News [SA] SA teasers on WOA, Qualcomm, and new Arm entrants (NV/Samsung?)

[SpudLobby]

From SemiAccurate, a series. Yes, it's paywalled and this is effectively a blurred line between rumors and news but Charlie's credibility isn't exactly MLID-tier and we discuss those things, so this I think is worth a thread. There are four posts in total, intertwined effectively:

I) MS made a deal with QC on WOA notebooks
II) QC lost that socket - or two. (Presumably Surface-related)
III) In Qualcomm's place, someone unexpected won that socket/contract - who?

The curious finale in IV, independent of the firm that won that socket Qualcomm lost (may not be an Arm-based replacement though) there's a new entry to the WOA space.

IV) "A new player enters the ARM laptop SoC space"
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


I) and II) are much more difficult to guess about and I think generally less interesting other than that Nuvia delays are possibly if not probably in play and QC's sloppiness hurt them, maybe even a pricing issue.

On III):

"Any guesses as to who won the socket that Qualcomm lost? SemiAccurate wasn’t expecting this name to pop up on the list but it makes sense given the company’s ambitions."

Assuming it isn't restricted to WOA here, to me this isn't Intel but probably MediaTek or plausibly AMD, because of "given the company's ambitions".

That is very straightforward here with regard to MediaTek's interest in something competitive for WOA as they've voiced publicly two if not three different times (maybe more) since 2020. Alternatively, for AMD everyone knows they're interested in growing their mobile pie - which is wise, because DIY crap is frankly kind of irrelevant.

On IV):

"A major semiconductor player just entered the ARM laptop SoC space. This one took SemiAccurate by surprise, and it is a big development."

"We told you about the deal between Microsoft and Qualcomm over WARTBook SoCsearlier, then why Microsoft booted them for repeated failures, and finally who ‘won’ that socket. There are a lot of other moving pieces in this game and a new player just entered, and it is not one of the four that are publicly known."

"There are a lot of other moving pieces in this game and a new player just entered, and it is not one of the four that are publicly known. This one changes a lot, the WARTBook plan is still garbage that will never catch Apple for technical reasons, but it is a seismic shift in the gutter."

Putting aside Charlie's stylistic bitterness, this has to be Nvidia or Samsung. The mention of Apple alongside the seismic shift makes me think so.

For Samsung's client/consumer division, they'd have to use stock IP obviously but they absolutely could ask for and buy beefier Exynos chips to throw into laptops without much issue (besides drivers) with their industrial scale and since they are an endpoint laptop vendor. MediaTek has to sell to someone directly, and has a tougher time with the chicken and egg game. I don't know it's likely, but it's possible, I guess.

However, I think it's far more likely to be Nvidia. Stock cores + GeForce IP on a recent process node could be popular and they'd have a reciprocal effect on developer interest.

 

[NTMBK]

I don't know if Nvidia would be interested, to be honest. They are making ridiculous margins on their AI datacentre chips - re-entering the relatively low margin laptop chip market probably won't look great to their shareholders. There's a reason why they abandoned Tegra, and refocused it on the automotive market.

Samsung seems like a more natural fit. They have fabs to fill, they produce consumer electronics, they could be building Samsung laptops around Samsung chips.

 

[DrMrLordX]

Could be Mediatek.

 

[Lodix]

I also think that it is probably Samsung. Their Exynos chip division is currently struggling. They are looking for new businesses apart from Smartphones to grow, like car's infotainment. So laptops/tablet's SoC is the next natural thing, they have prolonged their contract with AMD for GPU IP. And the foundry division must be also giving good deals to fulfill their fabs.

Samsung electronics division is enthusiastic about using Qualcomm ARM chips in their laptops. So they have a guarantee consumer if they get a good SoC. Qualcomm is very greedy trying to squeeze too much money for half baked laptop SoCs and they are having problems with their Nuvia cores. So a cheaper alternative with a more cooperative "company" would be ideal to them. It would be a benefit for 3 of their divisions.

 

[SpudLobby]

I don't know if Nvidia would be interested, to be honest. They are making ridiculous margins on their AI datacentre chips - re-entering the relatively low margin laptop chip market probably won't look great to their shareholders. There's a reason why they abandoned Tegra, and refocused it on the automotive market.

Samsung seems like a more natural fit. They have fabs to fill, they produce consumer electronics, they could be building Samsung laptops around Samsung chips.

Firms are always looking for new ways to diversify and grow their revenue streams, and while some do grow slothful with horrible culture (Intel) and kick back or blow it, corporate culture and hiring is variant.

They are not all unitary actors that simply recede and grow satiated the moment they're making more money. I mean, why stop at DCAI? It's arbitrary.

There's a reason why they abandoned Tegra, and refocused it on the automotive market.

Right but they've also shown interest in going back in the opposite direction one way or another. If you want proof: Their interest is pretty expressly part of what fueled the failed Arm acquisition - they are not in fact just interested in GPUs for the datacenter + Mellanox + dGPUs for gamers for eternity. In that acquisition's wake was a breakup fee with a 20-year deal to Arm's IP. Whatever that is exactly, I doubt it was a bad for Nvidia. Dylan Patel among others described it as a "sweetheart deal" which is unsurprising.

They're also in server CPU's now with Grace (albeit in a niche sense for AI really, not a great general platform and expensive yes) and we've seen reports they've custom CPU hiring etc. Even if this is a lower margin gig and they don't make a ton of profit, and they just use stock Cortex stuff - you can't look at that in isolation. It fuels economies of scale if they can amortize development costs for e.g. SoC integration, inference IP & graphics IP, and possibly their own CPUs later maybe. This is just big tech in 2023, for the better honestly.

IMO, also: midrange dGPU's are going to become a bit more niche, (though NV will still dominate) while advanced packaging, smaller process nodes + LPDDR are increasingly going to give us "good enough" for gaming in mobile and client systems where it previously wasn't possible. In theory, everything just adjusts and demands increase. In practice there are definitely some absolute thresholds of quality that people will consider at least acceptable, you're bounded by human senses at some point. Nvidia has 6-8B ballpark in annual gaming revenue as of recently afaict and this quarter gaming revenue was back up.

All this in mind, I don't see it as unreasonable they'll try some Windows on Arm chips for laptops and maybe handhelds. In fact I basically expect it.

 

[SpudLobby]

FYI:

I did end up hearing it is in fact Nvidia that replaced QC for that socket.

However, it's Samsung that is the new entrant described by IV) I think.

It is these two though that are in the rumors, so that's interesting. No word on MediaTek who claims to be interested but hasn't moved a ton in the rumor network.

 

[SpudLobby]

I don't know if Nvidia would be interested, to be honest. They are making ridiculous margins on their AI datacentre chips - re-entering the relatively low margin laptop chip market probably won't look great to their shareholders. There's a reason why they abandoned Tegra, and refocused it on the automotive market.

Samsung seems like a more natural fit. They have fabs to fill, they produce consumer electronics, they could be building Samsung laptops around Samsung chips.

So basically to answer, it's probably both, lmao.

 

[SpudLobby]

I also think that it is probably Samsung. Their Exynos chip division is currently struggling. They are looking for new businesses apart from Smartphones to grow, like car's infotainment. So laptops/tablet's SoC is the next natural thing, they have prolonged their contract with AMD for GPU IP. And the foundry division must be also giving good deals to fulfill their fabs.

Samsung electronics division is enthusiastic about using Qualcomm ARM chips in their laptops. So they have a guarantee consumer if they get a good SoC. Qualcomm is very greedy trying to squeeze too much money for half baked laptop SoCs and they are having problems with their Nuvia cores. So a cheaper alternative with a more cooperative "company" would be ideal to them. It would be a benefit for 3 of their divisions.

Yeah the new entrant it seems is Samsung, but NV too

 

[SpudLobby]

Laptop GPUs posted strong growth in the key back-to-school season, led by RTX 4060 GPUs. NVIDIA's GPU-powered laptops have gained in popularity, and their shipments are now outpacing desktop GPUs from several regions around the world. This is likely to shift the reality of our overall gaming revenue a bit, with Q2 and Q3 as the stronger quarters of the year, reflecting the back-to-school and holiday build schedules for laptops.

Nvidia statement. Interesting RE: laptop gpus, didn’t realize they were already that popular for them vs desktops.

 

[hemedans]

I also think that it is probably Samsung. Their Exynos chip division is currently struggling. They are looking for new businesses apart from Smartphones to grow, like car's infotainment. So laptops/tablet's SoC is the next natural thing, they have prolonged their contract with AMD for GPU IP. And the foundry division must be also giving good deals to fulfill their fabs.

Samsung electronics division is enthusiastic about using Qualcomm ARM chips in their laptops. So they have a guarantee consumer if they get a good SoC. Qualcomm is very greedy trying to squeeze too much money for half baked laptop SoCs and they are having problems with their Nuvia cores. So a cheaper alternative with a more cooperative "company" would be ideal to them. It would be a benefit for 3 of their divisions.

Samsung deal with Qualcomm is that they won't license Exynos to other OEMs. Unless there is new agreement it won't happen.

Did Qualcomm Inc. Kneecap Samsung's Exynos SoCs? | The Motley Fool

The companies have a complicated relationship.

www.fool.com

 

[Lodix]

Samsung deal with Qualcomm is that they won't license Exynos to other OEMs. Unless there is new agreement it won't happen.

Did Qualcomm Inc. Kneecap Samsung's Exynos SoCs? | The Motley Fool

The companies have a complicated relationship.

www.fool.com

First, this is an article from 2017 more than 6 years ago.

Second, if you really read and understand the article it doesn't imply what you are saying and it would be illegal anyway.

Third, Samsung doesn't license Exynos chips to other companies. Samsung SLI chip division sells SoC like any other Semiconductor company sells chips.

The Samsung that sells electronics devices to people is another division compared to the one that sell chips.

The article talks about a dispute of some license fees for patents over 3G CDMA connectivity IP for modems. Which is a technology only used in USA/China/Japan and is alredy dead anyway.

 

[soresu]

Samsung SLI chip division sells SoC like any other Semiconductor company sells chips.

I thought Sammy stopped doing that years ago!

I can't even remember the last non Sammy phone with an Exynos chip in it.

Wasn't it Xiaomi that used them at one point?

 

[Lodix]

I thought Sammy stopped doing that years ago!

I can't even remember the last non Sammy phone with an Exynos chip in it.

Wasn't it Xiaomi that used them at one point?

They do still sell chips, at least they try, but they have a tiny market share compared to Qualcomm and Mediatek. Currently I only know about Vivo, Meizu, Google Pixel. And various automotive brands use Exynos chips or have deals for future projects. So it makes sense to try to expand to new markets for growing opportunities.

 

[soresu]

Currently I only know about Vivo, Meizu, Google Pixel

Pixel Tensor is based off Exynos, but it's still got custom Google stuff in there.

 

[Lodix]

Pixel Tensor is based off Exynos, but it's still got custom Google stuff in there.

Yes, it has some blocks of Google's IP like ISP and NPU. But the design of the SoC and integration of its parts is made by Samsung Semiconductor Division. It is just another example that contradicts what the other user was saying.

 

[NTMBK]

I thought Sammy stopped doing that years ago!

I can't even remember the last non Sammy phone with an Exynos chip in it.

Wasn't it Xiaomi that used them at one point?

Apparently Vivo are using Exynos in their phones, according to Wikipedia. Looks like it's just them and Samsung right now.

 

[hemedans]

Apparently Vivo are using Exynos in their phones, according to Wikipedia. Looks like it's just them and Samsung right now.

Just one model used Exynos 1080 and was sold in limited Quantity,

 

[hemedans]

First, this is an article from 2017 more than 6 years ago.

Second, if you really read and understand the article it doesn't imply what you are saying and it would be illegal anyway.

Third, Samsung doesn't license Exynos chips to other companies. Samsung SLI chip division sells SoC like any other Semiconductor company sells chips.

The Samsung that sells electronics devices to people is another division compared to the one that sell chips.

The article talks about a dispute of some license fees for patents over 3G CDMA connectivity IP for modems. Which is a technology only used in USA/China/Japan and is alredy dead anyway.

4G and 5G inherit technology from Gsm and Cdma, because there is no Gsm or Cdma anymore doesnt mean those patents disapper.

That agreement is from 1993, we just know it from 2017 so if it was relevant for 25 years what change from 2017 to today? Without Korea FTC revealing it we wouldnt know anyway.

 

[Lodix]

Just one model used Exynos 1080 and was sold in limited Quantity,

It was more than one model and you don't know the quantity. But the point is that you were wrong. It doesn't matter the quantity or models. Even just 1 sold disproves what you said. And again it is totally ridiculous what you are implying. Did you read my complete response in my previous comment explaining the situation? They just sell less because Qualcomm and Mediatek usually have better offerings and market share. Not because they don't try. And there are multiple examples of that happening even right now in current sold smartphones. So why do you keep insisting when clearly it is about a topic you don't know...

 

[Lodix]

4G and 5G inherit technology from Gsm and Cdma, because there is no Gsm or Cdma anymore doesnt mean those patents disapper.

That agreement is from 1993, we just know it from 2017 so if it was relevant for 25 years what change from 2017 to today? Without Korea FTC revealing it we wouldnt know anyway.

It is exclusively about some patents of 3G CDMA which is a dead technology that is being discontinued. Not general 3G just some networks used in few contries. And patents expire.

 

[Doug S]

4G and 5G inherit technology from Gsm and Cdma, because there is no Gsm or Cdma anymore doesnt mean those patents disapper.

That agreement is from 1993, we just know it from 2017 so if it was relevant for 25 years what change from 2017 to today? Without Korea FTC revealing it we wouldnt know anyway.

Patents DO disappear - they have a limited lifetime. Patents created during the development of 3G have all expired now.

 

[hemedans]

Patents DO disappear - they have a limited lifetime. Patents created during the development of 3G have all expired now.

Qualcomm did transfer its Cdma patents to 3gpp and they were base to founding 4G LTE. Why do you think they are major player until today? Same companies Nokia, Ericson and Qualcomm have dominated cellular network for decades because of these patents.

patent last for 20 years, 4G came out around 2011/12 definetely there are plenty of 3G standard relevant today.

 

[hemedans]

It is exclusively about some patents of 3G CDMA which is a dead technology that is being discontinued. Not general 3G just some networks used in few contries. And patents expire.

If you read those Cases its Both Cdma and Lte and not just Exynos even Huawei was treated same with its Kirin soc. And if someone who use Qualcomm patents licence those modem then Qualcomm will negotiate separately with Oem and take royalities. Qualcomm even Blocked project Dragonfly in 2011 which wanted to create alternative modem.

Thats why Qualcomm have been fined everywhere.

 

[ikjadoon]

This is an interesting discussion. With Qualcomm moving to NUVIA IP, Arm's flagship IP might have had zero WOA wins.

Some rumors in 2021 & 2023 claimed MediaTek would license NVIDIA IP, without any result:

According to DigiTimes, this is part of the plan – both companies [MediaTek & NVIDIA] will reportedly be looking to get into the “Windows On ARM” segment with these chips, i.e. Windows laptops based on ARM SoCs, which can only be built on Qualcomm’s Snapdragon chips as of now. While MediaTek is also active in laptop segment, the company’s marketshare is limited to Chromebook platform devices (which is based on Linux). But MediaTek should have a significant share in them, reportedly up to around 20%, which could provide an avenue for penetrating regular laptop market, if MediaTek devices were bundled with a full-fledged operating system and software ecosystem.

//

Re: assuming NVIDIA won the Surface SoC, SA mentions:

Multiple sources tell SemiAccurate that this win is solid as long as the parts in question deliver on their promises which is a fair request. That said knowing the history of the players, it may not be as assured as some may think.

What beef (i.e., negative history) do NVIDIA and Microsoft have? Perhaps this is Windows RT's disastrous choice to go with NVIDIA's Tegra 3, but that was 10+ years ago and kind of Microsoft-inflicted:

Surface also happens to use a quad-core NVIDIA Tegra 3 SoC, featuring four ARM Cortex A9 cores running at up to 1.3GHz. At least for the Cortex A9 generation, I don’t know that Microsoft could’ve used anything slower. Simply typing quickly in Microsoft Word maxes the single threaded performance of Tegra 3’s ARM Cortex A9 cores. I’ve seen CPU usage a high as 50% when typing very quickly, but mostly it tends to sit between 20 – 40%. Switch to notepad and max CPU utilization drops to sub 10%. This says more about Office 2013 than the performance of NVIDIA’s Tegra 3, but there are not a whole lot of spare CPU cycles to go around with Surface.

Across the board Intel manages a huge advantage over NVIDIA's Tegra 3. Again, this shouldn't be a surprise. Intel's 32nm SoC process offers a big advantage over TSMC's 40nm G used for NVIDIA's Cortex A9 cores (the rest of the SoC is built on LP, the whole chip uses TSMC's 40nm LPG), and there are also the architectural advantages that Atom offers over ARM's Cortex A9. As we've mentioned in both our Medfield and Clover Trail reviews: the x86 power myth has been busted. I think it's very telling that Intel didn't show up with an iPad for this comparison, although I will be trying to replicate this setup on my own with an iPad 4 to see if I can't make it happen without breaking too many devices. We've also just now received the first Qualcomm Krait based Windows RT tablets, which will make another interesting comparison point going forward.

//

NVIDIA does have a fair bit of Arm + GPU → platform → end-user device experience with their Jetsons, one good review here.

The Jetson Orin Nano is hands-down one of the most polished SBCs we’ve ever tested.

While I remember how NVIDIA's once-massive consumer Arm ambitions were a big flop, NVIDIA turned a leaf after it (finally) abandoned its custom Arm microarchitectures.

AnandTech: Project Denver is targeted at everything from PCs to HPC/servers. This is completely a high end play going after the x86 stronghold. Project Denver ties in completely with Microsoft's announcement to bring Windows 8 to ARM next year.

 

[Doug S]

Qualcomm did transfer its Cdma patents to 3gpp and they were base to founding 4G LTE. Why do you think they are major player until today? Same companies Nokia, Ericson and Qualcomm have dominated cellular network for decades because of these patents.

patent last for 20 years, 4G came out around 2011/12 definetely there are plenty of 3G standard relevant today.

If there are new patents created for the 4G standard they are not 3G patents. All cell phone standards use a radio, but that doesn't mean Marconi's patents are still relevant.