NVIDIA shows signs ... [2008 - 2017]

[Silent_Buddha]

The fact that Intel would settle doesn't surprise me, but that $1 billion figure certainly does. It's almost as much as AMD got, despite a much smaller prejudice, in my opinion anyway.

A few months ago, JHH seemed intent on going to court, so either all those zeros changed his mind or Charlie is wrong.

That number may or may not be big depending on what Nvidia patents Intel is getting licenses to in the process. Notice that Nvidia isn't getting anything they were seeking in potential patent case other than cash. And Intel is getting something out of the settlement (access to patents) that they weren't originally going for.

If would be interesting if those Nvidia patents are an offshoot of something in the original contract terms that has come to light during this case. Or that Intel only agreed to the settlement if Nvidia were to grant access to those patents.

In the end, Intel probably values access to those Nvidia patents as being worth more than the 1 billion USD settlement. In which case, this is all about Intel being gracious and allowing Nvidia an out that doesn't have them (Nvidia) looking bad in the process. In other words, this "settlement" looks like nothing more out of the ordinary than Intel licensing patents from Nvidia. Except that Nvidia may have been forced into doing this, or going to court. Again depending on what patents Intel is getting access to.

Still it's all in the rumor stage at this point, so who knows what it actually entails.

Regards,
SB

 

[Alexko]

Well it would be a lot easier to assess the situation if we actually had any idea which patents Intel needs from NVIDIA. Is there any publicly available information about this? Apart from NVIDIA's entire list of patents, that is.

 

[Silent_Buddha]

Unfortunately, just like the agreements that Nvidia felt Intel were in violation about, it likely will never be publicly known.

Regards,
SB

 

[Harison]

This is should ease the strain.

http://www.semiaccurate.com/2010/11/12/intel-said-settle-nvidia/

Not for long NV havent got licenses they needed to survive, while Intel instead of buying a whole Nvidia for ~5 bln., got the patents they wanted for 1 bln., at least it looks this way. Now NV wont have anything to threaten Intel with, while Intel got what they wanted in the end.

NV manufacturing at Intel looks an interesting idea, but wasnt it strongly rumored they are trying out GF? In any case, it could be a positive move for NV to get hands on Intels advanced tech process, even though it seems unlikely.

 

[Karoshi]

Not for long NV havent got licenses they needed to survive, while Intel instead of buying a whole Nvidia for ~5 bln., got the patents they wanted for 1 bln., at least it looks this way. Now NV wont have anything to threaten Intel with, while Intel got what they wanted in the end.

NV manufacturing at Intel looks an interesting idea, but wasnt it strongly rumored they are trying out GF? In any case, it could be a positive move for NV to get hands on Intels advanced tech process, even though it seems unlikely.

"Only the paranoid survive": Maybe it's not nvidia they are thinking about when opening their foundry to them? Think (paranoidly) red.

 

[CarstenS]

Charlie's at it again: http://www.semiaccurate.com/2010/11/15/nvidia-eols-gtx480/
Sounds pretty tame this time, but one (of the three) sentences strikes me odd:
"Short story, you can't order GTX480s any more if you are an AIB/OEM, you have to go with the GTX580. That isn't a bad deal though, the new card is faster, marginally less power hungry, and costs Nvidia many times less to make."

I cannot follow the logic, why it would cost Nvidia "many times less" to make a GTX580 instead of a 480. Do you?

 

[entity279]

Tuned layout so 580 yields better ?

 

[trinibwoy]

Many "times" less? That implies it's < 50% the cost which is hard to believe. Charlie is just being his usual melodramatic self I think.

 

[hoom]

No more chipsets from JHH here

Though he seems to be saying its SoC division now.

"We are not building any more chipsets, we are building SoCs now. We are building Tegra SoCs, and so we are going to take integration to a new level. [...] The chipset business [has] not grown largely this year because we have not really been expanding the sales of it," said Jen-Hsun Huang, chief executive officer of Nvidia.

 

[NathansFortune]

Charlie's at it again: http://www.semiaccurate.com/2010/11/15/nvidia-eols-gtx480/
Sounds pretty tame this time, but one (of the three) sentences strikes me odd:
"Short story, you can't order GTX480s any more if you are an AIB/OEM, you have to go with the GTX580. That isn't a bad deal though, the new card is faster, marginally less power hungry, and costs Nvidia many times less to make."

I cannot follow the logic, why it would cost Nvidia "many times less" to make a GTX580 instead of a 480. Do you?

One would expect the yields are a lot better for the GF110 and TSMC's 40nm process is more able to handle it now so the price per usable chip is probably down by 50-60%.

 

[Arun]

Regarding the rumoured deal, everyone seems to be forgetting NVIDIA and Intel already have a multi-year broad patent cross-license agreement today: http://www.nvidia.com/object/IO_17070.html

Here's the catch: it's tied to the chipset license, so it's directly threatened by the lawsuit. Back when Intel first started to claim NVIDIA was not eligible for QPI without a new license, Jen-Hsun said in a conference call that they'd absolutely *love* to revoke the entire deal, implying that both Larrabee and Intel IGPs would be in infringement. That means the entire Intel market would have to use discrete GPUs and that represents an unbelievable amount of money for NV/AMD. And with on-CPU IGPs, the financial loss for Intel would be even more severe in terms of margins.

So here's the critical point: it's not just a question of either completely winning or losing the lawsuit. It seems to me that an intermediate decision could be taken, where NVIDIA is granted the right to break the entire deal (which they currently cannot do). If NVIDIA indicated this as a desirable outcome early in this process and Intel's lawyers believe this is a reasonably plausible outcome, Intel's execs might have freaked out pretty badly. There's also the possibility that the license deal will expire sooner rather than later anyway, and Intel realises they won't be able to renew it otherwise given their current relationship with NV.

We'll see what happens, but while $1B is definitely more than I expected, it's far from impossible given the risk for Intel.

 

[Squilliam]

Arun, how come they couldn't make the same deal with AMD? Is there something that Nvidia controls which AMD doesn't have which they need?

 

[trinibwoy]

I was wondering that myself. Surely AMD and nVidia are currently infringing each other's patents and it's in nobodys interest to open that can of worms. For Intel it probably isn't any cheaper to license graphic tech from nVidia than from AMD.

 

[rpg.314]

I was wondering that myself. Surely AMD and nVidia are currently infringing each other's patents and it's in nobodys interest to open that can of worms. For Intel it probably isn't any cheaper to license graphic tech from nVidia than from AMD.

AMD and Intel had a patent cross license agreement, signed in 2000/2001. Their recent settlement renews their patent cross license which this time includes ATI's patents as well.

 

[NathansFortune]

I thought ATi and Nvidia had a cross licensing deal? It would have carried over to AMD when they bought ATi.

As Arun pointed out Intel and Nvidia already have a cross licensing deal and Nvidia are suing because they believe that Intel violated it by not renewing/giving them a chipset licence when they integrated the memory controller from Nehalem onwards. I think Arun is on the right track and Nvidia are looking for the judge to cancel the whole cross licensing deal as it would put Nvidia in a massive position of power since Intel are now selling CPUs with integrated graphics on the chip. It would force them to either remove IGPs from their designs (unlikely since Bobcat is too competitive) or renew the cross licensing deal on Nvidia's terms (cash and a chipset licence, but not an x86 licence).

 

[Richthofen]

I thought ATi and Nvidia had a cross licensing deal? It would have carried over to AMD when they bought ATi.

As Arun pointed out Intel and Nvidia already have a cross licensing deal and Nvidia are suing because they believe that Intel violated it by not renewing/giving them a chipset licence when they integrated the memory controller from Nehalem onwards. I think Arun is on the right track and Nvidia are looking for the judge to cancel the whole cross licensing deal as it would put Nvidia in a massive position of power since Intel are now selling CPUs with integrated graphics on the chip. It would force them to either remove IGPs from their designs (unlikely since Bobcat is too competitive) or renew the cross licensing deal on Nvidia's terms (cash and a chipset licence, but not an x86 licence).

Way to go NV! Kick em hard.

 

[itsmydamnation]

AMD and Intel had a patent cross license agreement, signed in 2000/2001. Their recent settlement renews their patent cross license which this time includes ATI's patents as well.

you dont know that, that is an assumption.

 

[LordEC911]

Charlie's at it again: http://www.semiaccurate.com/2010/11/15/nvidia-eols-gtx480/
Sounds pretty tame this time, but one (of the three) sentences strikes me odd:
"Short story, you can't order GTX480s any more if you are an AIB/OEM, you have to go with the GTX580. That isn't a bad deal though, the new card is faster, marginally less power hungry, and costs Nvidia many times less to make."

I cannot follow the logic, why it would cost Nvidia "many times less" to make a GTX580 instead of a 480. Do you?

Because they have used all the hotlots and never actually went into mass production???

 

[rpg.314]

you dont know that, that is an assumption.

Well, that's what was published in tech news.

 

[itsmydamnation]

i saw that in a few reports as well ( the minority) but the fact is they dont know that either. but lets put it into perspective, AMD was sueing intel and had lots of Ammo. AMD bought ATI for what, 5 billion.

so you think the negotiations basically ended up:

AMD
AMD can manufacture where ever they like
cross licences for existing stuff still exists
1 billion dollars from intel

Intel
massive case against them gets dropped
access to patents that cost amd 5 billion to aquire
cross licences for existing stuff still exists
-1 billion dollars

considering various countries/UE had taken intel to the cleaners for a few billion if this is the way the negotiations turned out then AMD is epic fail at negotiating