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

671–680 of 784 posts

Re: Nvidia to Acquire Arm for $40B

#671

Post by ineedasername »

thomasjudge wrote: post #499
zdw wrote: post #306

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Their best move might be to forget about the architecture license and make the switch to something else with the rest of the market. This assumes that there isn't some other factor in transitioning architecture - this argument could boil down in the mid 2000's to "Why not go x86/amd64", but you couldn't buy a license to that easily (would need to be 3-way with Intel/AMD to further complicate things) Apple has done…

It's kind of puzzling that Apple didn't buy them. They don't seem to be particularly aggressive/creative in the M&A department

Many of Apple's direct competitors are ARM customers, and US politics is already turning a large anti-trust eye towards FAANG. That might have been a factor.

Re: Nvidia to Acquire Arm for $40B

#672

Post by ed25519FUUU »

thomasjudge wrote: post #499
zdw wrote: post #306

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Their best move might be to forget about the architecture license and make the switch to something else with the rest of the market. This assumes that there isn't some other factor in transitioning architecture - this argument could boil down in the mid 2000's to "Why not go x86/amd64", but you couldn't buy a license to that easily (would need to be 3-way with Intel/AMD to further complicate things) Apple has done…

It's kind of puzzling that Apple didn't buy them. They don't seem to be particularly aggressive/creative in the M&A department

They have a perpetual license. What value is it for them to buy ARM?

Re: Nvidia to Acquire Arm for $40B

#673

Post by DCKing »

easde wrote: post #634
DCKing wrote: post #604

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Nvidia is a total powerhouse when it comes to chip design. Most people here are looking at this from the angle of "how does ARM benefit Nvidia", but I think its more valuable to consider "how does Nvidia benefit ARM". In 2020, given what we know about Ampere, I really don't think there's another company out there with better expertise in microprocessor design (but, to be fair, lets say top 3 next to Apple and AMD).…

Nvidia actually did try to license out its GPU IP a few years back: https://www.anandtech.com/show/7083/nvidia-to-license-kepler... I don't believe they ever closed a deal, but clearly Nvidia had some interest in becoming an IP vendor. Perhaps the terms were too onerous or the price too high.

Ah that's very interesting. I wonder what kind of circumstance would get in the way deals for a GPU line that (starting with Maxwell) is technically the best GPU architecture money can buy. Perhaps Nvidia were trying to win game console SoC deals?

Re: Nvidia to Acquire Arm for $40B

#674

Post by ed25519FUUU »

AnthonyMouse wrote: post #656
zdw wrote: post #306

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Their best move might be to forget about the architecture license and make the switch to something else with the rest of the market. This assumes that there isn't some other factor in transitioning architecture - this argument could boil down in the mid 2000's to "Why not go x86/amd64", but you couldn't buy a license to that easily (would need to be 3-way with Intel/AMD to further complicate things) Apple has done…

> Apple has done quite well with their ARM license, outperforming the rest of the mobile form factor CPU market by a considerable margin. But that has really nothing to do with the architecture. They just spent more money on CPU R&D than their ARM competitors. They could have done the same thing with RISC-V, and if that's where the rest of the industry is going, they could be better off going there too. Especially fo…

The problem I see with your argument is that it ignores their superior mobile ARM SoC. If they are going to unify on an architecture, it would certainly be easier to migrate Mac to ARM than iOS to x86.

Re: Nvidia to Acquire Arm for $40B

#675

Post by kllrnohj »

riotnrrd wrote: post #629
kllrnohj wrote: post #612

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They released a new SBC aimed at autonomous vehicles. They haven't had a mobile SoC since 2015's Tegra X1. Which only made it into the Pixel C tablet, Nintendo Shield, and Nvidia's Shield TV (including the 2019 refresh)

You're forgetting the TX2 as well as the Jetson Nano

Which ended up in what mobile products?

Re: Nvidia to Acquire Arm for $40B

#676

Post by ThrowawayR2 »

013a wrote: post #590
klelatti wrote: post #559

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But Nvidia has an Arm architecture license already - the same as Apple - so can build Arm chips to whatever design it wants (and it does in Tegra). This is nothing to do with extending Nvidia's ability to use Arm IP in its own products.

Nvidia is a total powerhouse when it comes to chip design. Most people here are looking at this from the angle of "how does ARM benefit Nvidia", but I think its more valuable to consider "how does Nvidia benefit ARM". In 2020, given what we know about Ampere, I really don't think there's another company out there with better expertise in microprocessor design (but, to be fair, lets say top 3 next to Apple and AMD). N…

> "In 2020, given what we know about Ampere, I really don't think there's another company out there with better expertise in microprocessor design..."

Since Ampere and GPUs in general are structured nothing like a microprocessor, I doubt you'll find anyone who agrees with that.

Re: Nvidia to Acquire Arm for $40B

#677

Post by deaddodo »

dralley wrote: post #593
tboerstad wrote: post #534

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The three licensees would be Intel, AMD and VIA

VIA doesn't have a license for the AMD64 instruction set, however. Intel and AMD did a cross-licensing deal so they have a co-equal position.

VIA isn't privy to the cross-licensing agreement Intel/AMD signed which gives them full access to the other's technology portfolio (since AMD was a second source foundry for Intel, while Cyrix/VIA was not). However, the Court ruled (when they were still Cyrix) that they are allowed to sell any clean-room designed x86 hardware. So while they don't have access to internal architectural documents, they're allowed to reverse-engineer/duplicate x86.

In some ways, it actually frees them up a bit; as they don't have to reciprocate any efforts with Intel. Which they tried to leverage with their Padlock technology. Unfortunately, their marketshare limits any real practical usage of those benefits.

Re: Nvidia to Acquire Arm for $40B

#678

Post by deaddodo »

klelatti wrote: post #627
bigyikes wrote: post #620

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Noob question: how does the x86 licensing work? Does Intel still own the rights? Why would they license to AMD? Why don’t they license to others?

Very briefly: - They don't license because they can make a lot more money manufacturing the chips themselves. - AMD also has the right to x86 because Intel originally allowed them to build x86 compatible chips (some customers insisted on a 'second source' for cpus) and following legal action and settlements between the two companies over the years there is now a comprehensive cross licensing agreement in place. [1] -…

> some customers insisted on a 'second source' for cpus

IBM required it. It was their business MO to protect themselves from losing access to a technology or having the market be dictated by one company. Intel acquiesced so that they would be the architecture of the IBM PC-series.

Re: Nvidia to Acquire Arm for $40B

#679

Post by deaddodo »

VectorLock wrote: post #625
bigyikes wrote: post #620

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Noob question: how does the x86 licensing work? Does Intel still own the rights? Why would they license to AMD? Why don’t they license to others?

In simplest terms, the AMD & Intel perpetual license goes all the way back to the early 80s and Intel has tried to legally harangue their way out of it ever since, with limited success.

Not really. Intel hasn't shown any legal or business moves to try to cancel it ever since they developed EM64T and integrated it in their entire product line. AMD existing protects them from antitrust considerations. They would just prefer AMD stay in the budget realm so they can continue selling high margin products (enthusiast, laptop and server chips) without competition.

Not that they would complain if AMD lost their license or ceased existing, they just don't seem to actively be trying to cancel the license at this point.

Re: Nvidia to Acquire Arm for $40B

#680

Post by smabie »

mytherin wrote: post #646
alfalfasprout wrote: post #638

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And you really think more protectionism will help? Maybe part of the problem is that due to so many regulations, there's not a healthy startup ecosystem and the compensation isn't remotely high enough to draw the best talent.

Regulation has little to do with it. Most of the tech industry is inherently winner-takes-all or winner-takes-most because of how easy it is to scale up tech solutions. US companies get a huge head-start because of their large home market compared to the fragmented EU market, and can easily carry that advantage into also dominating the EU market. There is a reason Russia and China have strong tech companies and Europ…

The only way for Europe to get good tech companies is to create a business friendly environment. They seem unwilling to do that.
Post reply on HN