NVIDIA Still Prohibited from Building Chipsets for Newest Intel Processors

[wikoogle]

Can someone explain to me how what Intel is doing isn't antitrust/a monopoly?

Can someone explain to me how what Intel is doing isn't antitrust/a monopoly?

Intel basically just monopolized the entire integrated graphics market, despite making a far inferior product than it's competitors.

How is this any different than when Microsoft bundled IE with Windows to try and monopolize the entire internet browser market, despite making an inferior internet browser.

Microsoft was sued for that and lost, so why not Intel.

Atleast with what MS did, there was an easy fix, anyone that realized that Netscape (which evolved into Mozilla Firefox), was the superior product could simply download it and install it. That however is not an option for Apple and other consumers of chipsets, Intel instead is suing anyone that rips out Intel's crappy integrated graphics and puts in an integrated graphics solution that actually works well. I am still shocked by the fact that when Apple/Nvidia tried to do just that (rip out the Intel IGP from Intel's i3's and i5's and stick in Nvidia's IGP), Intel sued THEM. Imo, it should be other way around. Intel should be ones getting sued for trying to monopolize the IGP market.

The FCC investigated Apple and Google for their purchase of AdMob and ---. Why aren't they investigating Intel about this?

 

[Yaboze]

so the macbook pros that will be updated this spring will have ???

Sandy Bridge Core i5/i7's for 15, 17, most likely a Core i3/i5 for the 13" and a integrated Intel Graphics GPU, instead of the Nvidia 3xxM. That's my guess.

The mobile Nvidia GPU's in the current line up are pretty good, it's doubtful (but yet remains to be seen) that the Intel GPU's will be as good.

It's possible that the 13" will get a CPU bump, but take a step backwards with the Intel GPU.

I guess we'll find out and see.

 

[commander.data]

Can someone explain to me how what Intel is doing isn't antitrust.

Intel basically just monopolized the entire integrated graphics market, despite making a far inferior product than it's competitors.

How is this any different than when Microsoft bundled IE with Windows to try and monopolize the entire internet browser market, despite making an inferior internet browser.

Microsoft was sued for that and lost, so why not Intel.

Atleast with what MS did, there was an easy fix, anyone that realized that Netscape (which evolved into Mozilla Firefox), was the superior product could simply download it and install it. That however is not an option for Apple and other consumers of chipsets, they can't rip out Intel's crappy integrated graphics and put an integrated graphics solution that actually works well, and when Nvidia started to do just that, Intel sued THEM. Imo, it should be other way around.

The FCC investigated Apple and Google for their purchase of AdMob and ---. Why aren't they investigating Intel about this?

Probably because people recognize that integration is the direction that the industry is moving toward. AMD has Fusion, ARM designs are commonly implemented as SoC, nVidia was heavily promoting moving GPUs toward being CPU-like for more general purpose functionality and are now doing integrated CPUs are well. Just because Intel is the biggest company shouldn't mean they aren't allowed to integrated GPUs right into the CPU die, which admittedly conveniently closes out the ecosystem making other IGPs redundant.

With all the talk of OpenCL, Intel's method of the IGP and CPU sharing the L3 cache (ie. on die IGP) is actually very efficient since it significantly improves data latency and bandwidth between the IGP and CPU as they share data and instructions. If Intel ever gets around to implementing the appropriate OpenCL drivers of course.

 

[Mattsasa]

AMD actually has many interesting solutions coming this year. They could turn the market upside down.

I'll believe it when I see it.

 

[wizard]

Yes and no!

In most applications that the consumer runs these days, the GPU is further behind than the CPU. i.e. The CPU has been fast enough for some time, but the GPU has not been.
So when "updating" the smallest notebook, and you are forced to choose, the right choice is to choose the best GPU performance. Sadly, that puts a slower processor in it. But it's the right choice imho.

Yes this is very true. GPU's simply aren't fast enough even today. Since the new integrated GPU on Sandy Bridge is only a lateral move this is not a good thing at all for people expecting better behavior out of their Macs.

I know Intel and Apple are on friendly terms. They are Developing Lightbridge for example, and Apple has been able to get its hands on a few of the newer chips from Intel before other manufacturers did. Surely spending millions to adopt an AMD chip would not go unnoticed, and Intel would take offense. Afterall, it's not as easy as a quick swap.

I think you meant LightPeak there.

In any event NO it is not an issue of extra millions to go to AMD hardware in a platform. By definition new Intel hardware requires new engineering efforts that are no different than going with AMD.

Oh the irony of how you started that sentence... The problem is that in the smallest notebooks (The smallest cases) there is no room for an independent GPU. Apple is already going to a second dedicated GPU in their larger form factor notebooks.

Actually that is debatable because so much is now integrated into the SB SoC itself so there "might" be room for a GPU and memory on smaller machines.

Personally, I've never understood why it's THAT big of an issue. Power takes space. If you want desktop power in a laptop, you better be prepared to carry around something a little bit bigger. Apple's 15" Macbook Pros are still fracking fast AND pretty small, with a dedicated GPU. I can start using the "Well back in my day..." lines to put this in perspective, and I'm only 26
I remember hacking a voodooII graphics card into my Bondi Blue iMac. Go wiki that shiet and look at how powerful that sucker was.

There is nothing wrong with expecting continued increases in performance and capability. Higher integration chips mean that moving performance into smaller frames is a trend for the future.

 

[Yebubbleman]

so the macbook pros that will be updated this spring will have ???

Sandy Bridge CPU and either an NVIDIA GT 400M or GT 500M or an AMD Radeon HD 6000M equivalent on the 15" and 17".

Either Sandy Bridge and Intel IGP or Core 2 Duo and the 320M on the White MacBook.

Meanwhile, the 13" MacBook Pro gets discontinued. At least that's what I'd bet.

AMD actually has many interesting solutions coming this year. They could turn the market upside down.

I wouldn't be surprised, though, I'm on the fence as to whether or not Apple would actually make that move. It'd certainly be better for the machines that rely on an IGP, that's for sure.

 

[iPhysicist]

Update: From the press call:
NVIDIA just said on its press call that it has "no intentions to build chipsets for Intel processors," and that Intel will be able to use NVIDIA's technology in Sandy Bridge

This actually sounds good.

 

[Yebubbleman]

Update: From the press call:
NVIDIA just said on its press call that it has "no intentions to build chipsets for Intel processors," and that Intel will be able to use NVIDIA's technology in Sandy Bridge

This actually sounds good.

Oh snap. Though, they'd kind of have to in order for the Intel IGP to not be a complete flop on its own.

 

[chrmjenkins]

People seem to be confused. You won't actually see Nvidia products like GPUs be used by Intel. They're just licensing their patents. It would be silly for Intel to rely on a partner agreement as the basis for their on-die IGPs. Nvidia would have them by the balls then.

 

[Yebubbleman]

People seem to be confused. You won't actually see Nvidia products like GPUs be used by Intel. They're just licensing their patents. It would be silly for Intel to rely on a partner agreement as the basis for their on-die IGPs. Nvidia would have them by the balls then.

Did you see how much money Intel will be owing NVIDIA? Sounds to me like NVIDIA has something of Intel's resembling balls.

 

[HLdan]

So how much does Apple save by using a 2006 CPU architecture in these Macs?

Excellent question from someone who no longer cares to use Apple products.

 

[chrmjenkins]

Did you see how much money Intel will be owing NVIDIA? Sounds to me like NVIDIA has something of Intel's resembling balls.

I don't think that's pure licensing cost. Part of that is an agreement to avoid having to pay punitive damages as enforced by the court. Still, no way there will be a discreet nVidia GPU on an intel processor die.

 

[commander.data]

Sandy Bridge CPU and either an NVIDIA GT 400M or GT 500M or an AMD Radeon HD 6000M equivalent on the 15" and 17".

Either Sandy Bridge and Intel IGP or Core 2 Duo and the 320M on the White MacBook.

Meanwhile, the 13" MacBook Pro gets discontinued. At least that's what I'd bet.

If something gets discontinued, I'd think it'd be the White Macbook. It's pricepoint is already overlaped by the MacBook Air, although the use case is slightly different, and could be further mitigated by bringing the 13.3" MBP down $100. I'd then see the 13.3" MacBook Pro get a low-end discrete GPU and Sandy Bridge. Eliminating the HDD for the blade SSD should free up enough room to put in a discrete GPU with some redesign. I'm hoping the ODD is retained since that's a logical part of the Pro differentiation and is still necessary for installing larger software, given the common internet bandwidth limits in Canada for instance.

I wouldn't be surprised, though, I'm on the fence as to whether or not Apple would actually make that move. It'd certainly be better for the machines that rely on an IGP, that's for sure.

I hope Apple avoids the AMD's first Fusion products. Llano may have a better GPU, but the CPU is Core 2 Duo caliber. It's missing out on Sandy Bridge's faster hardware video encoder and lacks SSE4.1 and SSE4.2 much less AVX, which is a big benefit for multimedia applications and is likely to be adopted by software much faster than getting developers to rewrite things in OpenCL to take advantage of the GPU.

 

[Optimus Frag]

Wouldn't be surprised if Apple now brought NVIDIA with money found down the back of the sofa and partner their tech with Apple's new A5/6/7/8 chip or whatever the hell you think Apple might call it (my cash is on A8) for use on the next MBA.

Probably wrong but you never know with Apple.

 

[Kenrik]

This is bad news...

Intel and ATI have NEVER been good at making good mobile GPUs.

Intel has not made a single worthwhile GPU... EVER.

And for the people who say that these new Sandy Bridge GPUs are as good as the 320m I say they are missing the point. THE 320M IS OLD... If Nvidia were making a GPU to go along with the Sandy Bridge chips I would more than likely be 2x the speed of what intel will be offering.

 

[blackburn]

Apple could just keep the same old c2d and stuff a good ssd in the macbooks. Way faster for the average consumer, and still have time to find a decent solution (amd bulldozer or any thing that doesn't suck as hard as intel graphics)

edit: and 8MB of cache shared with graphics? what the hell where they thinking my old quadcore had the same cache (and was level 2=faster)

 

[rdlink]

Can someone explain to me how what Intel is doing isn't antitrust/a monopoly?

Intel basically just monopolized the entire integrated graphics market, despite making a far inferior product than it's competitors.

How is this any different than when Microsoft bundled IE with Windows to try and monopolize the entire internet browser market, despite making an inferior internet browser.

Microsoft was sued for that and lost, so why not Intel.

Atleast with what MS did, there was an easy fix, anyone that realized that Netscape (which evolved into Mozilla Firefox), was the superior product could simply download it and install it. That however is not an option for Apple and other consumers of chipsets, Intel won't sues anyone that rips out Intel's crappy integrated graphics and puts in an integrated graphics solution that actually works well. I am still shocked by the fact that when Nvidia started to do just that, Intel sued THEM. Imo, it should be other way around. Intel should be ones getting sued.

The FCC investigated Apple and Google for their purchase of AdMob and ---. Why aren't they investigating Intel about this?

Umm, why would the FCC investigate a chip company over chipset patents?

 

[aucl]

Same. Lets hope that they just ditch the DVD player and make the extra room that way because those custom SSDs will cripple the MBP. Unless they make it a small custom SSD for boot drive and 2nd HD for storage. (which is pretty much what i did to the current Alu MB with the optibay, couldn't go back now)

yea, throw out that drives and use it for some more power and battery,

guess they could double battery when taking out the dvd drive, or even triple when changing the hd to new small ssd

 

[commander.data]

edit: and 8MB of cache shared with graphics? what the hell where they thinking my old quadcore had the same cache (and was level 2=faster)

If your processor had 8MB of L2 cache then I'm guessing it's a Core 2 Quad. That L2 cache is implemented as 2x4MB. A unified 8MB cache should have more effective space since data duplication is reduced/eliminated. And to put it bluntly, the Core 2 Quad had 8MB of L2 cache because it needed it to offset the latency and bandwidth restrictions of having to access system memory through an off-die memory controller and via the FSB. Nehalem, Westmere, and now Sandy Bridge have on die memory controllers which reduces the need for large caches.

 

[rdlink]

So how much does Apple save by using a 2006 CPU architecture in these Macs?

Dunno, but my ancient chip Macbook Air is the second fastest computer I've ever owned. And far and away the absolute fastest laptop I've ever used. It's not just about pure core processing, dude. Graphics are far more important than CPU for 98% of the computing that 99% of people do these days.

Very rarely do you tax a CPU anymore. GPUs get hit continuously, and storage I/O is key.

 

[squinks808]

Do you realize what is happening???

Nvidia doesn't give a rats A** about intel anymore because both Apple and Nvidia are going to ARM for EVERYTHING!!

I am willing to bet the rumored Nvidia/ARM combo chipsets are going to dominate everything and thus, they don't care what Intel does anymore. I personally am excited about this move.

 

[blackburn]

Still I don't like cpu and gpu sharing things. If I tax to much one the other one will suffer (due to the tdp management).

Let's hope arm fills the void and another transition to the mac community, and yes for the windoze people too

 

[Eidorian]

I'll believe it when I see it.

AMD Brazos is of interest today.

 

[commander.data]

AMD Brazos is of interest today.

Brazos is superior to Atom, but is slower CPU-wise then ULV Core 2 Duo and slower GPU-wise against the 320M. Whereas Apple going Sandy Bridge at least has upside for the CPU, Apple going Brazos looks to be a downgrade all around.

 

[inlovewithi]

Still I don't like cpu and gpu sharing things. If I tax to much one the other one will suffer (due to the tdp management).

Let's hope arm fills the void and another transition to the mac community, and yes for the windoze people too

Look into it. From everything I've read, and even from what naturally makes sense to me, it's more efficient, and less power hungry.