Nvidia: Intel is Hindering Graphics

Does this mean Nvidia is going to blame Intel for delaying Fermi over half a year and for turning Fermi into a grill?

I will never own a green card but I do feel a little bad for them. Anyone know why Nvidia can't just start making CPUs? Both AMD and intel are making cpu/gpu chips in the future...will this put nvidia out of biz?

Wow such coc- I mean performance blockers

I don't think that most people who use IGP solutions know or care which chip they have. If AMD and others don't get a slice of the Intel chipset pie, I don't see how nVidia has a case here.

If you can't beat em, Join em.

Unfortunately NVidia can't start manufacturing x86(/x64) cpus due to licensing issues. NVidia would have to buy a company with an x86(/x63) contract (such as VIA, as its unlikely to buy Intel or AMD).

I think it's basically because the green team don't have yet the know-how to build CPUs for x86 systems.

AMD bought ATi and only after almost five years we're seeing the result of the marriage: Fusion.

So far NVidia is trailling behind the blue and red teams, let's see what the green team can pull off the hat in this cpu/gpu trend days

Nvida should be talking they are having trouble getting their drivers working with Windows 7! (Nvidia kernel mode stop working}

When I buy a low end device with IGP, I don't care what GPU brand it uses. As long as I get the device for less $$$. And I doubt Nvidia is able to compete with Intel on the CPU/GPU integration.

Future doesn't look good for Nvidia.

Consumers do have the option - they can buy your video cards.

What you really want is for OEMs to buy IGP chipsets and mass-produce motherboards for major PC makers, such as Dell and HP. Well guess what? Years ago that fell upon the shoulders of the OEM motherboard manufacturers because they chose the components used in their boards. It may come as a surprise to this guy, but Intel is in the chipset business too. According to Intel, there are specific licensing issues that prohibit the use of nVidia chipsets with Core-i CPUs. Compete or die - it's big business. nVidia can't blame Intel for being business savvy and securing more profit for themselves.

If you made your own CPUs, you'd protect your chipset business just like Intel is doing now. Oh, that's right! You already do that with ION and Tegra...

This whole debate over whether or not the original license agreement carries over from the previous CPU generations into the Core-i CPUs is just getting old. If nVidia wanted in on that market, they should have just negotiated a new license with Intel to produce Core i compatible IGP chipsets when they were first released instead of claiming the existing license should permit them to do so. If they had done so, they would have been making money since then instead of spending it in court. And of course, they could have gone back and sued to recover the 2nd license's cost if they truly believed the original license granted them the ability to develop for the Core-i. Instead, now they'll try to recover some make believe sum of hypothetical money lost since they weren't able to do so.

Part of me just wants to punch nVidia in the mouth, tell them to refocus on just making kick-ass video cards, and forget the rest.

But nvidia / ati IGP are way more advanced from what Intel can offer. And the motherboards with nvidia chipset were usually cheaper than the ones from intel

Intel is hindering the market because they refer to that crap they include in their chipsets as a GPU. However, anyone who knows what GPU is, knows Intel isn't sufficient for that purpose. For everyone else, they wouldn't really benefit from Nvidia, the CPU can handle the extra workload for them (i.e. watching hi-def movies). Unless manufacturers push Nvidia chipsets, most people won't even know to ask for them.

Intel probably thinks that once they include a GPU in the physical CPU (i.e. like AMD's Fusion), they won't need Nvidia anymore because the chipset itself will just basically be a SATA/USB controller. In part, they are right. There will be two consumer markets: low-end fusion-like products with integrated graphics, and high-end products that wouldn't benefit from embedded graphics of any type (on-die or in-chipset).

Right now there's a small area where Nvidia fits into the chipset segment (i.e. low-end workstations with Athlons, Celerons, Pentiums, or Core 2s). Intel and AMD, who actually make the chips, are trying to eliminate that area entirely. Nvidia should focus on something else, because once every Celeron and Sempron comes with on-chip GPUs, there won't be any room for Nvidia chipsets.

the majority of the functionality of the old nvidia chipsets for the core2 have now been moved on chip for the core i*.
as the trend is going, more and more components are going to be moved on chip. Soon the motherboard wont exist and computers will be a single chip with only a HDMI, USB port and a power connector.

to survive as a chipmaker now you must conform to the vision of a single piece of silicon containing the entire functionality of a pc. Companies who only specialize in one component will start failing the their only hope is to be bought out by a bigger companies who want to integrate the specialty components into their own chips.

and i think intel would much rather watch nvidia sink then buy them out.

I thought i would be fine when i went with the Intel 4500MHD chip in my lenovo x200t, but boy was i wrong. This thing can hardly run ANYTHING video related. I Have a gaming computer i use to play intense game, but i sometimes use my laptop for very light gaming. The thing is a piece of crap and i wish i had the option to go nvidia. I can barely run RUNESCAPE!

Actually, I think the guy has a good point. Don't assume that everyone buying low end is not knowledgeable. Integrated gfx are a big factor in the HTPC market, and lots of enthusiasts also put together low end systems for friends and family. And you don't think that Dell, HP, Acer, and the rest would like to bump up the gfx just a little bit on their AIOs.

Nvidia is losing a share of this market because they can't make chip-sets for Intel's latest sockets. That is an absolute fact.

NVidia needs a x86 contract in order to compete in a couple of years. AMD's Fusion will utterly destroy Intel's Core i intergration in terms of graphics. NVidia should have bought AMD 2 years ago when they had the chance.

I am lost here....they are acting like you cannot put a cheap ass nvidia discrete into your system....lol

The trouble with Nvidia is that they seem clueless as to what the want to do or go.

They're complaints can be summed up in two factors: Intel now has the basics convered with HD graphics, most media centers and work (office/net) computers will be fine; and then Nvidia does not have any competitive low end discrete cards, and it will take them another 3-4 months to get them to market.

The second factor is that they probably made a fatal mistake by not acquiring VIA a few years ago. Now they are being sandwiched between AMD and Intel, both having their own complete solutions both on desktop and on laptops. That's why Nvidia talks sometimes about directing their business to other areas other than mass market consumption. I honestly think that Nvidia's CEO is no longer reasoning and is confused; it would be better for the company if he stepped down.

The problem is the vast amount of money the lose if OEMs such as dell, hp, etc stop using low end integrated graphics. Discrete ad on cards have the most profit margin, but the low end is more profitable in general because of the volume. I wonder how long until AMD implements a similar licensing strategy and Nvidia is really cooked.

Having purchased a laptop for my wife with an integrated NV GPU, and experienced the pain of the thing failing when the IGP malfunctioned, I can't say as I feel a lot of sympathy for NV on this one. I suspect that an awful lot of OEMs were stung by that to the point of not wanting to incorporate any more NV chipsets at all. So the stated market loss by NV is probably a lot more optimistic than they care to admit.

This is coming from the company who deliberately sabotages their drivers so that ATI users cannot use a dedicated NVIDIA card for PhysX...

As much as Fermi angered me, I really do hope that Nvidia get's they;re rights back with Intel. I'm tired of seeing Intel graphics chips in Intel laptops. All I see is discrete wise are ATi cards and only in AMD laptops which there are so few of.

You can't just make x86 CPUs, unless you have a license they would get sued to hell and back by Intel and left to die if they did. Even if they did buy a company with the license (VIA and AMD are only ones), they would still get sued by Intel, with them stating that the license is not transferable. Unless nVidia can make their own architecture, and have the major OS companies follow them (good luck with that) it will not happen.

They're now raising this up because they want to make-upfor the not-so-successful-Fermi sales.

it is still about sales

So by there own logic nvidia allow low cost physx capable cards to play nice with expensive ATI cards.

Quit trolling this article had nothing remotely to do with Fermi it's about integrated graphics. Nvidia is correct Intel is screwing the consumers right to choice over. Their anti competitive bundling for the Atom platform is pretty shameful as well.

Nvidia has exactly ZERO friends in the technology community right now. They can keep running their mouth, but it won't hide the fact that the company is in a really sad state at the moment. Tegra's success is exagerated and the new GTX 400 series is unprofitable at best in its current form. Keep accusing everyone else of being your problem while you do things like put out phony fermi pictures.

I wouldn't call this trolling, he makes a good point that this is just a blame game. Yes, Intel has made some anti-competitive moves, but didnt the EU just smack them with a nice fine for that?

Sounds like Nvidia missed the opportunity to get a piece of the action and they're not happy about it.

I think it was actually mentioned here on Tom's that it won't help either: once Nvidia buys a company with x86 license, the license will be nullified by the acquisition. Not sure what the license terms are and what the law says about this sort of thing, and while company acquisitions shouldn't void existing contracts and commitments the purchased company has, it is possible that Intel can claim that the license is non-transferable and block Nvidia from making x86 CPUs indefinitely.

I don't use Nvidia GPUs, but it's about time Intel as a company stops being a complete immoral dungbag about the situation. They are just as bad as Apple has been going about dealing with their issues these days. Notice how AMD allows Nvidia chipsets on their boards. And plus the Nvidia chipsets aren't even that great! So its not like Intel is going to loose everything they ever owned.

The FCC might be coming into play again sometime soon depending on how this progresses or de-progresses for that matter. Nvidia is going through a rough patch, okay its more than a rough patch, its like a sand bunker....at the bottom of a hill, with wind in your face...

So, I do feel a little bad, but they will have to fight themselves out of it and not depend on everything and everybody else.

Nvidia once started this with Intel. I guess they did not realize how much they actually needed intel. Most Intel notebooks I see have Intel GMA anyway. So most makers take the cheapest path anyway. I DO agree that even NV onboard is better then Intels, but they did kind of start this them selves.