Legit Reviews

Looks like it is not going to be smooth sailing for Nvidia in the not to distant future if this story is true.

http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/video/disp ... r_Bus.html

It maybe that Intel is trying to squeeze them out or position themselves to buy out Nvidia.

However it turns, we should know the future of Nvidia before the years out.

I think there is way to much money at stake to have this technology fall to the wayside over a simple licence.

Intel and NVIDIA are in a big fight right now... The 680i not supportting quad-cores was just the start... 780i not supporting 1600MHz FSB cpu's was round two... round three on the 790i is still in the works. Seems the latest stepping that Intel came out on their 45nm 1600MHz FSB processors (QX9770) doesn't play nice with 790i... Three generations of chipsets have all worked with the early engineering sample processors then Intel releases a new stepping and breaks something on the NVIDIA chipset logic... With the next round of new CPU architecture it only makes sense that Intel play tough with NVIDIA and force them to do what they want. Intel will not pay NVIDIA an SLI license fee for every chipset they sell and with the added pressure from AMD and Intel it might be tough for NVIDIA to find a niche again. AMD chipsets will be the best choice for AMD CPU's and Intel will be the best for Intel CPU's. With Intel getting into the GPU market and ATI already competitive form a price/OEM perspective, NVIDIA will also feel some pressure... NVIDIA had a couple years of competition free sales, but with the slowing US economy and pressure from other companies it will be tough. Remember Phenom might have flopped in a sense, but AMD still has Fusion in the works and they have integrated a full GPU into the 780G. For the first time integrated graphics isn't 'halfed', which is interesting.

just my 2 cents

I heard somewhere there is a possiblity of IBM buying out AMD since their stock is in the shitter. That would truly create a monster.

Last time I checked, Nvidia is out there to make video cards, not motherboards. As far as I can tell, they'll end up selling more video cards if they forget about their motherboards and just allow SLI on the superior Intel chipsets.

I'm sure Nvidia will be fine no matter what though.

Wildfire788 wrote:Last time I checked, Nvidia is out there to make video cards, not motherboards.

Non-integrated video cards are a really small market though, the vast majority of PCs have all their audio/video needs integrated into the motherboard.

The biggest discrete gpu maker is Nvidia. If you want to run SLI, you need Nvidia's chipset. Nvidia's got their niche market and don't want to give it up. Intel wants to keep their bases covered now that their previous close relationship to ATI is non-existent. The only way they are going to get a SLI license is to twist Nvidia's arm until they say daddy.

Wildfire788 wrote:Last time I checked, Nvidia is out there to make video cards, not motherboards. As far as I can tell, they'll end up selling more video cards if they forget about their motherboards and just allow SLI on the superior Intel chipsets.

I'm sure Nvidia will be fine no matter what though.

Remember Intel is going to start making discrete graphics... so 'fine no matter what' isn't so true.

Just my 2 cents also, Nvidia has always done what I felt to be a superb job on their nforce chipsets. I've dealt almost exclusively with them on all my builds until the core 2 quads came out. NF2, NF4 and 650i sli were all great boards. I'd say at the least they have a good niche in the motherboard market still. They may have some problems with intel, but you have to remember VIA is almost completetly out of the competition now so, one leaves and another enters. This time though it is a bigger competitor.

Zelig wrote:

Wildfire788 wrote:Last time I checked, Nvidia is out there to make video cards, not motherboards.

Non-integrated video cards are a really small market though, the vast majority of PCs have all their audio/video needs integrated into the motherboard.

im gonna have to disagree with you on that one. i belive that more pcs have descrete graphics nowadays

I would say that all home-built rigs have dedicated graphics cards, but half of all branded PC's have integrated graphics, and over half of all laptops have integrated graphics.

So all in all, its pretty even.

Yep. Those building their own PCs opt for discrete graphics, but majority of off-the-shelf budget PCs and laptops still have integrated. I reckon 100% of gamers have discrete graphics cards, but the rest of the population would probably forgo the additional expense.

martini161 wrote:im gonna have to disagree with you on that one. i belive that more pcs have descrete graphics nowadays

http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/video/disp ... earch.html

For example, of 97.85 million graphics adapters shipped in the third quarter of 2007 only 25.74 million were discrete graphics cards (among 72 million desktop graphics adapters).

Actually, that's more than I expected.

And FWIW, laptop sales are expected to pass desktops overall in 2008.

well when i say discrete graphics, i mean a chip that is seperate from the north bridge, which is what most many laptops have. every desktop i have had has had a discrete graphics adapter. as for laptops surpassing desktops, i hate that. i absolutly hate it. why? because people are so stupid. the only people that really need laptops are buisness people who either work at home and work and that travel alot. if you arent one, then why dont you get a real computer that you can upgrade? not to mention that a laptops price performance ratio are absolute crap compated to desktops. people dont seem to realize that desktops are muuuch better for the average consumer.

well, Laptops are now required for many courses and schools(College) and otherwise, are still good to have(in college) and that is a large sector of computer sales

martini161 wrote:as for laptops surpassing desktops, i hate that. i absolutly hate it. why? because people are so stupid. the only people that really need laptops are buisness people who either work at home and work and that travel alot. if you arent one, then why dont you get a real computer that you can upgrade? not to mention that a laptops price performance ratio are absolute crap compated to desktops. people dont seem to realize that desktops are muuuch better for the average consumer.

Because the same people who buy laptops aren't likely to upgrade, either. They're more comfortable just buying a new computer. Besides, few of them would use the laptop beyond Word, internet surfing and email. You're also forgetting the space constraint factor. Also, if you've done some price shopping for bottom of the barrel PCs, you'll notice that sometimes, laptops are even cheaper than desktops since they already include built-in displays. Sure, they're not as powerful, but for basic needs, they're more than fast enough.

justjoel73 wrote:I heard somewhere there is a possiblity of IBM buying out AMD since their stock is in the shitter. That would truly create a monster.

that was disclosed shortly after, apparently it was just a couple of kids that made it up in their blogs.

skierkid450 wrote:well, Laptops are now required for many courses and schools(College) and otherwise, are still good to have(in college) and that is a large sector of computer sales

right, and UMPCs, and slimline laptops are becoming more practical and popular now, too. while with jobs in engineering, you'll usually see tablets.

hnzw_rui wrote:Also, if you've done some price shopping for bottom of the barrel PCs, you'll notice that sometimes, laptops are even cheaper than desktops since they already include built-in displays. Sure, they're not as powerful, but for basic needs, they're more than fast enough.

hooray for asus eee! although i do think martini161 has a point, from what i've seen, if you compare two computers (one desktop, one laptop), with very similar components, you'll find that the desktop is cheaper, granted it's because the laptops are soo much smaller, but i guess portability is worth a lot, just look at the macbook air.

actually the mac book air has had a lot of problems. and i think that somthing that thin is just complete and total overkill