Its the opposite. Rather than being a good manager, he's the engineer who feels he can be stubborn because he made nvidia.
The exact same thing happened with yahoo, where the founder didn't want to sell to microsoft.
-
Competitor rules
Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.
Nvidia stock downgraded, shares fall. Fermi at fault?
- Thread starter tbh
- Start date
Its the opposite. Rather than being a good manager, he's the engineer who feels he can be stubborn because he made nvidia.
The exact same thing happened with yahoo, where the founder didn't want to sell to microsoft.
There are other reasons.
Most definitely, they're big enough now that they need a much more articulate ceo, who is more aligned with the wishes of his customers and shareholders.
The only thing holding GeForce up is the quality of their drivers. AMD is beginning to catch up in that regard. And Fermi is no good to anyone if you can't buy it.
Soldato
So is Jen the major share holder in the company then? If so then he ain't going nowhere unless he get bought out.
Define major. He owns a small percentage. But as you'd expect, investors don't really force the founder to give up the CEO position unless they seriously screw up. Normally you'd expect them to have the company's best interests, but when it comes to things like, selling up (e.g. yahoo) or giving way to your arch rivals (AMD and GF) then problems can occur.
Last edited:
Soldato
I would say 20%+ would make him a major shareholder, given how large Nvidia are now I wouldn't know how much of his company he owns.
Soldato
This is exactly what was said of ATI when the 8800 Series cards launched.
The 2900 series from ATI was not as good, and people predicted that ATI would not live long.
The 2900 series from ATI was not as good, and people predicted that ATI would not live long.
Associate
nvidia wont go. No competition will make prices increase and the quality/power fo new products will decrease because there would be no competition to force the company to make more powerful cards to compete 
nVidia are just not in full flow of producing there product but once its up and running it should be all good
nVidia are just not in full flow of producing there product but once its up and running it should be all good
Soldato
NVIDIA has a massive step over AMD/ATI in terms of the HPC and scientific computing market.
Their marketing of CUDA (and now OpenCL/CUDA) was both well ahead of any GPGPU stuff by ATI and packaged far better.
It's not a huge market, but its certainly not to be sniffed at. They are even starting to get to the point where their Tesla products are being packaged into workstation sized "GPU super-computers" by some major HPC manufacturers.
Most new HPC clusters have at least one GPU node, if not more. GPU computing has made its way into many areas of the scientific community, and people associate GPU computing with NVIDIA, not AMD/ATI (though they are trying to change that, albeit in a VERY lacklustre way at the moment...)
NVIDIA is having a dip in their consumer product market though, that's for sure, FERMI has been very badly handled. I do hope they don't disappear though, its the game of cat and mouse that ATI and NVIDIA have played over the past decade that has seen GPUs become what they are today...
Their marketing of CUDA (and now OpenCL/CUDA) was both well ahead of any GPGPU stuff by ATI and packaged far better.
It's not a huge market, but its certainly not to be sniffed at. They are even starting to get to the point where their Tesla products are being packaged into workstation sized "GPU super-computers" by some major HPC manufacturers.
Most new HPC clusters have at least one GPU node, if not more. GPU computing has made its way into many areas of the scientific community, and people associate GPU computing with NVIDIA, not AMD/ATI (though they are trying to change that, albeit in a VERY lacklustre way at the moment...)
NVIDIA is having a dip in their consumer product market though, that's for sure, FERMI has been very badly handled. I do hope they don't disappear though, its the game of cat and mouse that ATI and NVIDIA have played over the past decade that has seen GPUs become what they are today...
Associate
Funny thread. Seems none of us really have any clue! NV won't die, that's just doom mongering. As someone said, there have been many times in ATI and AMDs history where they have looked almost dead, but guess what? They didn't die, shocker!
NV will be fine. Things change and companies adapt. Besides, the fermi architecture was a long term plan.
Also, I'm sure I read somewhere that tsmc were skipping 28nm entirely, so it will be interesting seeing what comes of the 28nm GF process.
EDIT: my bad, it's the 22nm they are skipping;
http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/news/1600978/tsmc-snubs-22nm
Who really cares though, nowt we can do and were all just ****ing in the wind. I'm off for a cold beer in the sun!
NV will be fine. Things change and companies adapt. Besides, the fermi architecture was a long term plan.
Also, I'm sure I read somewhere that tsmc were skipping 28nm entirely, so it will be interesting seeing what comes of the 28nm GF process.
EDIT: my bad, it's the 22nm they are skipping;
http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/news/1600978/tsmc-snubs-22nm
Who really cares though, nowt we can do and were all just ****ing in the wind. I'm off for a cold beer in the sun!
Last edited:
I think the difference is the low end when gpu/apu and the cpu are made on the same packet and have the speed of a 220 and above it will eat into nvidia's low end as oem's should love it.
Did they not get taken over by AMD though?
I'm sure if the 2900 episode hadn't occurred AMD would have been able to buy them out...
I know Intel would probably like to get hold of some Nvidia pie, but I don't think they will be allowed to buy Nvidia due to anti-monopoly law.
Associate
which is a good thing..
Nvidia do a lot for PC gamers by funding their 250 headcount of engineers on the TWIMTBP program working closely with developers & even testing the newest games on their testbeds to help the QA process along. This costs them a lot of money & Nvidia quite rightly know GPU's nowadays are utterly worthless/pointless without the eye candy to play on them.
If Nvidia were to get into serious financial trouble (which is very unlikely this year as they made huge profits for 2006-2008) PC gamers would suffer a lot as Nvidia also help fund & develop games in return for advertising & or exclusive features like AA or PhysX. So Nvidia disappearing would be probably the worse possible thing for PC gaming in general as ATI would have no reason to lower prices & even though ATI make superb hardware they have traditionally refused to help PC game development to the same level as Nvidia.
The day ATI show the same level of commitement as the TWIMTBP program is the day Nvidia will be in serious trouble & most likely be in danger of going the way of 3DFX
If Nvidia were to get into serious financial trouble (which is very unlikely this year as they made huge profits for 2006-2008) PC gamers would suffer a lot as Nvidia also help fund & develop games in return for advertising & or exclusive features like AA or PhysX. So Nvidia disappearing would be probably the worse possible thing for PC gaming in general as ATI would have no reason to lower prices & even though ATI make superb hardware they have traditionally refused to help PC game development to the same level as Nvidia.
The day ATI show the same level of commitement as the TWIMTBP program is the day Nvidia will be in serious trouble & most likely be in danger of going the way of 3DFX
Associate
^ didnt know that
It's not quite the way AWPC put it.
The main reason nVidia work with developers is purely down to their own selfish means. They basically just want said game to make their hardware look good.
Developers shouldn't "need" the kinda help nVidia claim to give if you think about it.
Just look at the Batman AA situation, nVidia worked with rocksteady, gave them a piece of generic AA code which nVidia claimed was their own proprietary code which could only be used on nVidia hardware.
Once people realised what was going on, nVidia and rocksteady couldn't have been quick enough to blame each other.
There's a really interesting article on Bright Side of News that goes in to a lot of detail.
Associate
have you got a link? i would like to read it
Associate
Isn't bright side famous for being very anti nvidia?
Associate
who or what is bright side?
You're probably thinking of Semi-Accurate (who have been extremely accurate this last year anyway despite being anti-nVidia).
Caporegime
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 33,188
No, its NOTHING like what was said when the 2900 was delayed, nothing, its not anything like the same situation and its very naive to suggest so.
When the 2900 was delayed, the 8800 cards were out, the 8600's weren't, the 8500/8400/8300 weren't out, Nvidia was selling the smallest part of the market as the new gen, the largest part of the market was on par with AMD's largest sales part of the market, the x1950pro sold more than the 8800's did, because it was half the price and incredibly good value, more people on these forums bought x1950pro's for £120, than 8800gtx's for £400.
ATi then launched their new low and mid end at about the same time as Nvidia's, they also both had "large core" parts that both still at the time had plenty of cores per wafer, cheaper wafers and decent yields.
The bad situation Nvidia is in is NOTHING to do with Fermi, they stopped selling the gt200b's, for the last 3 gens Nvidia hasn't sold a new gen midrange, but a last gen top end as the new midend, its the GTS250 with the 260-285gtx as the high end. But they EOL'd the "mid end" 6 months ago, they weren't selling millions of 260gtx's while the 5870 was out.
Likewise, there was not the biggest problem, the situation of the low end market literally evapourating, you can't ignore it or pretend it won't happen. The low end market is being ENTIRELY absorbed into on die gpu's, this will happen, Nvidia can't do it and won't, its 50%+ of Nvidia's profit, vanishing.
Likewise, AMD didn't have a x1950 that cost twice as much to make and the 8800gtx, the 2900xt didn't cost twice as much as a 8800gtx to make. Their mid and low end wasn't double the size and double the cost to make as Nvidia's.
This is NOT the case now, Nvidia's midrange will be double the transistors and size of AMD's.
AMD also have their mid/low end out for 3-5 months, that wasn't the situation when the 8800gtx launched.
To pretend its the same situation is laughable.
Nvidia have missed out on 6million sales obviously, already, the 2900xt being late, maybe missed out on a million sales, if that. Nvidia will lose probably in the region of 100million gpu sales on the low end when that market dissappears. The situations aren't comparable even in the slightest way.