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

521–530 of 638 posts

Re: Nvidia buys $5B in Intel

#521

Post by mensetmanusman »

xp84 wrote: post #390
mensetmanusman wrote: post #331

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Microsoft’s investment in Apple was helpful for the world.

As an Apple user (and even an Apple investor), I'd rather that Apple went out of business back then. If we could re-roll the invention of the (mainstream) smartphone, maybe we'd get something other than two monopolistic companies controlling everything. For instance, maybe if there were 4 strong vendors making the devices with diverse operating systems, native apps wouldn't have ever become important, and the Web pla…

Nope, we know exactly where it was headed. Phones controlled by carriers full of NFL ads.

Re: Nvidia buys $5B in Intel

#522

Post by slater »

magarnicle wrote: post #457
tracker1 wrote: post #406

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or... we could still be using blackberry-like devices without much in the way of active/touch interface development at all. Or worse, the Windows CE or Palm with the pen things.

Nah, the LG Prada phone would have taken over the world.

I think you mean the Vertu!

edit: god they're still around https://vertu.com/

Re: Nvidia buys $5B in Intel

#523

Post by mrheosuper »

mschuster91 wrote: post #97
fidotron wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But what they've completely resisted so far is any non trivial modification. They turned down Acorn about the 286, which led to Acorn creating the Arm, they have turned down various console makers, they turned down Apple on the iPhone, and so on. In all cases they thought the opportunities were beneath them. Intel has always been too much about what they want to sell you, not what you need. That worked for them when…

> they have turned down various console makers The problem is, console manufacturers know precisely how much of their product they anticipate to sell, and it's usually a lot . The PlayStation 5 is 80 million units so far. And at that scale, the console manufacturers want to squeeze every vendor as hard as they can... and Intel didn't see the need to engage in a bidding war with AMD that would have given them a sizabl…

>To get Intel CPUs to the same level of power efficiency that M-series CPUs have would require a full rework of the entire CPU infrastructure and external stack, that would require money that even Intel at its best frankly did not have

Intel, at one of its lowest low, still come up with lunar lake, which is not as efficiency as Apple M, but still, quite impressive.

I bet if they were focus on mobile when they are at their peak, they could come up with something similar to Apple M

Re: Nvidia buys $5B in Intel

#524

Post by bobajeff »

ahartmetz wrote: post #499
bobajeff wrote: post #456

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I once had an mini pc with Nvidia. I got it for Cuda dev. One day the support for it was dropped for it so I was unable to update my system without it messing things up. So regardless of Cuda I decided Nvidia is not for me. However, doing research when buying a new pc, I've found that AMD kind of sucks too. ROCm isn't even supported on many of the systems i was looking into. Also, I've heard their Linux graphics driv…

I would really disagree with AMD's Linux graphics drivers are poor. Only ROCm is.

In your case maybe, but not according to some of the comments here in this very thread and also in some forums and YouTube videos back when I'd last checked.

Re: Nvidia buys $5B in Intel

#525

Post by dabluecaboose »

slater wrote: post #520
qwerpy wrote: post #519

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> redditization of Hackernews This has been very sad to see this past year.

Please don't post comments saying that HN is turning into Reddit. It's a semi-noob illusion, as old as the hills. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

You might feel smug and superior posting this, but it's quite ironic to post on one specific comment in an otherwise guidelines-breaking, off-topic, political circlejerk subthread like the one we're responding to.

This subthread is indeed reddit-esque: Started by a pithy, barely-constructive comment; and followed by pithy witticisms that add nothing to the conversation about Intel and Nvidia, but instead echo popular sentiments about the current administration without saying anything substantive. Meanwhile, the one contrarian opinion was instantly flagged and hidden, despite being level-headed and non-combative.

Re: Nvidia buys $5B in Intel

#526

Post by 22c »

scrlk wrote: 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…

> What’s old is new again

Let's go back even further.. I get strong nForce vibes from that extract!

Re: Nvidia buys $5B in Intel

#527

Post by jrochkind1 »

elAhmo wrote: post #237
littlecranky67 wrote: post #167

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…

Regulators? In this administration? There is no such thing.

They are superceding regulations with the government just arbitrarily ordering companies to do things instead.

Re: Nvidia buys $5B in Intel

#528

Post by mjevans »

clhodapp wrote: post #478
ho_schi wrote: post #428

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

I've found the amdgpu Linux driver to be fairly buggy running dual monitors with my Radeon VII, and found things like the fTPM to be highly buggy on Threadripper 2k/x399 to the point that I had to add a dTPM. They never got things truly working properly with those more-niche products before they just.. kind of... stopped working on them. And of course ROCm is widely regarded to be a mess. On the other hand, my Steam…

I seem to recall the Vega era as 'when I wouldn't buy a GPU because AMDs were just unstable' (and of course never closed source Nvidia).

Took me almost 5 min to drill through enough Wikipedia pages to find the Radeon VII string.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_AMD_graphics_processin... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radeon_RX_Vega_series

Contrast that with the earlier R9 285 that I used for nearly 10 years until I was finally able to get a 9070XT that I'm very happy with. They were still refining support for that aged GCN 1.2 driver even today, even if things are a lower priority to backport.

Overall the ONLY things I'm unhappy about this GPU generation.

* Too damned expensive * Not enough VRAM (and no ECC off of workstation cards?) * Too hard for average consumers to just buy direct and cut out the scalpers

The only way I could get my hands on a card was to buy through a friend that lives within range of a Microcenter. The only true saints of computer hardware in the whole USA.

Re: Nvidia buys $5B in Intel

#529

Post by bentt »

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.…

I dont agree here. Nvidia could simply segment the market and keep intel on the low end of gpus. I think AMD is the real target/victim here.

Re: Nvidia buys $5B in Intel

#530

Post by TiredOfLife »

tart-lemonade wrote: post #380
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…

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…

Out of 9 desktop GT 7xx cards only 2 were Fermi rest were Kepler.

Out of 12 mobile GT 7xx cards only 3 were Fermi (and 2 of those were M and not GT) rest were Kepler.

Post reply on HN