NVidia announces x86 chip?

Discussion in 'PC Industry' started by Jawed, Mar 4, 2009.

  1. Jawed

    Legend

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2004
    Messages:
    10,873
    Likes Received:
    767
    Location:
    London
  2. rendezvous

    Regular

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2002
    Messages:
    347
    Likes Received:
    12
    Location:
    Lund, Sweden
    I can bother, and I'll try to summerize.
    The question was if or when Nvidia would go in to the CPU market.

    Paraphrased
    "Some day, 2-3 years, it would make sense to take the same level of integration as tegra to the x86 market."

    Doesn't say much at all, no mention of nvidia deveoping their own x96 blocks.

    Found other audio streams of the event here
    http://finance.aol.com/event/nvidia-corporation/nvda/nas/conference-calls
     
  3. Arun

    Arun Unknown.
    Moderator Legend Veteran

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2002
    Messages:
    5,023
    Likes Received:
    299
    Location:
    UK
    You call that announcing an x86 CPU? Gosh, Charlie must really be out of headlines. rendezvous' summary is pretty much spot on. The only thing they say is that it would make sense for MIDs and Netbooks in 2-3 years. I completely agree it implies they're interested in the market, but that doesn't even necessarily mean they're investing in it today - especially from an in-house R&D point of view. Heck, I suspect their handheld group would disagree that market makes any sense anyway given the R&D budget required.

    It feels much more logical to me that this would indicate they've been talking with VIA about collaborating on a SoC on 28nm with a revenue sharing scheme or something like that. It's not impossible that they've got a project at the very early concept stage, but I'm not convinced. I'm pretty sure they had something in an early concept stage in 2H06/1H07 based on what Jen-Hsun said once, but given their change in tone later they probably canned it long, long ago.
     
  4. bowman

    Newcomer

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2008
    Messages:
    141
    Likes Received:
    0
    I'd rather see them license those new out-of-order execution SMP ready ARM cores and integrate one (or more) into GPU architecture. Cell, your time is out.:lol:
     
  5. Sxotty

    Veteran

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2002
    Messages:
    4,871
    Likes Received:
    330
    Location:
    PA USA
    Charlie is so antagonistic that he makes himself look like a total fool.

    So he spends the first half talking about how he is right they are going to build an x86 chip, then the seconds saying they are just saying it to prop up stock and implying they are not going to build the chip.
     
  6. Jawed

    Legend

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2004
    Messages:
    10,873
    Likes Received:
    767
    Location:
    London
    Bit-tech is more thorough

    http://www.bit-tech.net/news/hardware/2009/03/04/nvidia-reveals-plans-for-x86-cpu/1

    In my view this piece makes it quite clear that NVidia is going to do x86. Indeed for a 3 year timescale NVidia would have to have the project underway already, I'd say.

    An alternative, of course, is simply to licence x86 from Intel, say, and build a SoC with x86/Geforce all on the same bit of silicon. All done at TSMC.

    The fact that Intel has just launched this capability sounds like quite an interesting match, no?

    Jawed
     
  7. rpg.314

    Veteran

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2008
    Messages:
    4,298
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    /
    Somehow, I doubt that Intel will give nv an x86 ip core or otherwise license. Going with VIA seems a more probable route
     
  8. Arun

    Arun Unknown.
    Moderator Legend Veteran

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2002
    Messages:
    5,023
    Likes Received:
    299
    Location:
    UK
    BTW, just thought I'd emphasize this: these statements are like 10x less conclusive than what Jen-Hsun said in early 2007 in a CC. And apparently not much came out of that, did it? And an in-house R&D program (versus a deal with VIA) makes no sense given Michael Hara's claim in the same CC that lowering OpEx further would compromise revenues, implicitly in the short/mid-term rather than speculative just long-term. This is all BS, sorry Charlie.
     
  9. INKster

    Veteran

    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2006
    Messages:
    2,110
    Likes Received:
    30
    Location:
    Io, lava pit number 12
    Maybe they'll just gonna put a few thousand of these on a single die and call it the day... ;)
     
  10. Silent_Buddha

    Legend

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2007
    Messages:
    16,051
    Likes Received:
    5,002
    R&D into a possible entry of Nvidia into the x86 market would certainly make sense when combined with earlier statements by Jen-Hsun that they would greatly increase R&D funding this year.

    And as Jawed said, if they are trying for something, they would have to have already started R&D on it...

    Of course the counter to that is all the vitriol that Jen-Hsun has been saying towards CPUs in general and how their importance was waning.

    Regards,
    SB
     
  11. Humus

    Humus Crazy coder
    Veteran

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2002
    Messages:
    3,217
    Likes Received:
    77
    Location:
    Stockholm, Sweden
    On the other hand, unified shading was teh suck according to Nvidia all the way until they were first to the market with such a GPU.
     
  12. _xxx_

    Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2004
    Messages:
    5,008
    Likes Received:
    86
    Location:
    Stuttgart, Germany
    Same thing with AA back then, remember all the "would you rather have AA and low res or a very high res with no AA" statements.
     
  13. Jawed

    Legend

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2004
    Messages:
    10,873
    Likes Received:
    767
    Location:
    London
  14. Blazkowicz

    Legend Veteran

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2004
    Messages:
    5,607
    Likes Received:
    256
    very interesting!
    It appears to be the ancestors of DM&P's x86 SoCs (the vortex86 series).
    They make tiny PCs from them that can make cheap, low power thin clients
    http://www.dmp.com.tw/
    http://www.compactpc.com.tw/ebox-3300.htm
     
  15. INKster

    Veteran

    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2006
    Messages:
    2,110
    Likes Received:
    30
    Location:
    Io, lava pit number 12
    Follow-up.
    A way around the Intel x86 license ?

    If i understand it correctly, all the Cyrix-derived x86 IP is Intel licensing-free because it's clean reverse engineering work, and VIA can order production to any foundry with a previous x86 license (IBM, TI, etc), so... ;)
     
  16. bowman

    Newcomer

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2008
    Messages:
    141
    Likes Received:
    0
    VIA has been using all kinds 'a foundries, TSMC, Fujitsu..

    Maybe a Cel..GeForce with a Nano core (or two), some shader clusters, a HyperTransport bus and some GDDR5 controllers on it? :shock::grin:
     
  17. Davros

    Legend

    Joined:
    Jun 7, 2004
    Messages:
    14,849
    Likes Received:
    2,268
    @inkster wouldnt they then have to reverse engineer all the sse instructions
    and how willing would amd be to license amd64
     
  18. INKster

    Veteran

    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2006
    Messages:
    2,110
    Likes Received:
    30
    Location:
    Io, lava pit number 12
    VIA's Nano/CN x86 CPU already supports those at least up to SSSE3 and x86-64.
    Nvidia could (like AMD with the only partially SSE4-compatible future SSE5, vs Intel's future AVX) just fork it from here, and use their experience in small floating point units to their advantage, i suppose.
    The main concern, proper x86/x64 software compatibility, has been addressed already by Centaur/VIA.
    What amazes me the most is that the Centaur subsidiary can design such a complex thing as the Nano CPU with a "mere" 100 or so engineers...
     
  19. 3dilettante

    Legend Alpha

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2003
    Messages:
    8,122
    Likes Received:
    2,873
    Location:
    Well within 3d
    It's more understandable given how long it's taken that team to make a moderate-performance OoO x86 CPU, and how that design was rarely seen at all in the months (a year?) since it's been announced.
     
  20. INKster

    Veteran

    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2006
    Messages:
    2,110
    Likes Received:
    30
    Location:
    Io, lava pit number 12
    I believe they have been having issues with Fujitsu's 65nm process technology. Therefore, a move to TSMC for the 40/45nm dual-core version seems like a reasonable choice, given enough time to port it.
     
Loading...

Share This Page

  • About Us

    Beyond3D has been around for over a decade and prides itself on being the best place on the web for in-depth, technically-driven discussion and analysis of 3D graphics hardware. If you love pixels and transistors, you've come to the right place!

    Beyond3D is proudly published by GPU Tools Ltd.
Loading...