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

Nvidia buys $5B in Intel

tomshardware.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

461–470 of 638 posts

Re: Nvidia buys $5B in Intel

#461

Post by lobsterthief »

maxlin wrote: post #439
lobsterthief wrote: post #282

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He didn’t say anything violent. Have you watched the monologue? Even if he did (which he didn’t), I don’t see Fox shutting down anything when one of their presenters recently stated, on air, that we should euthanize our homeless population.

Of course I watched it, many times. I didn't say he said anything directly violent, but he spread hateful disinformation about someone's death, entirely against FBI's findings and common sense, during a time of the highest temperatures in a while. Just to try to win the attention of people that'd rather not look in the mirror. This is exactly the kind of disingenuous, dehumanizing behavior that radicalizes people lik…

If his administration’s concern was about turning the temperature up, they are doing absolutely nothing to turn it down.

Re: Nvidia buys $5B in Intel

#462

Post by misiek08 »

bee_rider wrote: post #307
evanjrowley wrote: post #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.…

Apparently it is 5% ownership. Does that give them enough leverage to tank Intel’s iGPUs? That would seem weird to be. Intel’s iGPUs are an incredibly good solution for their (non-glamorous) niche. Intel’s dGPUs might be in a risky spot, though. (So… what’s new?) Messing up Intel’s iGPUs would be a huge practical loss for, like, everyday desktop Linux folks. Tossing out their dGPUs, I don’t know if it is such a huge…

Intel was already dead, even money from gov didn’t help them. It is old, legacy, bad corp. I think NV just wants to help them and use however it wants - Intel management will do anything they say.

Re: Nvidia buys $5B in Intel

#463

Post by lobsterthief »

maxlin wrote: post #433
yoyohello13 wrote: post #297

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Did you actually watch the clip? Or are you just repeating what you heard on social media?

Yes I did. The whole clip. A few times. Not easy to watch.

The fact you’re taking this opportunity to state this clip was hard for you to watch says a lot about your ability to consider another’s perspective in this conversation. I’m out.

Re: Nvidia buys $5B in Intel

#464

Post by behringer »

xp84 wrote: post #386
tart-lemonade wrote: post #380

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Intel's iGPUs don't seem very at risk because the market for low-power GPUs isn't very profitable to begin with. As long as Nvidia is able to sell basically any chip they want, why waste engineering hours and fab time on low-margin chips? The GT 1030 (Pascal) never got a successor, so that line is as good as dead. Even before the Pascal GTs, most of the GT 7xx cards, which you would assume were Maxwell or Kepler from…

Agree. Not only would there be no money in it to try to replace Iris graphics or whatever they call them now -- it would be ultra pointless because the only people buying integrated graphics are those where gaming, on-device AI, and cryptocurrency aren't even part of the equation. Now, that is like 80%+ of the PC market, but it's perfectly well served already. I saw this move more as setting up a worthy competitor to…

Intel sells discrete cards and their next card was setup to do AI and games competently. They were poised to compete with the low to mid range Nvidia cards at HALF the cost.

It was definitely going to upset the market. Now i understand the radio silence on a card that was supposed to have been coming by Xmas.

Re: Nvidia buys $5B in Intel

#465

Post by behringer »

sodality2 wrote: post #342
bee_rider wrote: post #307

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Apparently it is 5% ownership. Does that give them enough leverage to tank Intel’s iGPUs? That would seem weird to be. Intel’s iGPUs are an incredibly good solution for their (non-glamorous) niche. Intel’s dGPUs might be in a risky spot, though. (So… what’s new?) Messing up Intel’s iGPUs would be a huge practical loss for, like, everyday desktop Linux folks. Tossing out their dGPUs, I don’t know if it is such a huge…

> Tossing out their dGPUs, I don’t know if it is such a huge loss It would be an enormous loss to the consumer/enthusiast GPU buyer, as a third major competitor is improving the market from what feels like years and years of dreadful price/perf ratio.

They were one release away from completely upending the market. A sad day this is.

Re: Nvidia buys $5B in Intel

#466

Post by ddalex »

intvocoder wrote: post #48
ddalex wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That was targeted at supporting more tightly integrated and performant Macbooks .... it flopped because Apple came up with M1, not because it was bad per se.

apple never shipped a product with that, but it made for an excellent hackintosh

Exactly

Re: Nvidia buys $5B in Intel

#467

Post by beached_whale »

bee_rider wrote: post #307
evanjrowley wrote: post #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.…

Apparently it is 5% ownership. Does that give them enough leverage to tank Intel’s iGPUs? That would seem weird to be. Intel’s iGPUs are an incredibly good solution for their (non-glamorous) niche. Intel’s dGPUs might be in a risky spot, though. (So… what’s new?) Messing up Intel’s iGPUs would be a huge practical loss for, like, everyday desktop Linux folks. Tossing out their dGPUs, I don’t know if it is such a huge…

Intels gpus are a better solution for almost all computing outside high end gaming, ai, and a few other tasks. For most things a better gpu is overkill and wastes energy

Re: Nvidia buys $5B in Intel

#468

Post by behringer »

arkmm wrote: post #448
evanjrowley wrote: post #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.…

This misses the forest from the trees IMO: - The datacenter GPU market is 10x larger than the consumer GPU market for Nvidia (and it's still growing). Winning an extra few percentage points in consumer is not a priority anymore. - Nvidia doesn't have a CPU offering for the datacenter market and they were blocked from acquiring ARM. It's in their interest to have a friend on the CPU side. - Nvidia is fabless and has c…

Intel just released a halfway decent workstation (eg data center) card and we were expecting an even better set of cards by Xmas before this happened.

Re: Nvidia buys $5B in Intel

#469

Post by bigyabai »

ho_schi wrote: post #428
evanjrowley wrote: post #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.…

Conclusion: Buy AMD. Excellent Linux support with in-tree drivers. For 15 years! A bug is something which will be fixed. Nvidias GPUs are theoretically fast on initial benchmarks. But that’s mostly optimization by others for Nvidia? That’s it. Everything Nvidia has done is a pain. Closed-source drivers (old pain), out of tree-drivers (new pain), ignoring (or actively harming) Wayland (everyone handles implicit sync w…

FWIW, my experience gaming/web browsing/coding on a 3070 with modern drivers has been fine. Mutter and KWin both have very good Wayland sessions if you're running the new (>550-series) drivers.

Re: Nvidia buys $5B in Intel

#470

Post by fluoridation »

imiric wrote: post #455
fluoridation wrote: post #443

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No way, man. Peak consumer Intel was from Core 2 up to Skylake-ish. That was when they started coasting and handed the market to AMD. Right now they're losing market share to them on mobile, desktop, and server. If we ignore servers, most PCs have an AMD CPU inside. The GPUs might be competitive on price, but that's about it. It's pretty much a hardware open beta.

Ah, I was thinking of Core 2, but was off by a couple of years. Although "peak" consumer Intel was undeniably in the 90s. Like I said, Intel may not be market leader in some segments, but they certainly have very competitive products. The fact they've managed to penetrate the dGPU duopoly, while also making huge strides with their iGPUs, is remarkable on its own. They're not leaders on desktops and servers, but still…

The 90s were easy mode for semiconductor manufacturers because of Moore's law, and because cranking the clocks was relatively easy. After 2000 was when the really advanced microarchitectures started coming out.

>a company that's struggling, but to a healthy market where the consumer benefits

I would argue that the market is only marginally healthier than, say, 2018. Intel is absolutely struggling. The 13th and 14th generation were marred by degradation issues and the 15th generation is just "eh", with no real reason to pick it over Zen. The tables have simply flipped compared to seven years ago; AMD at least is not forcing consumers to change motherboards every two years.

And Intel doesn't even seem to care too much that they're losing relevance. One thing they could do is enable ECC on consumer chips like AMD did for the entire Ryzen lineup, but instead they prefer to keep their shitty market segmentation. Granted, I don't think it would move too many units, but it would at least be a sign of good will to enthusiasts.

Post reply on HN