Core Values: What's next for NVIDIA?
Core Values is our new monthly column from Anand Shimpi, Editor-in-chief of AnandTech. With over a decade of experience poring over the latest in chip developments, he's here to explain how things work and why our tech is the way it is.

The last time NVIDIA was this late to a major DirectX transition was seven years ago, and the company just quietly confirmed we won't see its next-generation GPU, Fermi, until Q1 2010. If AMD's manufacturing partner TSMC weren't having such a terrible time making 40nm chips I'd say that AMD would be gobbling up marketshare like a fat kid. By the time NVIDIA gets its entire stack of DX11 hardware out the gate, AMD will be a quarter away from putting out newly refreshed GPUs.
Things aren't much better on the chipset side either -- for all intents and purposes, the future of NVIDIA's chipset business in the PC space is dead. Not only has NVIDIA recently announced that it won't be pursuing any chipsets for Intel's Core i3, i5. or i7 processors until its various legal disputes with Intel are resolved, It doesn't really make sense to be a third-party chipset vendor anymore. Both AMD and Intel are more than capable of doing chipsets in-house, and the only form of differentiation comes from the integrated graphics core -- so why not just sell cheap discrete GPUs for OEMs to use alongside Intel chipsets instead?
Even Ion is going to be short lived. NVIDIA's planning to mold an updated graphics chip into an updated chipset for the next-gen Atom processor, but Pine Trail brings the memory controller and graphics onto the CPU and leaves NVIDIA out in the cold once again.
Let's see, no competitive GPUs, no future chipset business. This isn't looking good so far -- but the one thing I've learned from writing about these companies for the past 12 years is that the future's never as it seems. Chances are, NVIDIA's going to look a lot different in the future because of two things: Tesla and Tegra.
Tesla is NVIDIA's high performance computing (HPC) business, with customers from the seismic, financial, medical or academic markets. The workloads are things most of us would never remotely come close to doing, stuff like looking for oil or breast cancer detection. These markets also have the sort of extremely data parallel workloads that could work really well on a GPU, which are very good at working on a lot of data at the same time. A single high end GPU easily has hundreds of execution units that can run in parallel, while a single quad-core CPU may only have a dozen or so. Through C for CUDA, NVIDIA started enabling these markets to port their applications (or parts of them) from x86 CPUs to NVIDIA GPUs.
NVIDIA also made a decision to make its GPU architectures much more flexible, a decision that resulted in the G80 chip at the heart of the GeForce GTX 8800. At the same time, NVIDIA began investing in programming languages to make writing for its flexible GPUs much easier, and also fed HPC feedback into its GPU design cycle: the GT200 was more HPC friendly than the G80 and Fermi is even more HPC friendly than GT200.
NVIDIA believes there's roughly $1b to be made in these HPC markets over the next 24 months, and although it's only made a bit over $10m so far, the company thinks that Fermi is going to be the turning point for Tesla revenue. Let's be realistic, though: at its peak, NVIDIA used to pull in around $1b in a single quarter. Tesla alone won't be enough for NVIDIA, not at those numbers.

Tegra is NVIDIA's SoC brand -- as we talked about last time, the smartphones we love reading about are based on highly integrated SoCs (system on a chip). That's a CPU, GPU, some other specialized processing, memory/storage and maybe even a modem. Tegra contains nearly all NVIDIA-developed technology -- and like everything else in the smartphone space, it's based on ARM, which means NVIDIA won't be dependent on x86 CPUs that will soon have integrated GPUs.
While Tesla depends on NVIDIA's continued development of high end GPUs, Tegra does
If push comes to shove, Tegra has enough upside to let NVIDIA exit the PC business entirely and just make smartphone chips. |
But going from zero to significant market share in the SoC space is difficult. The established players there are companies like Marvell, Samsung and Qualcomm. Even Intel looks like an unlikely underdog in that market.
Although Tegra got a lot of attention with the Zune HD, it's based on an older ARM11 core with the usual general purpose performance shortcomings -- and it doesn't necessarily look so hot compared to other performance oriented SoCs that have moved to Cortex A8. That said, NVIDIA plans on updating its Tegra SoCs once a year, similar to its GPU update cycle. Given the slow level of progress we've seen in the SoC space, there's room for NVIDIA's Tegra approach to do well -- update it annually and it may end up being fast enough to raise a few brows.
Looking at it this way, the biggest threat to NVIDIA today doesn't come from Intel or AMD, but rather Imagination Technologies, whose graphics cores are heavily used by Apple and Samsung in smartphones -- and NVIDIA believes its strengths as a GPU maker on the PC side will give it the advantage here. I'm willing to give NVIDIA the benefit of doubt, but we had better see a big splash in 2010 with Tegra and Tegra 2.
So. Will NVIDIA remain a high end GPU maker for PCs, will it see success in HPC, or will it move entirely to the application processor/SoC space? That future is at least a few years away, and as AMD has already shown us, a lot can happen in a few years. A lot more than I could predict at least.
[Zune HD image courtesy of iFixit]
Anand Shimpi is CEO and Editor-in-chief of AnandTech. Contact him at anand AT anandtech DOT com or on Twitter at @anandshimpi. Views expressed here are his own.






















Losing NVIDIA in the PC GPU business would suck.
@webran61 Linux driver development would certainly be crippled.
@webran61
Agreed. Competition drives innovation. AMD/ATI needs a good solid competitor, and I haven't seen anything that suggests Larrabee will be it.
@lamerz GUYS LETS START A GPU CHIPSET COMPANY AND TAKE DOWN ATI LOL
@poematik14 So this is what Nvidia has been up to lately, Not to say that the Tegra opportunity is a needle on a hay stack, but I don't like the idea that Nvidia will stop manufacturing PC GPU cards in the future.
Detailed point of view about Tesla and Tegra: http://bit.ly/tesla-and-tegra-what-are-they
A very nice howdy writeup from Anandtech CEO
What about the ARM Mali GPU architecture? It's almost "good enough". So I reckon the second generation will be good enough to power many devices and will add another source of viable competition to nVidia.
They next four years are going to be very interesting for hand held or tablet devices. Every technology including low power displays will advance except battery technology which seems to have slammed into a brick wall.
@JS sorry, but MALI has always been regarded as a joke. Its performance is abysmal. PowerVR is the only player in the ARM SoC space, although Creative's Zii may shape up to be a contender. AMD used to sell some good IP, but they sold the lot to Qualcomm. Neither Creative or Qualcomm appear to have any interest in licensing IP, which is where PowerVR and MALI both target.
Noooooooooo!
Good to seee anandtech and engadget, 2 of my favorite sites, get on the love train. A well written article.
@ckent I agree. I am totally sync'ed to see Anand writing a column on Engadget! I
I was surprised to see Anand's name up there and felt the exact same way about it: glad to see two of my favorite tech websites working together :).
As always, interesting article Anand!
@ckent I agree. While I don't agree with all the points made, the article seemed to be well thought out and written. Maybe the Engadget team could learn a thing or two...
On second thought, just keep at what you're doing. We all love it.
Anandtech may have a limited selection of hardware reviews and tech articles, but they are some of the most insightful and well-researched ones on the web.
you do know the reason it's coming out in 2010 is because of TSMC right?
so the ATI gobbling up market share is BS
@(Unverified) Agreed, you don't think it's important to mention that the thing delaying nVidia is the exact same thing that's delaying AMD? If they had a competent manufacturer, then neither of them would be delayed.
I was just contemplating how I'd almost completely stopped visiting AnandTech and now read Engadget/Gizmodo. Good to see Anand branching out even more.
nVidia is losing on the Linux grounds aswell. ATI now has perfect KMS support up to R700. The xvba-video libs are on the important repositories, but not official.
It just a matter of the final finishing touch and nVidia lost the Linux HTPC market aswell.
@Pyronick
Except that the current onslaught of atom processors mixed with ion graphic chipsets have completely changed the scope of the HTPC market in the last year or so, and represent the majority of new HTPC systems. I'll go a step farther and say that that platform in many ways has saved / resurrected the HTPC market, and until ion chipsets no longer play nice with intel architecture, will most likely represent the majority of HTPC builds.
@Pyronick I am sure companies are losing sleep over the possibility of losing the 10 people that make the Linux HTPC market...
@Pyronick I agree -- if nVidia wants to see any future success in the CPU or CPU+GPU market without licensing x86, they better start pushing Open Source AND Open Standards that help the developers transition from the Windows-only world to multi-platform. If they aren't behind projects like Linux, LLVM, Bytecode-compile-at-install, OpenGL/CL/VPU/AL/etc. in every way possible, their long-term strategy is just full of fail.
I've had it with nvidia. I always bought AMD and then bought Laptop with nvidia graphics and nvidia motherboard and their drivers suck. I mean people criticised AMD for their drivers but at least the work and install. I don't think i will buy nvidia for desktop but may still buy for notebook unless AMD bring something to the laptop market in my price range. If nvidia die though then we would be stuck. Although AMD Desktop Graphics have been better than nvidia. The only probelm I would have is ATI stream is not progressing as fast as Nvidia cuda.
@kris120890 What Nvidia chipset? My wife has a HP with an AMD TL-60 and a Nvidia 7150 chipset. Drivers aren't the problem with the machine, overheating is. The TL-60 doesn't run particularly cool. The Nvidia chipset looks to be a single chip solution as far as I could tell looking at the laptop MB. The chipset and the CPU share a single heatpipe cooler and the chipset has a really thick thermal pad which probably doesn't help with cooling either.
@KAL326
It was 9300/9400 730i. I had it less than a month and it broke. I had to get it RMA and they replaced the chip. Temp was only around 28/35 and spiked at 60 even though I wasn't using the machine for around 50 minutes and 30 for the intel chip. It was a faulty chip and I wasn't the only person. Not a single problem with anything AMD. The drivers are the worst for nvidia. Again AMD I don't have a problem.
@kris120890 In the Desktop world, it's ATIs drivers that blow.
@Hotrod
Get over it, that hasn't been true for almost 4 years now.
@Macbeth The last ati card I had was a 4890, which was playing everything in 1080i instead of 1080p. Also anytime drivers where updated my display would start out under scaled. The only plus about ATIs drivers is the image quality is superior.
Stop being a fanboy and admit ATIs drivers have issues that never get resolved. Have you been on rage3d dot com in the last 4 years?
@Hotrod
Well you've got two people here who haven't had problems with ati drivers. The new nvidia drivers are having a lot of problems. It won't allow me to turn the screen backlight off and not even installing properly while talking three hours.
ION is kind of pointless. I'd much rather have integrated AND discreet graphics with a little switch on the computer to go between them. Honestly, nForce boards have always had sh*t onboard audio/LAN/RAID, so why not just let Intel do all the heavy lifting and tack on a Geforce 9300 (or 110, or whatever the hell they're calling it now).
@shnoogie Until Intel actually includes some graphics core that is even capable of HD in Atom netbooks, the ION does what Intel is not capable of doing.
Making a netbook a pleasure to use, and make it seem more powerful than it actually is.
@shnoogie lay off the crack pipe. nvidia's chipsets have traditionally been luxury sedans, laced with fancy features. to this day, people still seek nforce2 chipsets for their realtime dolby encoding capabilities. nvidia introduced close-to-core accelerated gigabit pipes, & the first series of usable non-shiet onboard video. nv lost relevance as more and more features became standard and less important, but they've been the king of throwing on ridiculous amounts of accelerators and gimmicks for years. after all, they were tasked with differentiating themselves from baseline chipsets-- it was up to them to make it clear to consumers there was a reason to choose nv, and not go with the vendor providing the cpu's chipset (amd/intel).
on the other hand, luxury as they once were regarded-- nv chipsets have always been huge power hogs.
@Ruben I think what he means is that you use integrated when you are doing light tasks, then switch to ION when you need it. Although tbh, I dont think there is a power consumption advantage.
I know I'm in the minority, but NVIDIA has changed the way I do computation now. Even in biology, the ability to do the kind of number crunching we can do now has completely changed the game for us. And it took me a month to rewrite all my software in C for CUDA.
I'm looking forward to Fermi.
@(Unverified)
Well if Anand is on the money you'll have to be dusting off the C code again soon ;)
I'd like nVidia to team up with VIA to create their own CPU/GPU lines, I loved Cyrix back in the days, maybe something start from via nano still has a chance these days.
@htd
I second for that. Heck, just buy VIA and you have a low cost, hight end graphics platform.
@(Unverified) They were planning an ION-like combo using Via's Isaiah (Centaur). That just disappeared for some reason.
I hope nVidia comes back into the market with good cards.
Even though I'm an ATi fan, I like to see both compete well so that prices drop for us! Plus I'm not a diehard fanboy so I'll make the switch whenever I see it fit.
Good luck, nVidia. I hope their next series of GPUs is going to be awesome (like the 5xxx).
@(Unverified)
If I recall correctly.... the 5xxx line was terrible. At least in comparison to the ATI offerings at the time. I had a 5950 and I remember it being really mediocre.
@(Unverified) like the 5xxx? What? The Nvidia 5xxx series was universally lampooned as a crap overpriced rebadge of the excellent 4xxx. And the 6xxx introduced SM3.0... if you bought a top of the line one when it came out in April 2004, it'll still run almost any game at a tolerable clip with decent effects, albeit likely not at full HD resolutions.
That said, good luck nvidia. Hopefully you'll consider selling ARM IP, and not just your particular Tegra; the mobile world really needs more freefloating IP to power it.
@(Unverified)
I'm pretty sure he is referring to the new ATi 5xxx cards
@richb93
Thank you.
I guarantee he's talking about the ATI 5 series.
Apparently it's easier to shoot someone down than to use common sense.
@(Unverified)
Yeah I was talking about the ATi 5xxx series, not the nVidia FX 5xxx series ;)
Great article, great addition to the site.
AnandTech rocks
Just wanted to say excellent article! And please, engadget, do more articles like this and less articles that are clearly aimed at producing 300 comment fanboi flamewars. This article is everything that is great about engadget.
@cashmonee
This article as well as a reply expanding button would be sex!!
The bottomline is Intel seems to make the bulk of their money on underpowered (by gamers standards) computers with integrated graphics. I want nVidia and aTI to push the envelope technologically but they should give up the low end to Intel. Sure the average large business IT Director is Intel brainwashed but what about SOHO/small businesses that just want the cheapest box available? Also HP and Dell are mainly intel but Acer is selling alot of AMD boxes now. I think they could eat Intel's lunch on the low end...
@sc28 I mean they should NOT give up the low end.
I wouldn't worry too much about losing NVIDIA in the desktop space, just so long as we get three things:
1) Good graphics competition from Intel. So far their chipsets have been severely lacking, to the point of being sluggish even in 2D acceleration.
2) Lightweight (read: non-catalyst) Windows drivers from AMD. NVIDIA drivers install cleanly onto a system with no fuss and no additional bullshit. Ever since the introduction of CCC, AMD drivers have been bloatware. You used to be able to get the drivers without it, but AMD has been pushing it hard lately.
3) Decent AMD drivers for linux. I'm really impressed with how well documented and easy to use the NVIDIA drivers are for linux. It's gotten to the point that regardless of cost and performance, whenever I'm about to put together a non-Windows machine, I just get an NVIDIA graphics card by default.
@kleptophobiac AMD catalyst drivers have been non-problematic for ~3 years now. AMD apparently realized the maxim "fancy chips with bad drivers are just really expensive glass", and reformed the hell out of ATI's completely unworkable drivers. Even in infamous and universally reviled Vista (thanks Aero!), little irks like mode switching have been smoothed over.
And more importantly, AMD open sources its device specs, which is why in a growing number of cases the open source AMD drivers are the most performant drivers out there. You might not care now, but when you're running WebGL in ChromeOS in another three years and its leaving everything else in the dust, I think people will begin to reconsider.
@rektide
Maybe that's true for their newer products, but their newer drivers for older products have gotten worse. I have a Radeon 9800 in my desktop and recently reinstalled with Windows 7. When I went looking for drivers, I found that I couldn't get ones without all the Catalyst bloatware.
Two or three years ago when I did this the last time, I was able to find WDM style simple drivers from ATI for my card. Now I can't do that anymore. You download the bloatware version and the checkbox to get rid of it is grayed out. Makes me sad. I shouldn't need the C# runtime environment for my graphics card driver.
And it's really good that AMD has released the datasheets for its parts, but that's something of a token gesture. Implementing the software to use it still takes lots of manhours and the open source drivers are still lagging far behind the NVIDIA proprietary drivers. The AMD linux drivers were a pain to package the last time I did it (about six months ago).
The biggest barrier here is honest high end competition in discrete graphics from Intel. The other two things aren't so hard to accomplish. NVIDIA has been doing it for years and it hasn't seemed to be much of a tax on their business. AMD just hasn't bothered yet.