Intel vs AMD vs Nvidia

[Peter]

In the future Nvidia is rumoured to produce its own CPU line-up to compete against both Intel and AMD starting at 2008 Nvidia is to produce both 65nm and down to 45nm processors.

This is taken from The inquirer so its a good chance that it might not be true but how knows?

read this little article HERE

imo Nvidia pwns

[communisto]

lord i hope intel doesn't buy them

[Shaun]

Sounds interesting, hope nVidia CPU's will be compatable iwth ATi GPU's.

[AlfonsoVIII]

As much as I like to say this might help, unless Nvidia has the money to research and develop the product, it will never exist. By 2008, we will be forced to see quad core and maybe up to 32 cores, so the advancements will be really where no one has touched yet, so Nvidia should save their money and make a real CPU for the GPU. I want to have heatsinks and real processors on the VC.

[Erik]

By 2008, we will be forced to see quad core and maybe up to 32 cores, so the advancements will be really where no one has touched yet

The fact that intel plans to make multi-core CPU's is a sign of weakness and technical stagnation.

They would prefer to make faster single or dual core processors.
Only after failing to increase their processing speed per core fast enough will they resort making multi-core processors.

If nVidia manages to make their cores faster than intel's cores then they have a big chance of gaining a large market share even if they put less cores in their CPU's.
Especially games requre fast single cores.

so Nvidia should save their money and make a real CPU for the GPU. I want to have heatsinks and real processors on the VC.

The GPU is a real processor (and it has a heatsing+fan too, btw), only it is optimized for graphics processing rather than general purpose processing.

Why would you want a CPU on your video card? that makes no sense.

[Peter]

The main problem for Nvidia would be fabrication capacity. If they are successfull at entry-mainstream segment they need to churn out huge quantities without affecting the production of their current products, Motherboard chipset, GPU, and all other things. If ATI will copy this they might just ask AMD to produce for them but i dont see that happen as they would become rivals. "hey boss can you produce some boxes that i will sell at premium price at my own company?"

Anyway it thinks its an interesting idea with this Nvidia independency as they would force Intel and AMD out of their crypts and into the researchfacilities for a faster future.

[Erik]

The main problem for Nvidia would be fabrication capacity. If they are successfull at entry-mainstream segment they need to churn out huge quantities without affecting the production of their current products, Motherboard chipset, GPU, and all other things.

I'm sure they will build more factories, or buy additional production from 3rd party chipmakers.

And having a wider product line is a big advantage because if one part doesn't do too well they can use the excess production capacity to produce more successfull parts.

If ATI will copy this they might just ask AMD to produce for them but i dont see that happen as they would become rivals.

There are independant companies who make chips for anybody who hires them.

But a future merger between AMD and nVidia (or any other CPU maker) is very possible.

Anyway it thinks its an interesting idea with this Nvidia independency as they would force Intel and AMD out of their crypts and into the researchfacilities for a faster future.

The rivalry between AMD and intel is already very fierce.
I think two companies is actually the optimum for high tech components like CPU's because in a multi-company market a lot of resources are wasted on research.

[Peter]

Erik: ATI is merged with AMD as of July 24, 2006, hence why i thought they would become rivals if ATI seeks similar ambitious goals as Nvidia. And i agree that Intel and AMDs rivalry is strong but still we could have technology much faster with more actors then just two. intel and AMD counter eachoter with a slow but strong pace but if Nvidia steps in which in itself is a very aggressive competitior could effectivly raise the bar much higher then we got today.

[Erik]

Erik: ATI is merged with AMD as of July 24, 2006

Realy?
I must have missed that news when I was on vacation.
I thought they were still just strategic partners.

btw:

On July 24, 2006, AMD reached an agreement to merge with ATI at a cost of $5.4 billion, subject to ATI shareholder, court, and regulatory approval. The merger is expected to close by Q4 of 2006.[1]

So technically they aren't merged yet

hence why i thought they would become rivals if ATI seeks similar ambitious goals as Nvidia.

ATi and nVidia are already rivals.

And i agree that Intel and AMDs rivalry is strong but still we could have technology much faster with more actors then just two.

How so?
I don't think the rivalry can become any more fierce, and a 3rd party would only consume research that would otherwise become available to either AMD or intel.
If nVidia merged with intel, for example, then they could combine their research labs.

[Peter]

I meant ATI and AMD will become rivals if ati will have interest in non GPU processors as Nvidia have. So they probably stay out of it alltogether.

And secondly if i believe this is right the more actors, the more technology- creates more answers to eachothers products.

[Erik]

I meant ATI and AMD will become rivals if ati will have interest in non GPU processors as Nvidia have. So they probably stay out of it alltogether.

How can they be rivals if they are the same company?
Your not making sense.

AMD-ATi (or whatever the combined company will be called) will produce both CPU's and GPU's.

And secondly if i believe this is right the more actors, the more technology- creates more answers to eachothers products.

No, I think there is a maximum amount of R&D that can be spend on improving CPU's.
Because R&D is for a large part responsible for the price per unit
ie: if you increase the research you increase the costs of CPU's.

In an ideal world all R&D will be combined to make a single product.
If AMD told intel everything they knew, then intel could be making better chips than they are doing now.

But on the dowside combining R&D takes away the incentive to invest in future R&D.
Why should AMD pay for R&D if intel benefits equally from their inventions?

I think 2 rival companies is the optimum because it combines R&D as much as possible, while keeping the competition.

[Peter]

I just said ATI wouldent follow Nvidias approchs as that would upset AMD, ATI cant produce its own CPU's because they are the same company as AMD as you said.

[legionari]

Yea Ati and AMD are working together

[krazykarl]

apparently Nvidia picked up a bunch of Stexar people who are very good at making cpus (former Intel staff) but I think thier major hurtle will be the mess of patents that exist under the X86 infrastructure.