia wants their cut as well... Maybe small retailers could use this tactic against Walmart?

Hmmm....looks like they are trying to load up on negative publicity about Intel. I wonder what the logic behind the action was since the other negative publicity was already published and distributed.

Is Nvidia going to throw support behind AMD? If so...that is a stupid thing to do since AMD owns Nvidia's GPU rival. The modern america = punishing successful companies. I just read over nvidia's STACK OF EVIDENCE site... I dont see how this warrants an antri-trust suit. There are other competitors in that same market. Note To Self: Don't become too successful or Risk putting a target on your back.

Awesome gives me the opportunity to follow this wherever it may lead in the years to come. I would love to see a true "third" competitor in the x86 business as I am sure many others would. Preferably not a "low-end" maker like Via turned out to be but someone with the funds, technology and drive to take on the two big guys. Intel's dominance is starting to show and being a lackey for there products that I am it's not doing consumers any good. Although economic situations can't be helping any of us right now.

I wonder if Nvidia warns you not to install their latest driver on this site as well.

Good media coverage, bad media coverage, Nvidia just loves any articles about them, who cares about good drivers or advanced graphics cards, just gimme press coverage!

"Technologies like NVIDIA's game-changing graphics and chipset products have been kept in short supply or blocked from the market entirely by Intel's anticompetitive practices."

Yeah, right. Just give us Fermi already.

This is all becuase Intel wont give Nvidia rights to the QPI technology that they need to create motherboard chipsets for the Core I series processors. And i hate to say it but Nvidia is getting whats coming to them they did this crap to Intel back when Intel wanted to Buy SLI rights from Nvidia and Nvidia denied them the rights to its tech. So now Nvidia is pissed and wanting to Sue Intel. What a little baby company that cant even create a product thats comparable to what ATI has on the market. Quit worrying about Chipsets for Intel Processors and build a damn Video card thats not 800 Dollars that can trounce the ATI offerings.

great seeing where nvidia is putting their revenue stream...god forbid they put that money toward releasing a decent driver that doesn't fry gpu's...

You have frittered away a total market domination in the GPU market by allowing ATI to have every single market segment from entry level to hardcore gamer. You pissed off your own loyal fanboys by waiting so long to release Fermi that the potential ATI product that renders it redundant will probably be in the shops in time for Xmas. You have now taken one of the only companies out their that could still be viewed as an ally (or at least not a direct competitor) and bad-mouthed them in public.

I am certain of fewer and fewer things in the world as time goes by, but one of the things that seems abundently clear to me is that if Jen-Hsun Huang wasn't the President and Founder of nVidia the board would have asked for his resignation a loooooong time ago.

I want to start out this comment to say I want my arguments to be as neutral as possible, sorry if it comes across the wrong way.

wcooper is absolutely correct, Intel is just getting back at Nvidia for the SLI deal. If I were Huang, I'd think to myself that a little fish doesn't fight the whale. I mean, Nvidia has their share of problems; Fermi was delayed almost six months, there's the whole deal of putting new stickers on old cards (8800GT, 9800GT, GTS250), etc.

As an intel user, I have to say that intel integrated graphics stink. Sorry, but they do. None of them can produce even decent 3D graphics (for lack of acceleration). So, the suit is simple. If the customer wants to play games, or do anything 3D for that matter, then invest in a Nvidia discrete graphics card, and don't buy intel. Simple as that. The market seems fair to me.

+1 Zinosys, I believe you hit the nail on the head there.

I'm a bit suprised that the two companies are acting so anti-competitive. If intel and nvidia paired up, amd/ati would lose even more market share. An intel board with nvidia graphics is (imho) the best choice for people running without a dedicated video card nowdays. Argue if you will; I've had far less trouble with nView than with Catalyst.

Wow what a conundrum.....support AMD by buying a 5800 series card, or wait for fermi based card and support AMD by buying a card made by a rival that is against AMD's main competition...

My enemy's enemy is still my enemy?

@ wcooper007 and Zinosys

It doesn't matter if Nvidia is getting back Intel for the SLI deal. Just because Nvidia did not want to sell SLI licensing to Intel doesn't mean Intel has the right to take away their chipset license from Nvidia. They had a deal and Intel clearly is on the wrong. And look at what has happened now, Intel doe shave the SLI license and Nvidia is still not able to make Intel chipsets plus Intel is screwing them on the Atom chipsets as well with pricing.

I agree with you that Nvidia has had their share of problems with rebadging old cards but they have done nothing to deserve the anti-competitive practice from Intel. BTW, I am not an Nvidia fanboy just trying to explain this without any bias. Regardless of how bad the last couple of Nvidia chipsets were, less competition only hurts consumers. Look at how long Intel is taking to implement USB 3 and SATA 6 gbps on their motherboards.

Interesting to see this sort of thing... Perhaps it could turn out to be good, if nVidia keeps the site honest, and full of fact-checked statements, rather than adopting a "the way it's meant to be claimed" stance. If so, that sort of press could help their court case, by also helping people get behind them; I feel that being honest in their claims would create more substantial support than lies, since the latter could be prone to collapse and backlash.

@trust, it depends how the agreement was written, its possible that it was written in such a way that intel could keep that tech from them (making it impossible to make a chipset)

though NV also shot themselves in the foot by making less chipsets to work with AMD processors

Nvidia, Suing them right down to there pantie's. Leave nothing behind.

If Nvidia loses we all lose it's as simple as that less competition and anti competitive behavior hurts consumers period it's as simple as that. I'm surprised Via doesn't sue Intel as well for the anti competitive behavior as well as I'm certain it must have hurt them some as well.

Nvidia:
Less QQ (comics, case designing, etc.), more PewPew (better products).

Intel is stifling everything.

AMD comes out with a competing cpu, they threaten motherboard manufacturers with curtailing their supply of chipsets if they make Athlon motherboards. (The Athlon vs 440BX chipset incident)

AMD comes out with another competing, an even better chip than what Intel had, and they threaten computer makers to withdraw "marketing assistance" funds if they make AMD machines. (The Athlon 64 vs Pentium 4 incident.)

Also, notice that while Intel has the lead (the year just before the Athlon came out, the year just before the Athlon 64 came out, and now while the Core i7 is king) they have a year or longer between major releases. We won't be seeing a new Intel chip until 2011 now, instead of their claimed "tick, tock" schedule. Sandy Bridge wasn't delayed because there is a problem. it was delayed because AMD won't be coming out with a competing chip until 2011, with Bulldozer, Bobcat, and Fusion.

AMD could have had the Athlon 64 out a year ahead of then they did, if they had the funds to employ enough engineers to finish it. Intel curtailing the motherboard supply of the original Athlon cost AMD sales, and kept them from competing. It's the same way now. If the Athlon 64 had sold the way it should have, and not received interference from Intel's marketing rebates, they'd have had enough engineers to get Bulldozer and Fusion done already.

Without AMD, we'd likely not see a new chip for 5-10 years.

honstly if they get the rights to produce the x58 then the prices should drop even more. can you say good bye 1156?

This is just going to make nVidia look crappy too. Negative PR just hurts everyone involved, i wish that nVidia would start selling things on points that mattered not on obscure features like physx and bashing the other guys.

Nvidia is one the most under the table companies ever, they're just trying to get some sympathy points from consumers. Look at what they did with Arkham Asylum - paid to get ATI locked out from the highest graphics settings. I can understand paying a developer to optimize it for your own hardware, but paying them to hurt other companies hardware is downright wrong

Smoke and mirrors folks, it's all smoke and mirrors. It's all being done to distract from the real focus at the moment, the elephant in the room. The Fermi launch is coming soon and they don't want all the attention to be on that, so lets throw a few curve balls and then have a low key launch and hope the plebs don't notice. At least the Fan-boys will buy a few cards before the benchmarks come out and give the cards the Kiss of Death. AMD should stick a couple of sardines in a 480 box and deliver it to Nvidia HQ.