NVIDIA has x86 CPU in the works?

Now this is more like it. Sure, the idea of a mighty Intel / AMD brawl, with each CPU giant carrying a GPU manufacturer underwing, has its plusses, but it's not like Intel and AMD haven't been duking it out for-freaking-ever already. What we really need is some new blood in this fight, and who better than NVIDIA, with their mighty chip-building and power sucking expertise to challenge the two main players in the CPU space? Nothing quite "official" yet, but the Inquirer claims to have confirmed just such a scheme is being launched by NVIDIA at this very moment. What makes this all the more likely is a recent acquisition of Stexar, which was comprised of ex-Intel kids, and should give NVIDIA a good head-start in the x86 game. Reportedly development is already underway, and the big N is shooting for a 45nm design for release sometime in 2008. The plan is, naturally, an integrated graphics chipset mixed with their fancy new CPU, a package which it looks like NVIDIA is well poised to offer, and which will be a vital offering from the likes of Intel and AMD in the years to come.

[Andy @ Oct 19th 2006 11:32AM]

An x86? Looks like they're starting off on the wrong foot. Why the hell would you try to start out in the CPU market with x86 CPUs when everything is starting to move to x64 now? If they are going to make CPUs, I certainly hope they have even an ounce of intelligence and make them x64.

[Andy @ Oct 19th 2006 11:34AM]

Nevermind, after reading the actual article, no where did it say it was an x86 CPU that they were working on. It was just the Engadget writer assuming such based on the article's mention of Stexar being "known for its X86 marchitectural expertise".

[disciple83 @ Oct 19th 2006 11:50AM]

I can't imagine the price of something offered by nVidia that will comprise of both CPU/GPU options. Their new video cards require my first-born in terms of both price and power consumption. Where Intel has made vast breakthroughs in reducing this requirement for their CPU architecture, nVidia has gone in the completely opposite direction with their video chipsets. I still can't see why such a massive power source is necessary for a processor that roughly the clock cycles of a p3? Is it because it is an add-on board? and if thats the case, shouldn't it require less power than mainboard components? I mean, it's not like the video card is doing work for the entire system, it just translates the video instruction sets it gets from the CPU. Call me naive, but I don't see how putting both the processor and video system on the same die is going to benefit anyone. To me it just seems like its moving one subsystem and cramming it into another area, thus reducing the capabilities of both video and CPU. Help me out here.

[Celly @ Oct 19th 2006 11:51AM]

Wow. Interesting...

[Panther_V @ Oct 19th 2006 12:16PM]

If NVIDIA announced its plan to release a competition CPU for
X86Architecture. Then you will see IBM , Intel and AMD/ATI tag team to
make sure that NVIDIA don't live to see 2010.

*IBM has good relationship with Army, so do NVIDIA and if they enter the market and try to get a contract from the army it will make IBM supper mad.

*Intel and AMD is already having its trouble destroying each other and they sure as hell don't want another company to enter the market.

Anyways if NVIDIA try this they will end up like VIA :!

[Brandon @ Oct 19th 2006 12:42PM]

Who says 64bit CPU isn't X86? Working on X86 cpu doesn't mean they are on 32bit.
BTW, it's not x64, it's just 64 bit processor. DA

[TJ Wasik @ Oct 19th 2006 4:19PM]

actually 64bit processors aren't x86 architecture, they are technically x86-64 which is an evolution of the x86 architecture and is backwards compatible but is in actuality a different architecture

[PEZ @ Oct 19th 2006 12:49PM]

Andy, the entire panel here on Earth has the feeling you have absolutely no idea what you are talking about.


x86 is an instruction set. x64 is a CPU bit specification. As in 32bit, 64bit, etc.

In other news: Maybe THIS is why AMD and ATI got together - to challenge BOTH Intel and nVidia in both directions.

Interesting.

[raulr @ Oct 19th 2006 12:52PM]

And the AMD64 or intel EMT64 (same thing) are just extensions to the x86 architecture to bring them to 64bit capability. It's still x86.

[john @ Oct 19th 2006 12:59PM]

Its far easier for Intel to ramp up existing GPU developments then for NVidia to get into CPU sales/adoption from scratch. In my mind, this would make more sense if they acquired Transmeta.

[Heath Stahl @ Oct 19th 2006 12:59PM]

Oh boy! Does this mean NVidia will apply its knowledge of power saving procs to CPU's now? So lets see in 2008 when/if they launch a product we will need 2000W PSU's.

[chris @ Oct 19th 2006 1:02PM]

ahhh an all nvidia system.... nvidia gpu, nvidia chipset, and now nvidia cpu. i wonder if an intel chipset or ati chipset would work with nvidia procs? I imagine catastophic explosions and such things.

[abelIAN @ Oct 19th 2006 1:05PM]

Andy, x64 is not a processor architecture, it's MS marketing speak for their 64-bit versions of Windows. x86 refers to processors that are or are derived from the original 8086 design, and these include the current Cores and Athlons/Turions (I think they're 886). So, even though these are "x64", these are still x86.

[Max @ Oct 19th 2006 1:24PM]

wouldnt they use the x86's to process graphics? with vid cards getting bigger and bigger in size. wouldnt it make sence to render graphics on a deticated chip that is powerful enough to render everything else?

[chris McDowell @ Oct 19th 2006 2:03PM]

a graphics card already is a dedicated processing chip and for graphics the floating point calculations that graphics cards excel at make it much better for speed of the video and 3d acceleration than an x86 processor.

[bazald @ Oct 19th 2006 1:48PM]

Funny... There was an article in Wired where NVidia strongly suggested that they were moving in this direction a few years ago.

My only concern is that NVidia might not be inclined to make chips in line with the new push for efficiency from Intel and AMD. I don't want a 2 kilowatt power supply on my next desktop.

[Totalfixation @ Oct 19th 2006 2:00PM]

I think its just plain and simply, that if nvidia were to make CPUs. Its purpose is to bring more to the bargining table, giving a higher value to the Nvidia company. This could also force intel to think twice about purchasing Nvidia to drive down the CPU competition. It is like what North Korea is doing with the nukes so that they have more at the bargining table. There a bunch of flakes, they arent going blow anyone up, just to flash it around to get more out of the Aid out of the US.

[Jason @ Oct 19th 2006 2:21PM]

Max,

x86 chips are general purpose - they do everything, but nothing particularly well. They enable the versatile PC's we have today.

GFX chips are different - they're purpose built for a handful of related tasks, with one end game.

Using x86 chips for GFX purposes is like taking a semi to the speedway. Will it get you there? Yeah... but a Porsche would be much better.

[Jay @ Oct 19th 2006 2:23PM]

Hmm...all Nvidia would have to do then is stick it in a plasic box, give it 1080p output, and sell it as the next big console system.

[Idk @ Oct 19th 2006 2:41PM]

For invidia to create their own CPUs would be great. They would probebly make it so that the CPU is exclusive to graphics when in FS3D. Which would be great. It would probebly allow the CPU to communicate with the GPU easier and faster. or so I'm hoping.

[Keaton @ Oct 19th 2006 2:57PM]

hmmm....

I've said this before but nobody believes me. But now it seems even more likely that my theory is correct. Check out what I've said before...
http://www.engadget.com/2006/09/29/gazing-down-intels-roadmap-quad-core-yorkfield-set-for-q3-2007/
And in response to all the people who say that you can't run x86 instruction sets on a GPU.... why not? Apple has used Rosetta software to adapt its software, hasn't it? Couldn't our current CPU's shift roles and turn into "Translators" of instruction sets when CPU load gets too high so the GPU can pick up some of the slack? I really don�t know if this is possible and I'm no electronics engineer or whatever, but it seems like a good idea to me...
Not that most people NEED more power... My T2300e Yonah CPU never goes over 66% load...

[jim @ Oct 19th 2006 3:30PM]

This cant be accurate. Does Nvidia have a x86 license from Intel? Remember the years of Intel-AMD litigation over the right to produce x86 chips? That resulted in a settlement that allows AMD (only) to produce x86 chips.

VIA I believe, has only some limited rights to x86 production.

I doubt Intel (or AMD) would ever let this happen. The intellectual property issues would overwhelm Nvidia.

I dont doubt Nvidia could produce a nice CPU/GPU, especially at 45nm. However, the litigation risk is off the chart.

[nainai @ Oct 19th 2006 3:51PM]

duuude if Nvidia come out wid a real proccesor
that would be a freaking super computer. an Nvidia processor with an SLI set up or something im totally down for something like this. Hell YEAHH

[ryan @ Oct 19th 2006 5:25PM]

"duuude if Nvidia come out wid a real proccesor
that would be a freaking super computer. an Nvidia processor with an SLI set up or something im totally down for something like this. Hell YEAHH"

is this guy serious?

[Chris McDowell @ Oct 19th 2006 5:21PM]

not quite. x86 is a certain instruction set I believe. Celeron and Pentium 4 are both x86 but both use different architectures. The two big architectures are PowerPC and x86.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/X86
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PowerPC
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CPU_design

[Chris McDowell @ Oct 19th 2006 5:22PM]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Graphics_processor

[dick buttkiss @ Oct 19th 2006 7:14PM]

Well aside from the obvious fact that Nintendo is "the Big N" and not Nvidia, and the fact that only "the Inquire" has confirmed it makes me very sure that they are making one.

wow to check ure facts there engadget.

[azesino @ Oct 20th 2006 8:27AM]

the big N????? I tough that was Nintendo

[Rogelio Ibarra @ Oct 21st 2006 12:59AM]

The news began to run in Argentina: Albatron returns to Latin America and this time of the hand of an expert in subjects of territories, Nick Echeverria, after its excellent work in MSI. Those that already knew this news estan happy to see this giant in our earth again. Albatron returns to Latin America. See more... http://www.digitaltechonline.com.ar/page.php?p=_menu_1.htm&ti=Show%20Room

[hotmexican1983 @ Sep 4th 2007 6:37PM]

why go with x86 if they want something good for graphics why not do a risc or sparc with a kernel release for the first time for the windows os witch would be great and for once good graphics to be broght to linux mayby even a mips cpu