Live data from Hacker News

Nvidia buys $5B in Intel

tomshardware.com

211–220 of 638 posts

Re: Nvidia buys $5B in Intel

#211
Nvidia's stake in Intel could have terrible consequences. First, it is in Nvidia's interest to kill Intel's Arc graphics, and that would be very bad because it is the only thing brighing GPU prices down for consumers. Second, the death of Intel graphics / Arc would be extremely bad for Linux, because Intel's approach to GPU drivers is the best for compatibility, wheras Nvidia is actively hostile to drivers on Linux. Third, Intel is the only company marketing consumer-grade graphics virtualization (SR-IOV), and the loss of that would make Nvidia's enterprise chips the only game in town, meaning the average consumer gets less performance, less flexibility, and less security on their computers.

Re: Nvidia buys $5B in Intel

#212

NVDA stock is up 3.5% so far today, which is ~$150B, or slightly more than one Intel. $5B is pocket change in comparison.

Except that Nvidia, Inc. doesn't own any of that NVDA stock, other people do, and they cannot access that money. Nvidia, Inc. owns net profit, which is orders of magnitude less than market cap. Last year's net profit was just under $73 billion. ($5 billion is still very affordable, too be sure).

Re: Nvidia buys $5B in Intel

#213

Earlier quoted context omitted.

224 GB/s 128 bit The monkey's paw curls... I love GPU differentiation, but this is one of those areas where Nvidia is justified shipping less VRAM. With less VRAM, you can use fewer memory controllers to push higher speeds on the same memory! For instance, both the B50 and the RTX 2060 use GDDR6 memory. But the 2060 has a 192-bit memory bus, and enjoys ~336 GB/s bandwidth because of it.

Tell me again, how fast can you move data from system ram to vram?

Over a PCIe5 x8, ~31.5gb/s.

Re: Nvidia buys $5B in Intel

#214
post #36

> For personal computing, Intel will build and offer to the market x86 system-on-chips (SOCs) that integrate NVIDIA RTX GPU chiplets. These new x86 RTX SOCs will power a wide range of PCs that demand integration of world-class CPUs and GPUs. https://www.intc.com/news-events/press-releases/detail/1750/... What’s old is new again: back in 2017, Intel tried something similar with AMD (Kaby Lake-G). They paired a Kaby La…

I don't think this is Intel trying to save itself, it's nVidia. Intel GPUs have been in 3rd place for a long time, but their integrated graphics are widely available and come in 2nd place because nVidia can't compete in the x86 space. Intel graphics have been closing the gap with AMD and are now within what? A factor of 2 or less (1.5?) IMHO we will soon see more small/quiet PCs without a slot for a graphics card, re…

Intel hasn't had desktop GPUs for a long time. Your timescale is off compared to how long AMD and Nvidia have had to polish their GPUs.

Re: Nvidia buys $5B in Intel

#215
post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It might damage intel, but given they're circling the drain already, it's hard to make matters worse. How was Intel "circling the drain"? They have a very competitive offering of CPUs, APUs, and GPUs, and the upcoming Panther Lake and Nova Lake architectures are very promising. Their products compete with AMD, NVIDIA, and ARM SoCs from the likes of Apple. Intel may have been in a rut years ago, but they've recovere…

None of their products are competitive, they fired the CEO who was meant to save them, fired tens of thousands of their engineers, sold off massive chunks of the company, they're still bleeding money and begging for state support? Also their network cards no longer work properly which is deeply aggravating as that used to be something I could rely on, just bought some realtek ones to work around the intel ones fallin…

> None of their products are competitive

We must live in different universes, then.

Intel's 140V competes with and often outperforms AMD's 890M, at around half the power consumption.[1]

Intel's B580 competes with AMD's RX 7600 and NVIDIA's RTX 4060, at a fraction of the price of the 4060.[2]

They're not doing so well with desktop and laptop CPUs, although their Lunar Lake and Arrow Lake CPUs are still decent performers within their segments. The upcoming Panther Lake architecture is promising to improve this.

If these are not the signs of competitive products, and that they're far from "circling the drain", then I don't know what is.

FWIW, I'm not familiar with the health of their business, and what it takes to produce these products. But from a consumer's standpoint, Intel hasn't been this strong since... the early 00s?

[1]: https://www.notebookcheck.net/Radeon-890M-vs-Arc-140V_12524_...

[2]: https://www.notebookcheck.net/Intel-Arc-B580-Benchmarks-and-...

Re: Nvidia buys $5B in Intel

#216

This is a death blow to the Intel GPU+AI efforts and should not be allowed by the regulators. It is clear that Intel needs the downstream, low-cost GPU market segment to have a portfolio of AI chips based on chiplets, where most defective ones end up in the consumer grade GPUs based on manufacturing yield. NVidias interest is now for Intel not to enter either the GPU market, nor the AI market - which Intel was prepar…

If anything, it might be more of a strategic retreat or a hedged bet

Re: Nvidia buys $5B in Intel

#217
post #182

This is a death blow to the Intel GPU+AI efforts and should not be allowed by the regulators. It is clear that Intel needs the downstream, low-cost GPU market segment to have a portfolio of AI chips based on chiplets, where most defective ones end up in the consumer grade GPUs based on manufacturing yield. NVidias interest is now for Intel not to enter either the GPU market, nor the AI market - which Intel was prepar…

Intel had an opportunity to differentiate themselves by offering more VRAM than Nvidia is willing to put in their consumer cards. It seemed like that was where Battlemage was going. But now, are they really going to undermine this partnership for that? Their GPUs probably aren't going to become a cash cow anytime soon, but this thing probably will. The mindset among American business leaders of the past two decades h…

I remember when I was studying for an MBA.. a professor was talking about the intangible value of a brand .. and finance.. and how they would reflect on each other .. At some point we were decomposing the parts of a balance sheet and they asked if one could sell the goodwill to invest in something else .. and the answer was of course .. no… well.. America has proven us wrong .. the way you sell the goodwill is to basically enshittification.. you quickly burn all your brand reputation by lowering your costs with shittier products .. your goodwill goes to 0 but your income increases so stock go up .. the CEO gets a fat bonus for it .. even tho the company itself is destroyed .. then the CEO quickly abandons ship and does the same on their next company .. rinse and repeat… infinite money!

Re: Nvidia buys $5B in Intel

#218

Earlier quoted context omitted.

? https://blogs.nvidia.com/blog/nintendo-switch-2-leveled-up-w...

The point stands, they're not willing to make something that could go in an ROG Ally, for example.

You mean like this? https://www.rockpapershotgun.com/msi-claw-8-ai-plus-review

Re: Nvidia buys $5B in Intel

#219
post #31

Remember when Microsoft invested in Apple when Apple was down in the dumps? This is giving similar vibes. That deal was arguably what saved Apple near its nadir. I’m not a fan of Intel’s past monopolistic practices, but for the sake of sustaining competition in the CPU/GPU market, I hope this deal works out for them even half as well as the MS deal did for Apple.

That Microsoft-Apple deal was part lifeline, part strategic insurance. Intel clearly needs a win, and Nvidia needs more control over its ecosystem without being chained to TSMC forever

Re: Nvidia buys $5B in Intel

#220
post #191

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Consumer gpus are totally different products from the high end gpus now. Intel has failed on the gpu market and has effectively zero market share, so it is not actually clear there is an antitrust issue in that market. It would be nice if there was more competition but there are other players like AMD and a long tail of smaller ones

>Consumer gpus are totally different products from the high end gpus now. Intel has failed on the gpu market and has effectively zero market share, so it is not actually clear there is an antitrust issue in that market. It would be nice if there was more competition but there are other players like AMD and a long tail of smaller ones I'm sorry that's just not correct. Intel is literally just getting started in the GP…

Intel has been making GPUs for over 25 years. Claiming they are just getting started is absurd.

To that point, they've been "just getting started" in practically every chip market other than x86/x64 CPUs for over 20 years now, and have failed miserably every time.

If you think Nvidia is doing this because they're afraid of losing market share, you're way off base.

Post reply on HN