Slashdot Mirror
Nvidia Is Trying To Make an x86 Chip
Slatterz writes with a story from PC Authority which says that "Word has reached us that Nvidia is definitely
working on an x86 chip and the firm is heavily recruiting x86 engineers all over Silicon Valley. The history behind this can be summarised by saying they bought an x86 team, and don't have a licence to make the parts. Given that the firm burned about every bridge imaginable with the two companies who can give them licences, Nvidia has about a zero chance of getting one."
Except that Intel and AMD hold vital patents to the set of technologies that are part of the x86 architeture.
You realize patents only last 20 years, right? Some of those "vital" x86 components must have expired or be pretty close.
Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
What about Via?
I can think of a few reasons why nVidia might want a bunch of x86 engineers on-board, and they're not all "to design an x86 chip". nVidia have been pushing the GPGPU model for a while so having people around who know CPU architecture would be very useful, especially if they're looking at ways to emulate x86 assembler on their GPU architecture (which, for a few apps, would be an awesome feature).
The article is full of assumptions and conjecture. And it comes across as incredibly bitter toward nVidia. Did they turn the author down for a job or something?
http://twitter.com/onion2k
Sounds like pretty weak speculation.
You can't, at least officially, patent an aspect of the instruction set itself. In terms of more general patents over processes useful in producing the chips, there's no reason why NVidia couldn't have acquired equally 'vital' patents themselves. Plus Intel and AMD are both in the graphics business too - do they already have suficiently broad cross licensing agreements with NVidia? I don't know and I suspect you don't either.
The question in these situations often comes down to whether companies are really willing to go nuclear and risk having the courts reject a lot of the crap with which they would otherwise intimidate smaller companies. If NVidia are willing to call their bluff then there's every chance they'll succeed. Being seen to use patents to prop up a duopoly isn't necessarily anything that Intel wants to be seen doing anyway.
Except nVidia probably has a multitude of graphics patents that AMD(ATi) and Intel certainly violate.
Also, I really don't remember when "not having a license" was an impediment (remember Cyrix?? What about VIA?)
how long until
If you have the cash, intel doesnt need cash AMD does.
I think we're at the point where x86 licensing is honestly kind of silly. For the sake of competition, I believe nVidia will find the right buttons to press and get at least enough breathing room to build parts.
Saying that x86 is a technology that allows Intel or AMD chips to run very powerful software is completely off-target. x86 is a vast software market, which chip makers continually convoluted their designs in order to have the ability to serve.
In other words, it's quite clear that x86 is not a technology anymore and has become more like a standard, which all companies should have some fair access to.
"There are some people that if they don't know, you can't tell them." ~ Louis Armstrong
If you want to get rid of cruft, you don't start with x86. Many assembly programmers have weaped themselves to sleep over its backwards memory address model.
Not a typewriter
There is a simple way around this problem, however. They can get IBM to fab the chips. IBM have done this for other x86 manufacturers in the past, and it's covered by the cross-licensing agreements that they have with Intel and AMD.
I am TheRaven on Soylent News
Usually licensing agreements are set to be terminated if ownership of the licensee passes to a third party, so NVidia might even get a total of zero licenses if it buys Via.
So why didn't the cross licensing agreement terminate when National Semi bought Cyrix? Or when VIA bought Cyrix from National? Your speculation flies in the face of actual events.
If a job's not worth doing, it's not worth doing right.
That is my understanding as well. Current Via chips are extensions of the Centaur design. Cyrix was a technological dead end that didn't even own any fabrication facilities. Name brand had to be the only valuable thing they had.
You're confusing chip design with licensing agreements. VIA sells the Centaur IDT chip design under the Cyrix licensing agreement. Cyrix' "name brand" was worthless compared to their real asset, which was a full x86 cross-licensing agreement with Intel.
If a job's not worth doing, it's not worth doing right.
Actually I was speaking on a much less technical, and more human level. My point was that something that we all use and that has become a backbone of our society has essentially become public domain by nature of its own success.
That's not how patents work. The McCoy automatic oiler saved milions of dollars in labor back in the age of steam locomotives. The fact that just about every locomotive had an oiler and that railroads were the backbone of our transportation system in the 19th century in no way affected McCoy's patent on it.
If a job's not worth doing, it's not worth doing right.