Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Nvidia to Acquire Arm for $40B

nvidianews.nvidia.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

351–360 of 784 posts

Re: Nvidia to Acquire Arm for $40B

#351

Post by paulmd »

leptons wrote: post #335
paulmd wrote: post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It wouldn't have been good if any of the people who could actually afford to buy ARM did so. Would you rather have TSMC in control of ARM? Maybe have access to new architectures bundled with a mandate that you have to build them on TSMC's processes? How about Samsung? All of the fab ownership concerns of TSMC plus they also make basically any tech product you care to name, so all the integration concerns of NVIDIA. h…

Microsoft can't afford to buy ARM? lol... well that's not true at all.

But what would microsoft do with ARM at a $40b valuation?

Re: Nvidia to Acquire Arm for $40B

#352

Post by boulos »

walterbell wrote: post #273
Blammar wrote: post #243

No one has seemed to notice the following two things: "To pave the way for the deal, SoftBank reversed an earlier decision to strip out an internet-of-things business from Arm and transfer it to a new company under its control. That would have stripped Arm of what was meant to be the high-growth engine that would power it into a 5G-connected future. One person said that SoftBank made the decision because it would hav…

There were two separate IoT business units: Platform ( https://pelion.com ) and Data ( https://www.treasuredata.com/ ). The Platform unit fits the Segars post-acquisition comment about end-to-end IoT software architecture, https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24465005 > One person close to the talks said that Nvidia would make commitments to the UK government over Arm’s future in Britain, where opposition politicians…

> Why is this stake necessary?

Edit: it’s not necessary/a requirement.

They’re noting that after the transaction, SoftBank will still fall under the 10% ownership threshold that requires more reporting from the SEC [1]:

> Section 16 of the Exchange Act applies to an SEC reporting company's directors and officers, as well as shareholders who own more than 10% of a class of the company's equity securities registered under the Exchange Act. The rules under Section 16 require these “insiders” to report most of their transactions involving the company's equity securities to the SEC within two business days on Forms 3, 4 or 5.

[1] https://www.sec.gov/smallbusiness/goingpublic/officersanddir...

Re: Nvidia to Acquire Arm for $40B

#353

Post by throwaway4good »

Qualcomm and Apple are going to be fine even with NVIDIA owning ARM. They are American companies under the protection of US legislation and representation.

However the situation for Chinese companies is even clearer now. Huawei, Hikvision etc. need to move away from ARM. Probably on to their own thing as RISC-V is dominated by US companies.

Re: Nvidia to Acquire Arm for $40B

#355

Post by CountSessine »

ddevault wrote: post #276
CountSessine wrote: post #246

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The funny thing about GBM vs EGLStreams, though, based on everything I’ve read online, is that there’s broad agreement that EGLStreams is the technically superior approach - and that the reason it’s been rejected by the Linux graphics devs is GBM, while inferior, has broad hardware vendor support. Apparently very few GPU vendors outside the big 3 had decent EGl implementations.

That's not true. EGLStreams would be better suited to Nvidia's proprietary driver design, but it's technically inferior. This is the "broad agreement". No one but Nvidia wants EGLStreams, or we would have implemented it in other drivers.

You know I did a bit more reading about this, and it sounds like you’re right. There’s a great discussion about it here:

https://mesa-dev.freedesktop.narkive.com/qq4iQ7RR/egl-stream...

Re: Nvidia to Acquire Arm for $40B

#356

Post by smabie »

pathseeker wrote: post #296
Blammar wrote: post #243

No one has seemed to notice the following two things: "To pave the way for the deal, SoftBank reversed an earlier decision to strip out an internet-of-things business from Arm and transfer it to a new company under its control. That would have stripped Arm of what was meant to be the high-growth engine that would power it into a 5G-connected future. One person said that SoftBank made the decision because it would hav…

>Also, to first order, when a company issues stock to purchase another corporation, that cost is essentially "free" since the value of the corporation increases. This isn't correct. If investors thing Nvidia overpaid, its share price will decline. There are many examples of acquiring companies losing significant value on announcements to buy other companies even in pure stock deals.

It's rare for the acquiring companies stock to not decline, regardless of whether the market thinks they overpaid.

Re: Nvidia to Acquire Arm for $40B

#357

Post by sharken »

cnst wrote: post #314
topspin wrote: post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My instincts are telling me this is smoke and mirrors to rationalize a $40E9 deal. The only part of that that computes at all is the GPU integration, and that only works if NVIDIA doesn't terrorize Arm licencees. The rest is buzzwords.

There's a pretty big assumption that the deal even gets approved. Even if it does get approved, and even if NVIDIA decides to not screw up any of the licensees, the whole notion of NVIDIA being capable of doing so to any of their (NVIDIA's) competitors, will surely mean extra selling points for all of ARM competitors like MIPS, RISC-V etc.

Hopefully this deal will be stopped in it's tracks by regulators.

If not then it's very likely that NVIDIA will do everything in it's power to increase prices for ARM designs.

Re: Nvidia to Acquire Arm for $40B

#360

Post by genocidicbunny »

zaptrem wrote: post #344
yangcheng wrote: post #289

I am surprised that no one has mentioned China will very likely block this deal.

On what grounds/with what authority?

Is it that hard to see that China might see this as an American company further monopolizing silicon tech, potentially cutting China off from Arm designs.

But more to the point, this is also China. If you want to do business in China, you're going to do as they tell you, or you get the stick. And if you don't like it, what are you going to do?

Post reply on HN