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."

8 of 420 comments (clear)

  1. Re:What? by Dunbal · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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.
  2. Where's the *proof*? by onion2k · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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?

  3. Re:What? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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.

  4. Re:What? by JamesP · · Score: 4, Insightful

    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 /. fixes commenting on Chrome?
  5. Its amazing how fast bridges can be rebuilt... by voss · · Score: 4, Insightful

    If you have the cash, intel doesnt need cash AMD does.

  6. Re:What? by hardburn · · Score: 4, Insightful

    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
  7. Re:What? by TheRaven64 · · Score: 4, Insightful
    Not at all. Many of them relate to aspects of the vector instruction set, for example. Sure, they could make an x86 chip, but without SSE support who would buy it?

    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
  8. Re:Patents vs. GPU by Dun+Malg · · Score: 4, Insightful

    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.