Intel gives its take on Nvidia licensing issue

Nvidia sent us a statement about its licensing spat with Intel this morning before we even heard a peep from Intel itself. Well, the chipmaker has now explained its side of the story in a statement to the folks at CNet News. Here’s what it says:

Intel has filed suit against Nvidia seeking a declaratory judgment over rights associated with two agreements between the companies. The suit seeks to have the court declare that Nvidia is not licensed to produce chipsets that are compatible with any Intel processor that has integrated memory controller functionality, such as Intel’s Nehalem microprocessors and that Nvidia has breached the agreement with Intel by falsely claiming that it is licensed.
Intel has been in discussions with Nvidia for more than a year attempting to resolve the matter but unfortunately we were unsuccessful. As a result Intel is asking the court to resolve this dispute. It is our hope that this dispute will not impact other areas of our companies’ working relationship.

So, what’s going to happen now? Bit-Tech had a chat with Intel spokesman Chuck Mulloy in order to find out. Mulloy said Intel may be willing to renegotiate its license with Nvidia after the legal proceedings go through: "I wouldn’t rule out a re-negotiation if we win the suit. . . . There are options available to us and re-negotiating the license is one of them." However, he wasn’t willing to reveal what Intel might do if Nvidia won.

Comments closed
    • mattthemuppet
    • 11 years ago

    does anyone even know the details behind this? For all we know megaballs Huang may have been pulling his bluff and bluster trick and trying to get chipset rights for Intel’s new CPUs for nothing. Or, Huang may be offering billions for the rights, but Intel’s trying to squeeze them out and make a platform monopoly.

    They’re both a bunch of ba$tards, so it could easily be either.

    • A_Pickle
    • 11 years ago

    I’ll be honest… possessing an integrated memory controller on your chips doesn’t mean a damn thing as far as how chipset competition goes. Screw you, Intel.

    • ysunwoo
    • 11 years ago

    Intel is appling Apple’s history of pushing all possible competition to monopolize the PC market once again.
    Casualites.
    SiS, VIA, & ALi

    Atom is just a precursor of slow and limited machines to come from Intel.
    Nivida has a chance to spruce it up to a competent level but Intel just want to shoot Ion down & all other possiblities of future chipsets, Corei7 especially.

    We can say monopolistic practices? probably. But if we don’t vote with our dollars then we will truly give more of those dollars to intel in the future.

      • TheShadowself
      • 11 years ago

      How is Intel be “appling [sic] Apple’s history of pushing all possible competition to monopolize the PC market”?

      Apple has never had more than 19.2% market share in the U.S. (and even less world wide) back in 1990 and that was when they were still selling both Macs and Apple ][ variants. How can anyone say that is (or ever has been) a monopoly? Apple has it’s niche and its detractors as well as supporters, but a monopoly? Never even close.

      On the other hand, Intel’s market share may be high enough to be legally considered a monopoly. In the eyes of the courts this move to extend that monopoly position to force competitors into undesirable contracts may be illegal. Only time will tell.

      • BaronMatrix
      • 11 years ago

      I’d agree with that. I refuse to buy anything from Intel. That means Apple can’t get money from me for FinalCut.

      What possible reason could there be to not have ALREADY licensed Nehalem? Other than a desire to stifle competition. What could ATi have possibly stolen if they had kept their license? Sure they may sell one less chipset but they would still sell CPUs. Besides their IGPs are such crap I have to stay upwind.

      The thing that really gets me is that Intel is not being held accountable for dropping the bottom out of the CPU market with E6300 which was beating NetBurst up to 3GHz or so but cost less than half. But of course that’s not why Q108 showed 13% volume growth but only 4% revenue growth. But at least their profits are down 90% YOY from Q408 and it looks like they may actually post a loss for Q109. GO ATOM!!!

      Then they even said they would use the bad economy to finish off AMD. People are such sheep.

      • ludi
      • 11 years ago

      ROFL…you gotta be kidding. Intel has a complete line of Faster Please laptop offerings available at a wide range of prices. The problem, of which they are rightfully leery, is that the /[

      • eitje
      • 11 years ago

      Welcome to Tech Report!

      I noticed that you joined just in time to post that comment, and I wanted to make sure you felt welcome.

      Enjoy your time here at Tech Report!

    • ssidbroadcast
    • 11 years ago

    nVidia: We want to make compatible chipsets for your CPUs, plz.
    Intel: Where is your suitcase of money?
    nVidia: Right here. (/[

      • DrDillyBar
      • 11 years ago

      intel: *waits*

        • Kurotetsu
        • 11 years ago

        intel: make that three, just because your ‘CPU for the FAIL, GPU for the WIN!’ comments really, really annoy us.

          • Suspenders
          • 11 years ago

          Intel: “Hmm, we’ll see your can of whoop-ass™, and raise you one”

    • YeuEmMaiMai
    • 11 years ago

    maybe Intel does not want Nvidia making crappy unstable chipsets for their hardware anymore?

    wouldn’t suprise me…….

      • ThorAxe
      • 11 years ago

      My eVGA 680i SLI has been a rock solid for me.

        • davidedney123
        • 11 years ago

        And the 4 I have had as warranty returns have all been shite. Intel chipsets all the way for me from now on, especially as they now support SLI.

          • swaaye
          • 11 years ago

          Yeah, if you’re going Intel on the CPU you might as well with the chipset too. Intel makes the best chipsets out there as far as I’m concerned. I’ve had a taste of most of the chipsets that have come out over the past 15 years to back that up, eh.

          NVIDIA isn’t bad at it though. They do a better job than AMD (see southbridge issues). Although I’ve had a few NV boards that were worse than some of my favorite-to-hate-on VIA boards. Like, say, the defective TCP engine in nforce 4. And the same chipset’s problems with good ‘ol PCI.

            • MadManOriginal
            • 11 years ago

            NV data corruption issues aren’t so great.

    • thebeastie
    • 11 years ago

    Some of those PR people at Intel are murders and liars and are not to be trusted. 🙂
    In my opinion there is no defense from Intel, its just stupid they would stop Nvidia from making a chipset for Intels Core i7 stuff, I mean its actually a lot easier for Nvidia to do it then it was before because the memory controller stuff is already done.

    The biggest problem I see for Intel with this is that their new Nehalem CPU is just a lot more easier for competitors to make motherboard chipsets for it and hurt its own motherboard chipset division which are doing a pretty ordinary job if you ask me. (I can’t even have a 2 x 285 gfx + PCIe Creative labs sound card + PCIe wireless network card + PCIe TV card) because their chipsets dont offer that ability because they are crap.

    It shows what I have always believed about Intel is that their Lawyers have done far more for their investors then the actual technology ever has. Some of the law suits Intel has done against AMD and some of the others that are now dead was just plain evil.

    They need a massive antri trust case wallop against them, their just like some people on Wall ST they just wont stop if you don’t stop them.

      • ltcommander.data
      • 11 years ago

      Nehalem may be easier to make chipsets for because of the IMC, but it’s also a less profitable market. Mainstream and low-cost Nehalem won’t have QPI and will only have DMI and have integrated northbridges. The only thing left in the chipset is a southbridge and there’s only so much differentiation possible in a southbridge. Like supporting a few more USB ports isn’t exactly revolutionary or needed anymore. I don’t think southbridges have that high margins either. I can understand nVidia fighting to be allowed to make Nehalem compatible southbridges on principle, but as a business model for a chipset division, I don’t think it’s viable.

        • wibeasley
        • 11 years ago

        Where is the SLI logic located in the X58?

          • ltcommander.data
          • 11 years ago

          In the BIOS for the northbridge? I’m pretty sure Intel pushed out SLI support to existing X58 motherboards just with a BIOS update once nVidia agreed. SLI licensing will probably be nVidia’s focus from now on since they can sit back and charge a fee for SLI and let Intel figure out how to implement it in their hardware.

    • ltcommander.data
    • 11 years ago

    Just what are the terms used in the Intel-nVidia bus license? Previous Intel processors have used the FSB while new Nehalem designs will either use QPI in the high-end or have an integrated northbridge with IGP and only need a southbridge through DMI. If the previous license was for a FSB, I can see how Intel would say that doesn’t apply to QPI and DMI since those are quite different. If Intel just wrote a blanket bus license without stating which specific bus they were licensing and they are finally complaining now, then Intel’s legal department is really asleep at the wheel.

    • henfactor
    • 11 years ago

    Intel is trying to take over the world.

      • moshpit
      • 11 years ago

      Did you JUST figure that out?

      • Meadows
      • 11 years ago

      Google is keeping their hands tied about that.

Pin It on Pinterest

Share This