Intel Files Lawsuit Against Nvidia

It's true that Intel sells A LOT of IGP's to OEMs, but most of those OEMs deactivate the IGP and put a discrete graphics card in their systems. HP does it on all their Intel based desktops (since they all use a G33 chipset based motherboard) and I'm sure a whole lot of other major OEMs do the same. So yes, they did buy an IGP chipset and as a result Intel's share in the graphics market goes up again. It wouldn't even surprise me if they receive some sort of price reduction from Intel when they purchase IGP chipsets along with a C2D cpu.
 
Manaknight, did you ever find out why the IGP from Intel caused so many issues? We have a small sub group that uses discrete graphic boards in their setups. this has caused so many issues it was almost scrapped as a solution ( we needed dual monitors and IGP just didn't cut it ) till we found out it was a driver mismatch from a office automation program. it inserted itself in the video stream and messed up the driver setting. We removed it from the machines and placed it on a terminal server and all the issues went away.

As for Nvidia, I had to look at the calender to make sure that it wasn't already April 1 as I thought it was a joke the first time I read the article. They will not have a sustainable model if they do not find some other revenue soon. If the EU takes as long as it did with MS then they will either be dust or decimated before any help arrives if at all. Their current antics aside, all they have now are laptops and enthusiasts to get revenue but even with laptop sales up they still will not turn much of a profit.
 
When Intel signed the agreement with NVIDIA, they were losing to AMD in the CPU business. The gaming PCs those days were all AMD CPU with NVIDIA GPU(s). NVIDIA only made chipsets for AMD CPUs, and they had this unique SLI feature (at the time). So Intel went to NVIDIA to ask them to add SLI for Intel CPUs, and gave them the license to make chipsets for Intel CPUs. It was a mistake because the Intel SLI boards were not popular, but with the license, NVIDIA started making chipsets with integrated graphics, directly competing with Intel's own chipsets. This lawsuit is an attempt by Intel to stop the bleeding (NVIDIA recently took Macbook and started to enter netbooks with ION), by arguing that the original agreement doesn't apply to newer CPUs. NVIDIA disagrees and is confident enough to fight this legal battle. NVIDIA should get used to this kind of battle, especially if rumors about them building a CPU are true.
 
kraemer007 said:
Intel will "give up" on graphics like they have many times in the past. Intel apparently has not learned lessons from itanium, LCOS HDTV, or the old i740 graphics chip. They even had an MP3 player (the intel pocket concert) before apple shipped the 1st ipod. Talk about short sighted.
Click to expand...

I remember the i740 (and the followup, the i752). The problem with either was NOT performance, but price. i740 was *overpriced* for its performance (it was indeed faster than non-accelerated graphics processors of its day; the problem i740 faced was lowball pricing from ATI of 3D RAGE (the original 3D chipset) that severely undercut i740 in the AGP space). i740 largely performed on a par with ATI; the flaw in any argument for i740 was that it was twice ATI's price.

The Pocket Concert was also a victim of lowballing (this time, by Apple). Does *anyone* remember exactly WHY the original iPod was so successful? Apple was not only willing to LOSE money in initial pricing just to move product, they also had the penultimate tie-in: iTunes. (Remember; the iPod originally didn't support MP3s at all. You HAD to purchase music in Apple's proprietary AAC format to play on it, and that meant iTunes.) Worse (for Intel), the iPod cost less than the Pocket Concert (and had a larger capacity in terms of storage).

Ontel makes great products (their CPUs, chipsets, even networking gear); unfortunately, they are largely pants at consumer-direct marketing.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top