[Periander]

It's not an EU license. It's an European Commission negotiated license for Rambus' IP. It would give Nv the ability to sell its chips anywhere for a fee of 2% up to a $20 ASP. In other words, the royalty is capped at 40 cents a chip. Simply not a major factor going forward, and Nv's GPUs are not going to disappear anywhere. Winning this case does however help Rambus' case against Nv for back damages. That, however, is a matter of cash, not injunctions. Nv may well have to end up writing a large check to Rambus in addition to paying the rather piddling royalty going forward.

http://www.eweek.com/c/a/Desktops-an...t-Suit-431973/

[dkanter]

It's pretty obvious - NV will continue to ship products and will settle with Rambus, thereby clearing up the issue. However, the settlement won't be cheap...good thing NV has cash.

David

[Speccy]

While in monetary terms $0.40 a chip isn't that much, for an entry level, or even mainstream, chip it probably equates to quite a few margin points.

[Alexko]

Originally Posted by Speccy

While in monetary terms $0.40 a chip isn't that much, for an entry level, or even mainstream, chip it probably equates to quite a few margin points.

Then again, NVIDIA probably doesn't sell GT218s to OEMs for $20, do they? Since the cards end up selling for about $35 in retail, I'd imagine NVIDIA sells the GPU for something like $10, so the fee would be closer to $0.2.

I think the damages are the big deal, here.

[2senile]

Does the EU "licence" cover all infringing patents that the US ITC ruled on tho?

I agree that nV will end up paying Rambus.

*nV: "Alright Mr Rambus, let's negotiate fees based on the EU mandatory rate."*

*RB: "Certainly Mr nV, while you pop down to accounting & write a check for the last eight years we'll see if our negotiating team is available before the 8th of January 2015."*

[Silent_Buddha]

I don't believe it covers all products affected by the US ruling.

As well, it's not guaranteed that the EU ruling would allow Nvidia to bypass US Patent infringement judgements. It could play in favorably with an Appeal or awarding of damages in the US, however, as a judge could look at that as a reference point when determining possible awards.

At this point, Nvidia is basically trying to figure out the cheapest way out of this. They are hoping that damages will be limited to the scope of the EU ruling, but the US courts aren't bound by that.

Regards,
SB

[neliz]

Ouch "Increased Memory Costs"

today announced that it expects revenue for the second quarter ending Aug. 1, 2010, to be lower than the guidance provided with the company's financial results for its first quarter.

Total revenue is now estimated at $800 million to $820 million, compared with the range of $950 million to $970 million provided on May 13, 2010.

The revenue shortfall occurred primarily in the consumer GPU business, resulting from increased memory costs and economic weakness in Europe and China. The increased solution cost of discrete GPUs led to a greater-than-expected shift to lower-priced GPUs and PCs with integrated graphics.

[2senile]

Originally Posted by Silent_Buddha

I don't believe it covers all products affected by the US ruling.

As well, it's not guaranteed that the EU ruling would allow Nvidia to bypass US Patent infringement judgements. It could play in favorably with an Appeal or awarding of damages in the US, however, as a judge could look at that as a reference point when determining possible awards.

At this point, Nvidia is basically trying to figure out the cheapest way out of this. They are hoping that damages will be limited to the scope of the EU ruling, but the US courts aren't bound by that.

Regards,
SB

Hmn, I suppose once they are actually paying fees their current products will no longer be infringing but I guess that would be the time to go back to "court" for yet another judgement to get the import ban lifted. With the matter of the last eight years still unsettled it could be a waste of time & the import ban could stand.

As well as trying to find the cheapest way out of this I think they are looking for a bit of face-saving. To my mind the statement, "We intend to take advantage of the mandatory European Commission License that is available", points this way.
A more honest/accurate statement would have been, "we'll be paying fees based on the European mandatory settlement".

One thing greatly surprises me, especially since the profit warning. Charlie has yet to stick the knife in.

[Silent_Buddha]

Translation from PR spin, "We could not compete in the consumer performance segment, so the only thing that sold was our notebook and low end parts."

Regards,
SB

[neliz]

Originally Posted by Silent_Buddha

Translation from PR spin, "We could not compete in the consumer performance segment, so the only thing that sold was our notebook and low end parts."

Regards,
SB

I thought "The increased solution cost of Discrete GPUs" was something that reflects Charlie's sentiments well

[kyniskos]

One question if I may, does this also affect Nvidia's chipset-business? Did they infringe the patent with those as well? They must have made a great many million of chips which infringed anyhow, but if the final price is to scale linearly with number of chips that could very well get very expensive.

[EduardoS]

I laugh... The statement made my day.

[neliz]

These charts sum that up just about right SB, 2/3rds of nV's consumer graphics chips are in the <$100 market.

[Silent_Buddha]

You can also see by that chart that ATI was particularly weak in the 200-300 USD segment (5830).

Regards,
SB

[Alexko]

Don't worry, I'm sure he'll have a field day with this…

[2senile]

Originally Posted by Alexko

Don't worry, I'm sure he'll have a field day with this…

Yep, I suppose it is hard to type when you are paralysed with laughter.

[neliz]

Originally Posted by 2senile

Yep, I suppose it is hard to type when you are paralysed with laughter.

It's a bit too much to have and a profit warning and an erosion of sales in Q2 on the same day. I think he needs some positive news to balance his article.

[Squilliam]

Originally Posted by neliz

It's a bit too much to have and a profit warning and an erosion of sales in Q2 on the same day. I think he needs some positive news to balance his article.

He could talk about some Tegra 2 products finally making it to market?

[rpg.314]

Originally Posted by Squilliam

He could talk about some Tegra 2 products finally making it to market?

He just did.

http://www.semiaccurate.com/2010/07/...as-tegra-line/

[2senile]

Originally Posted by neliz

It's a bit too much to have and a profit warning and an erosion of sales in Q2 on the same day. I think he needs some positive news to balance his article.

Well, his article is up.
http://www.semiaccurate.com/2010/07/...h-bottom-line/

Not his best work imo. In my case "best" means amusing.tho.

Couldn't see anything positive.

[Tamlin]

deleted

[Silent_Buddha]

A bit surprised? Unless Nvidia is running into some semi-serious financial difficulties combined with low demand and/or low margins (due to low yields) of what they are able to manufacture. I can't really see why they'd cancel wafer starts with a presumably profitable GF104. If all they had was GF100, I wouldn't be at all surprised.

But without some serious insider info, there's just no way to tell 1) if they actually are cancelling wafer starts and 2) the reasons behind such a move.

Regards,
SB

[rpg.314]

Originally Posted by Silent_Buddha

A bit surprised? Unless Nvidia is running into some semi-serious financial difficulties combined with low demand and/or low margins (due to low yields) of what they are able to manufacture. I can't really see why they'd cancel wafer starts with a presumably profitable GF104. If all they had was GF100, I wouldn't be at all surprised.

But without some serious insider info, there's just no way to tell 1) if they actually are cancelling wafer starts and 2) the reasons behind such a move.

Regards,
SB

There is a possibility that they are cancelling wafer starts of dies other than GF104.

[neliz]

I can only assume that GT21x production has to cease at some point and with all this economic turmoil in China and Europe, you could only explain a lesser demand for those products.

[Blazkowicz]

a brainfart I've had : why not allow SLI on AMD chipsets?
the only other way is with an Intel X58, and high end nvidia chipsets for AM3 or socket 775 have felt irrelevant.

actually the only relevant nvidia chipsets I can think of are the ION (a rebranded geforce 9300, on the way out) and the nforce 720d (cheapest Asrock and Gigabyte mobos with a decent power stage)