Intel files lawsuit against Nvidia

[j0j081]

Could someone explain what this means in retard terms? Thanks.

 

[magreen]

Originally posted by: j0j081
Could someone explain what this means in retard terms? Thanks.

Sure. The bunny came out of its hole. It looked up and saw a big doggy. The doggy barked at the bunny, and the bunny ran around the tree twice, and only then it ran back into its hole.

DON'T be that bunny!!!

 

[Idontcare]

Originally posted by: magreen

Originally posted by: j0j081
Could someone explain what this means in retard terms? Thanks.

Sure. The bunny came out of its hole. It looked up and saw a big doggy. The doggy barked at the bunny, and the bunny ran around the tree twice, and only then it ran back into its hole.

DON'T be that bunny!!!

You failed to mention the part where the dog start dry-humping the bunny...

 

[apoppin]

Not a foot-race I'd want my fabless company to be in, and these guys know it, I'm not saying anything here that they haven't already contemplated eons ago.

Of course they know it; and there are definite advantages to fabless also as AMD considered 'asset lite'
TSMC is a guaranteed fab .. who know what the future will bring.

You are basically saying intel has the "advantage"
- agreed .. but not always the sense ..

a small and more aggressive company needs to think smarter and react faster ,, Nvidia seems to have that over intel, so far
- so much so that intel appears to be 'threatened' and is the one that is filing the lawsuit

 

[Idontcare]

Originally posted by: apoppin

Not a foot-race I'd want my fabless company to be in, and these guys know it, I'm not saying anything here that they haven't already contemplated eons ago.

Of course they know it; and there are definite advantages to fabless also as AMD considered 'asset lite'
TSMC is a guaranteed fab .. who know what the future will bring.

You are basically saying intel has the "advantage"
- agreed .. but not always the sense ..

a small and more aggressive company needs to think smarter and react faster ,, Nvidia seems to have that over intel, so far
- so much so that intel appears to be 'threatened' and is the one that is filing the lawsuit

Oh yeah there is no value to be gained by underestimating Nvidia's ability to do more with less as they have been most efficient in this regard to date. Until Intel actually delivers anything it is very much a market for NV to lose, one that Intel must gain.

You probably remember all the ballyhoo Intel put into their efforts to enter the HDTV markets back in 2004 timeframe. About the same time they were telling everyone they were going to dominate the cellphone markets too. Then two years later it was complete reversal as they pulled out after gaining no market traction.

Intel has history of hype and no delivery. This history cannot be discounted when looking at the hype being built around Larrabee.

 

[apoppin]

we are agreeing?
:Q

Yes ... the same marketing that intel used for P4 and Netbust hype seems to be back and overhyping Larrabeast

"10 Ghz is easily attainable with the P4's architecture"
- how can i forget?

it was not that long ago

 

[Idontcare]

Originally posted by: apoppin
we are agreeing?
:Q

History has taught me people can almost always agree on a list of what is possible, where things breakdown is when the discussion transitions to one of ranking the possibilities by probability/likelihood.

So yes, we both appear to be agreeing that it is possible Intel's larrabee hype will amount to nothing more than vaporware. But I suspect we'd begin to disagree if we started talking about whether it was the most probable outcome

Intel has not experienced an unchallenged path to dominating the big-iron markets with their EPIC/Itanium architecture, and that situation was much more predisposed to their MPU expertise compared to launching an assault on an existing discreet GPU industry.

The odds are not in Intel's court, but odds have a funny way of changing if you have deep enough pockets and a management with strong intestinal fortitude.

The pockets were deep enough for Intel to own the HDTV and cellphone markets, but the intestinal fortitude was lacking once gross margin price discovery homework was finally done by the accountants and marketing dept.

We'll know in about 12-18 months whether Otellini has more or less colorectal impaction and obstruction compared to Barret.

I do think it is more likely that Intel succeeds here because they have the money and the process technology advantage, but as AMD has shown us, snatching defeat from the jaws of victory happens frequently in this industry so there is no sense in being binary about the possible outcomes.

 

[magreen]

Another point to add here, idc and apoppin, is that with cellphones and hdtv it was intel trying to expand into a completely or nearly completely separate market. Their core cpu business (no pun intended) was not threatened or related to such ventures.

In the case of Larabee, there is much talk of cpu and gpu merging, and the cpu business changing and that those who don't grasp highly parallel vector processing by the horns will be left out in the cold (though the degree to which this is true is anybody's guess). Hence the amd ati purchase. So intel may see more of a need to get larabee right and have the stamina to see it through to completion, not merely for its own profitability (as the cellphone and hdtv projects were measured), but for the survival of intel's core cpu business.

 

[Idontcare]

Originally posted by: magreen
Another point to add here, idc and apoppin, is that with cellphones and hdtv it was intel trying to expand into a completely or nearly completely separate market. Their core cpu business (no pun intended) was not threatened or related to such ventures.

In the case of Larabee, there is much talk of cpu and gpu merging, and the cpu business changing and that those who don't grasp highly parallel vector processing by the horns will be left out in the cold (though the degree to which this is true is anybody's guess). Hence the amd ati purchase. So intel may see more of a need to get larabee right and have the stamina to see it through to completion, not merely for its own profitability (as the cellphone and hdtv projects were measured), but for the survival of intel's core cpu business.

I find this logic too be most rational and agreeable. NV might fear this much as well, hence the rhetoric Jensen has been firing off for the past year or so.

No one likes a feeling of impending doom, it tends to make one irritable.

 

[Denithor]

Yet I still cannot fathom how you can pack enough "GPU" cores onto the CPU along with the x86 cores to come anywhere near challenging a discrete card with 240-800 stream shaders.

I mean, the latest i7 chips are 731M transistors (a good portion of which is cache). Compare that to a GT200 core consisting of 1.4B transistors, the vast majority of which are used for compute power (paraphrased from here).

Am I the only one confused on how exactly Larrabee is going to challenge the behemoth top-tier graphics cards? I understand there will be extremely efficient data transfer from "CPU" cores to "GPU" cores (versus CPU feeding the GPU via PCIe) but I just doubt this will be enough to shift the current paradigm.

 

[Idontcare]

Originally posted by: Denithor
Yet I still cannot fathom how you can pack enough "GPU" cores onto the CPU along with the x86 cores to come anywhere near challenging a discrete card with 240-800 stream shaders.

I mean, the latest i7 chips are 731M transistors (a good portion of which is cache). Compare that to a GT200 core consisting of 1.4B transistors, the vast majority of which are used for compute power (paraphrased from here).

Am I the only one confused on how exactly Larrabee is going to challenge the behemoth top-tier graphics cards? I understand there will be extremely efficient data transfer from "CPU" cores to "GPU" cores (versus CPU feeding the GPU via PCIe) but I just doubt this will be enough to shift the current paradigm.

Look at what AMD did to best the GT260. If it is purely a horse-race to put enough xtors onto a PCB then Intel can do that with the best of them.

I'm not in the camp that thinks larrabee and RTRT is going to be a disruptive technology unleashed to the demise of NV and AMD.

I view Larrabee as a dark-horse in the discreet GPU market in the same manner that Microsoft was a dark-horse in the gaming console market circa 2000.

 

[aigomorla]

something simular came on the news today.

Rambus won the FTC complaint about Trust.

So i wouldnt be supprised if Intel Wins now.

http://www.marketwatch.com/new...CA05BD72%7D&dist=msr_9

 

[apoppin]

Originally posted by: Idontcare

Originally posted by: magreen
Another point to add here, idc and apoppin, is that with cellphones and hdtv it was intel trying to expand into a completely or nearly completely separate market. Their core cpu business (no pun intended) was not threatened or related to such ventures.

In the case of Larabee, there is much talk of cpu and gpu merging, and the cpu business changing and that those who don't grasp highly parallel vector processing by the horns will be left out in the cold (though the degree to which this is true is anybody's guess). Hence the amd ati purchase. So intel may see more of a need to get larabee right and have the stamina to see it through to completion, not merely for its own profitability (as the cellphone and hdtv projects were measured), but for the survival of intel's core cpu business.

I find this logic too be most rational and agreeable. NV might fear this much as well, hence the rhetoric Jensen has been firing off for the past year or so.

No one likes a feeling of impending doom, it tends to make one irritable.

intel is the one filing the lawsuit; i'd say that is "irritation"

it also depends on what direction Nvidia is heading. They say only 30% of their current market is hardcore gaming and it is going to be surpassed by their Pro market

i have have a feeling that Nvidia knows that intel is going to fUp Larrabeast
- they broke off negotiations with intel .. perhaps they realize that the intel engineers are way too "CPU oriented" to grasp GPU

 

[aigomorla]

Originally posted by: apoppin

i have have a feeling that Nvidia knows that intel is going to fUp Larrabeast
- they broke off negotiations with intel .. perhaps they realize that the intel engineers are way too "CPU oriented" to grasp GPU

i actually think the oposite.

There scared to shit about larrabe, and hope to get at least a little piece of the pie.

And there was no negotiations, intel just kept saying No, umm no, and definitely No.

Those of you who were in this hobby a long time ago, remember intel had an awesome GPU at its time.

It was called the i740.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intel740

i think and still think, intel engineers > nvidia engineers. :T

 

[waffleironhead]

Originally posted by: aigomorla


i actually think the oposite.

There scared to shit about larrabe, and hope to get at least a little piece of the pie.

And there was no negotiations, intel just kept saying No, umm no, and definitely No.

Those of you who were in this hobby a long time ago, remember intel had an awesome GPU at its time.

It was called the i740.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intel740

i think and still think, intel engineers > nvidia engineers. :T

Only you would consider that atrocious gpu to be "awesome". Thanks for that one I needed a laugh.

 

[apoppin]

You mean intel's glory days of over a decade ago
- that was a NASTY piece of crap that couldn't compete with anyone
:roll:


i don't think necessarily that either engineer is superior .. but they are quite different in their approach .. just as their HW is
- the CPU has not really changed much as a 'calculator plus typewriter'; the GPU has just become programmable quite recently

 

[aigomorla]

Originally posted by: waffleironhead
[
Only you would consider that atrocious gpu to be "awesome". Thanks for that one I needed a laugh.

For its time the i740 was a badass card.

Of course today it absolute terrible...

 

[apoppin]

i740 was an abject failure

i forgot about that junk intel HW where its PCI gfx was faster than AGP

it may well portend Larrabeast

you prove my point; thank-you!

and in the last TEN years since that failure into discreet graphics, intel's own IG has also been surpassed in every way by both AMD and Nvidia
--i am beginning to think the intel engineers have a real 'block' when it comes to GPU

 

[Cookie Monster]

Originally posted by: aigomorla
For its time the i740 was a badass card

Are you sure about that?

IIRC, i740 had monkeys coding for its drivers, while being on par against nVIDIAs old RIVA 128 (about a generation behind the i740, with RIVA TNT replacing this card after a few month from i740s release) plus being absolutely destroyed by 3DFX vodoo2 series.

 

[Idontcare]

Here's some i740 benchmarks from 11 years ago:

http://www.tomshardware.com/re...iew-april-98,64-3.html

It's ironic to see the top benchs are produced by a SLI rig...(Voodoo2)

 

[apoppin]

what a trip looking at those old benchmarks; intel never was in the running for gaming

do you really think they will get graphics right for the first time in intel's history?
- that is why i have been consistently saying - since it was announced - that Larrabeast was all smoke and mirrors

and now the lawsuit .. i say intel is running scared; i think they are looking at the possibility, for the first time, that the PC may actually shift away from client computing and make them less relevant

anyway, it brought back memories of when 3D gaming first got exciting to me
--i still have a working RIVA TNT 64 AGP card; my first performance card was really ATi's RageFury32

 

[magreen]

Wow.

Well, nvidia wasn't much better than that intel card back then.
What happened to 3dfx? They were stomping on everyone back then.

 

[Idontcare]

Originally posted by: magreen
What happened to 3dfx? They were stomping on everyone back then.

3dfx Interactive was a company that specialized in the manufacturing of 3D graphics processing units and, later, graphics cards. It was a pioneer in the field for several years in the late 1990s until 2000 when it underwent one of the most high-profile demises in the history of the PC industry. It was headquartered in San Jose, California until, on the verge of bankruptcy, many of its intellectual assets (and many employees) were acquired by its rival, Nvidia Corporation. 3dfx Interactive filed for bankruptcy on October 15, 2002.[1][2]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/3Dfx

There is a whole section there dedicated to the "Cause of decline"...it reads like a sad sad story.

 

[magreen]

Originally posted by: Idontcare

Originally posted by: magreen
What happened to 3dfx? They were stomping on everyone back then.

3dfx Interactive was a company that specialized in the manufacturing of 3D graphics processing units and, later, graphics cards. It was a pioneer in the field for several years in the late 1990s until 2000 when it underwent one of the most high-profile demises in the history of the PC industry. It was headquartered in San Jose, California until, on the verge of bankruptcy, many of its intellectual assets (and many employees) were acquired by its rival, Nvidia Corporation. 3dfx Interactive filed for bankruptcy on October 15, 2002.[1][2]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/3Dfx

There is a whole section there dedicated to the "Cause of decline"...it reads like a sad sad story.

Thanks. That is sad... and fascinating.

 

[Idontcare]

Originally posted by: magreen
Thanks. That is sad... and fascinating.

Some of this stuff was news to me in hindsight. For instance this part:

Third, Greg Ballard became CEO of 3dfx in 1997, and analysts marked it as a turning point since Ballard was a marketing guru. However Ballard failed to understand R&D in the graphics industry. Single-card 2D/3D solutions were taking over the market, and although Ballard saw the need and attempted to direct the company there with the Voodoo Banshee and the Voodoo3, both of these cost the company millions in sales and lost market share while diverting vital resources from the Rampage project.[4] Then 3dfx released word in early 1999 that the still-competitive Voodoo2 would only support OpenGL and Glide under Microsoft's Windows 2000 operating system, and not DirectX. Many games were transitioning to DirectX at this point, and the announcement caused many PC gamers ? the core demographic of 3dfx's market ? to switch to Nvidia or ATI offerings for their new machines.

Yeah I'd say he isn't the third reason, that reads to me like he is the most probable sole reason (destroy your cash-flow and the best R&D in the world will die before they get a company saving product out the door) for their demise if this info is true.

Sadly it reads (to me) as a parallel to AMD's marketing dept insistence that monolithic quads were necessary for AMD's customers to succeed.