It sort of make sense for Nvidia's shareholders. The initial offering for ARM was only worth $38.5bn, which was already expensive due to SoftBank initial purchase price and not wanting for a loss. But at Nvidia's peak this deal was worth " $87bn ". For a company that makes less than $2B in revenue and at best ~$300M in Operating Income. Remember this isn't something you can buy and milk the crap out of other market p…
Disclosures: I've closely followed Nvidia for 15+ years, and own stock. I feel Jensen and Nvidia still, very strongly, wanted to do the deal. The deal increased in value to $87bn only because NVDA's stock price increased that much. The real costs to Nvidia did not increase. ARM is a legitimate competitor to x86, which Nvidia wanted to control.
SoftBank's Sale of Arm to Nvidia Collapses, Arm to IPO
191–200 of 243 posts
Re: SoftBank's Sale of Arm to Nvidia Collapses, Arm to IPO
#192Earlier quoted context omitted.
> In fact, Ampere and M1 are a hint of the most dystopian future of computing I can imagine. OK I'll bite. What aspect of Ampere is locked down? They are nothing like the bad closed-source hacks that we see in small development boards.
I apologize. I confused Ampere with Amazon's Graviton.
In terms of firmware openness, yeah, you don't get the firmware source, but you don't get to touch the machines physically either so you wouldn't have a chance to run a custom build anyway :D
(While Ampere Altras are supported by upstream EDK2, have fun)
Re: SoftBank's Sale of Arm to Nvidia Collapses, Arm to IPO
#193Earlier quoted context omitted.
This has nothing to do with ARM. Unlike the PC there is no standard for system architecture (including boards). ARM based designers like Qualcomm, NVIDIA etc can choose to have their own board and system architecture. For example, they can boot of any memory location or lock the user out of using an exception level like EL3/EL2 etc. That is why the ecosystem looks closed. Nothing stops a SoC designer from giving comp…
There are standards like the Arm Server Base System Architecture but companies don't have to follow it. Most of the ARM servers are custom things for big datacenters. As you said the smaller systems like phones and other embedded systems have their own boot systems and memory layout etc. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Server_Base_System_Architectur... https://developer.arm.com/documentation/den0029/latest
Re: SoftBank's Sale of Arm to Nvidia Collapses, Arm to IPO
#194Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's really funny how the market thinks that Intel isn't in the game anymore. They may not be as energy efficient as M1 or ARM chips but they certainly show that they are still a competition and invest a lot of money to improve their performance.
But they really haven't. We've not seen hide nor hair of the new process, only iterative improvements on the current process, and the attempt at big.LITTLE x86-style doesn't seem to have worked out terribly well. ARM has taken out the low-power market that Atom and Pentium classes were aiming at. AMD APUs have long been a favorite of mid-power devices like gaming consoles and are now a desktop enthusiast favorite as…
This isn't really true though. Alder lake performance is better than Ryzen 5x at pretty much all price points. Alder lake's electricity usage is rough, but desktop users don't care. Now ryzen is a year behind intel, and who knows how their next offering will fare, but saying they've outmatched intel in every metric just isn't true.
Re: SoftBank's Sale of Arm to Nvidia Collapses, Arm to IPO
#195Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's really funny how the market thinks that Intel isn't in the game anymore. They may not be as energy efficient as M1 or ARM chips but they certainly show that they are still a competition and invest a lot of money to improve their performance.
But they really haven't. We've not seen hide nor hair of the new process, only iterative improvements on the current process, and the attempt at big.LITTLE x86-style doesn't seem to have worked out terribly well. ARM has taken out the low-power market that Atom and Pentium classes were aiming at. AMD APUs have long been a favorite of mid-power devices like gaming consoles and are now a desktop enthusiast favorite as…
maybe a couple years ago, at this point Intel is dominating the gaming market, competing in the productivity market despite having fewer cores (i.e. more potent cores), are at least matching Zen3 efficiency (except i9, but you said i5/i7) if not beating (particularly at lower power budgets due to infinity fabric overhead). Ryzen has absolutely lost favor with the enthusiast market due to the significant price increases (in some segments, a 50% increase over last generation) and the refusal to chop prices to remain competitive with intel (justified with "but they can make more money selling Epyc", which is great for them but it doesn't make their products competitive for me as a consumer either).
And AMD has completely abandoned the value market... i3 12100F is listed for $110 at Best Buy (iGPU version is $140), and Intel is in the process of rolling out Celerons for even cheaper rigs (will be nice for HTPC with that iGPU). AMD's cheapest processor has a $300 MSRP and they won't budge on pricing at all given their focus on the server market.
go look at a tech enthusiast forum and nobody is recommending Ryzen anymore. It's overpriced, it no longer has a performance or efficiency advantage (in fact it's rather flopped the other way), and AMD would rather address the server market instead.
this has really shifted in the last 6 months since Alder Lake launched, but really there was a significant niche for recommending 10-series as a budget option given the significant price advantage over AMD. The thing that changed with Alder Lake is that Intel moved back into the performance lead (and matched efficiency) and prices remained the same - leaving them both better and cheaper than AMD. Thing have changed, people don't recommend AMD anymore unless you have a very specific need (like you're buying a 5950X).
Also APUs in particular are rather a flop on desktop. AMD didn't even bother releasing a 7nm APU to the consumer market until... September last year? Up until then it was all 12nm quad-core garbage - and that's GloFo 12nm, so more like Intel 22nm. On top of that, the APUs also had reduced IPC compared to the CPUs of their equivalent architecture (due to less cache). All of the hype around Ryzen was around the non-APU enthusiast chips with no onboard graphics, the APUs were never popular in the desktop segment.
The APUs are nice if you are building a SFF rig with no discrete GPU... but they have a lot of compromises - reduced IPC, PCIe 3.0, and up until September they didn't have any that weren't limited to PCIe 3.0x8 (5000G series moves this to 3.0x16). They have no HDMI 2.1 support, no HDMI VRR support, no AV1 support, and the worst hardware encoder (i.e. Teams videoconferencing quality/etc) on the market. If you really want a gaming-focused SFF rig with iGPU only, they are the best available, but they were never popular, and AMD never really pushed them the way they did the enthusiast chips.
(HEDT is another segment that's been abandoned... AMD still has not released Zen3 processors, it's been 16 months now, and who knows whether AMD will try the same "release it for pro but not for consumer" crap again like they did with the APUs.)
Re: SoftBank's Sale of Arm to Nvidia Collapses, Arm to IPO
#196if they IPO can Nvidia buy a ton of shares and indirectly buy Arm?
Not easily. Trying to gain a controlling stake in a public company triggers regulatory involvement. I'm still unclear why Nvidia would want to control Arm. If they wanted an architecture they could extend as they wished, they can use RISC-V (which they are already doing in a small way).
Nvidia have some really good high performance Arm cores that they've developed and sold (Denver, Carmel). Continuing to invest in that area makes some sense for Nvidia today, but it would make a lot of sense if the products they're paying to develop were official Arm products sold through the Arm IP sales channel. In other words, it would increase Nvidia's return on investment on work they're already doing.
(on the other hand, the amount they would have ended up paying for Arm might be fully justified by the value of the company but it was really, really high)
Re: SoftBank's Sale of Arm to Nvidia Collapses, Arm to IPO
#197Earlier quoted context omitted.
The thing that stands out about ARM is that the user has less control of the hardware. The manufacturers try and succeed in keeping an extremely closed ecosystem. Why would you want that? The Intel+AMD duopoly seems like nirvana compared to the Ampere and M1. In fact, Ampere and M1 are a hint of the most dystopian future of computing I can imagine.
Uh... M1 (at least when Mac-fused) isn't actually locked-down. You do have to jump through a few hoops to boot modified kernels[0], but it's a reasonable level of security for a chip primarily intended to go into laptops. There's an ongoing effort to reverse-engineer the M1 and port Linux to it[1], which has actually gone really well. There's also plenty of ARM hardware out there that really doesn't bother with lockd…
There was! And it even booted Linux in some capacity: https://github.com/christinaa/rpi-open-firmware
> every chip is very different from one another
Eh, the usual embedded SoCs are not that different from each other — ARM GIC, ARM timer, lots of Synopsys Designware crap for SDMMC/XHCI/PCIe/etc.
For many SoCs it's totally feasible to make standards-compliant firmware, e.g. for the Rockchip RK3566 there is https://github.com/jaredmcneill/quartz64_uefi
And SoCs from the networking world (Marvell, NXP) are typically supported by upstream EDK2.
Re: SoftBank's Sale of Arm to Nvidia Collapses, Arm to IPO
#198Re: SoftBank's Sale of Arm to Nvidia Collapses, Arm to IPO
#199Earlier quoted context omitted.
NVidia has a track record of creating good products, but all proprietary and with closed source firmware/drivers. And lots of arbitrarily software locking features to extract more money from different market segments.
> And lots of arbitrarily software locking features to extract more money from different market segments. To be fair, AMD does super annoying lock in/binning things too, though not with software locking. For example, there was a Radeon that would have been a crazy awesome server rack mounted GPU for Deep learning 4U blades. You couldn't put it in a server because it was mounted on a chassis that was 4mm too large for…
They also have moved to locking their CPUs to the motherboards, to restrict second-hand sales of surplus CPUs/etc. So far it's only locked to the brand, so you can put it in any Dell system but only a dell system, but it's still sufficient to cause a huge amount of headaches for the surplus sector. I was looking at some cheap Epyc 7402Ps on ebay until I saw... "locked to dell, only runs on Dell". Welp. And the other cheap listing, is that one locked too? Who knows, and that's the point AMD is going for, they just have to inject enough uncertainty to change consumer behavior. Most people aren't going to be willing to trace the provenance of a used CPU, they will just pay 20% more for a new one. A limited number will be sold as complete systems, but as the market shrinks and people stop considering secondhand purchases, eventually they will just be thrown in the trash. Mission accomplished.
And that's coming for consumer CPUs too. It's already here for AMD's "ryzen pro" desktop line, it won't be long until it hits walmart prebuilts too.
Re: SoftBank's Sale of Arm to Nvidia Collapses, Arm to IPO
#200Earlier quoted context omitted.
Disclosures: I've closely followed Nvidia for 15+ years, and own stock. I feel Jensen and Nvidia still, very strongly, wanted to do the deal. The deal increased in value to $87bn only because NVDA's stock price increased that much. The real costs to Nvidia did not increase. ARM is a legitimate competitor to x86, which Nvidia wanted to control.
The real cost to Nvidia is $87bn. Value is denominated in dollars, not nvidia stock.
From the source:
https://nvidianews.nvidia.com/news/nvidia-to-acquire-arm-for... "The number of NVIDIA shares to be issued at closing is 44.3 million" [this is the pre-split amount]