LinkBack URL
About LinkBacksIndia's first indigenous mobile CPU is be build around RISC-V:
https://www.rambus.com/blogs/india-t...es-risc-v-isa/
https://www.tomshardware.com/uk/news...c-v,39781.html
India's first indigenous mobile CPU is be build around RISC-V:
https://www.rambus.com/blogs/india-t...es-risc-v-isa/
https://www.tomshardware.com/uk/news...c-v,39781.html
Someone with a ARM architecture licence can really do what they want. Qualcomm, Apple, Intel, AMD and all the other main players can put whatever GPU they want.Originally Posted by kompukare
The one thing that Nvidia can do is kill off Mali, which would hurt low end players. Hopefully they will just position Nvidia graphics as a high end option.
Android can in theory run on other CPUs, and has been run on Intel and MIPS in the past. In practice that was with the old DALVIK system, the modern ART system is apparently harder, and then there are the games with native ARM libraries.
It would need to actually be competitive for that, including in terms of power efficiency in that sort of power envelope, and that remains to be seen for their current offerings. The mobile market hasn't stood still.
Plus if they're planning to replace it, they need to replace it with something, and I don't seem them licensing their own GPU IP. If they were to just kill it, they've just lost a revenue stream, so I don't really see the point.
It can be withdrawn.
https://www.theverge.com/2019/10/25/...rade-ban-uk-us
Huawei has a ARM uarch license....they almost lost it,but Softbank said it was a UK company,so managed to wangle it. Now,see how that works once Nvidia owns it. Any foreign owned subsidiaries of US owned companies would be subject to restrictions.
They might want to learn from how Mali is more energy efficient to apply those tricks to their mainline graphics.
I think Nvidia's failed Tegra initiative did do wonders for Geforce efficiency and hence performance from being able to cram more shaders into a given heat allowance.
lol, Huawei are the No1 phone maker atm despite Trump's daftness. Seems their sales didn't tank as much as Samsung's. https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2020...sales-plummet/
Last edited by DanceswithUnix; 31-07-2020 at 08:51 PM.
Mali isn't the most power efficient graphics....PowerVR seems to be,otherwise Apple wouldn't have been using them for so long!
If not they would have bought IT for pocket change!
Have they ever designed their own cores though? They make their own SoCs, but I only know of ones using off the peg cores such as the A76.
Even when they were told they were being cut off from US intervention, they were only cut off from future help and didn't lose anything they currently had. To a company making their own cores that would be a minor inconvenience, but if they want to plug in an A77 IP block into their SoC then they were stuffed.
OFC given the hate between the companies we might find that Intel making your argument just to stir things up and lose Nvidia some money. That's the bit that worries me, you don't need things like fact or legal merit to mess things up when these guys get involved.
They have a full license AFAIK,but the wording is "UK technologies",so Softbank managed to move around it. The issue is when Nvidia buys them,all subsidiaries can be subject to the same laws. The issue there were loopholes around this,but increasingly from what I gather they are being closed. Even if ARM was technically UK "owned",the problem is pressure can still be pushed onto Nvidia,as they are not.
Also the fact is there will be uncertainty over what applies and what doesn't - even countries such as India got some severe sanctions in the 1990s after their second lot of nuclear tests,and that was ontop of severe technological sanctions on various things in previous years. Hence the UK and France stepped in and did some good business over there as a substitute. After Modi came to power and under Obama things were significantly relaxed,so they can import more technology. However,it spurned an increased indigenisation effort for the last few decades.
ARM doesn't actually make that much money a year. £175 million in 2017. Paying over $30 billion,doesn't tell me they are just here for licensing costs. I can see them certainly try and box companies in and jack up prices,like they did with GPUs,as in the short term there is not much which can be done.
If they wanted better GPU,tech Imagination Technologies was sold for £550 million and Apple IGPs are far ahead of any other mobile ones,and they could have easily bought MIPS,but didn't care. They already have an ARM design license.
Makes me wonder whether there is something else happening behind the scenes.
Edit!!
IT also does mobile RT GPUs too,so would actually have been a good fit.
Last edited by CAT-THE-FIFTH; 31-07-2020 at 09:13 PM.
Nvidia and open-access licensing model? I'm not sure how that would work unless Nvidia kept ARM as a completely separate business with it's own board of directors etc.
CAT-THE-FIFTH (31-07-2020)
Well the context of the quote is important TBH...
mmmm now I understand why Samsung is partnership with AMD to design Galaxy Gpus....the writing was on the wall
I really don't think it is that complicated.
I am expecting a big push in Windows on ARM. So far it has always been half hearted, and most ARM chips aren't optimised for high performance. Nvidia know how to make an ARM chip perform, and I can see a future push for Chromebook and Windows ARM machines. Partly to stop Nvidia being the one GPU trick pony they have been trying to branch out from for years, but giving Intel a kicking would be a nice bonus for them.
This could turn into a very nasty Intel vs Nvidia battle.
I am not seeing it though. A huge amount of ARM business is to companies which make Android based devices. Companies such as Qualcomm,Samsung,Fujitsu and the Chinese firms. I can't see them putting up with Nvidia trying a fast one on them,and it will only push them to other uarchs. You really think they will just stand by and allow Nvidia to try and do what they did to AMD?? I think not.
Plus one of the biggest selling points of Windows is its backwards compatibility,etc which is why ARM based Windows never took off.
If you don't need backwards compatability,Windows has no real advantages. ARM based Windows versions have been a failure,and it is nothing to do with performance IMHO. The people they are targetting are not wedded to Windows,especially younger people and if you use a device as a consumption device,not a production device. Google essentially gives away Android for free,and if you don't want to use certain stuff,Android is essentially freely available to anyone,ie,why Huawei can still use it,despite the restrictions based on it. Can you see MS trying to essentially compete with Android in upfront costs?? I don't see it longterm as MS makes most of its money through licensing.
Also,if MS was that worried about ARM,they could have gone a different way with the consoles,and the whole concept of them trying to unify console and PC gaming,etc.
Edit!!
The only way it would work,is as Iota describes,as a totally separate business,with the current model. But again,ARM works though licensing IP,and they made $230 million in revenue in 2017. Even if they tripled that,that would be barely $700 million a year. It would take decades to get $30 billion back. This only makes sense if Nvidia wants to be another Chipzilla and push out all the other ARM licensees,and make their own chips like Qualcomm does.
This is why I think they are trying to corner the market on ARM CPUs and push everyone else out. It fits in what Nvidia always tends to do.
Last edited by CAT-THE-FIFTH; 01-08-2020 at 11:37 AM.
The fact that regulators aren't sniffing around on this stinks to high heaven for me.
No beneficiary of an unbiased licensor should then own that licensor, this is just asking for trouble. An American company now owning the only other realistic option for CPUs on the planet, while under the Trump administration?
Hmm...
Softbank is loosing a lot of money based on some poor investments,so actually are after cash. They even divested their own holdings in Nvidia last 2019,so I have to question how much of any purchase agreement will be stocks and how much will be cash?? They just have under $11 billion in actual cash. It will be interesting to see how this is funded.
So currently ARM is a UK company with a Japanese parent company, and the technology is deemed UK.
The whole point of having these trees of parent, holding etc companies is to wall things off, so having a US parent company could happily work the same way.
It would only change if Nvidia absorb ARM rather than let ARM run as a UK independent subsidiary, and I'm not convinced absorbing makes any sense.
If I was working on the ARM GPU I might be getting my CV up to date though. I can see pushing SoC IP with ARM CPU license and Nvidia GPU/AI licences becoming a thing.
They are small fry if this goes ahead, we'll be luck if one survives.
This is probably the worst news which could have come from this, I'm unsure if Intel would be a better buyer (for the world and it's economy, long term).
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote