• 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.

NUVIA - a new CPU startup to challenge AMD and Intel?

CAT-THE-FIFTH

CAT-THE-FIFTH

CAT-THE-FIFTH

Soldato
Joined
9 Nov 2009
Posts
24,844
Location
Planet Earth
Apparently they are trying to take on AMD and Intel in the data centre:
https://www.anandtech.com/show/15115/nuvia-breaks-cover-new-startup-to-take-on-datacenter-cpu-market

“NUVIA was founded in early 2019 with the goal of reimagining silicon design to deliver industry-leading performance and energy efficiency for the data center. The company was founded by John Bruno, Manu Gulati and Gerard Williams III, who have collectively driven system engineering and silicon design for more than 20 chips, with more than 100 patents granted to date. NUVIA’s founders bring a rich silicon design heritage, having held a diverse array of engineering leadership roles at Google, Apple, ARM, Broadcom and AMD.”
Click to expand...
 

humbug

humbug

humbug

Caporegime
Joined
17 Mar 2012
Posts
47,650
Location
ARC-L1, Stanton System
CAT-THE-FIFTH said:
Apparently they are trying to take on AMD and Intel in the data centre:
https://www.anandtech.com/show/15115/nuvia-breaks-cover-new-startup-to-take-on-datacenter-cpu-market
Click to expand...

I like the idea of a third player, but while i think its good for competition the problem is Between Intel and AMD they own almost all the IP they would need in what is for now at least primarily Intel's world, which they are not going to get.

These guys are not the first and wont be the last to make grand ambitions to take on Intel and AMD, its an extremely lucrative market, but even AMD with much much better products and all the necessary IP are struggling to bring Intel's server share down to 90%, what chance does any outsider without that IP really have?

Its a good bearish attitude to have to bring in investment money, but like so many others who have gone before it will result in nothing.
 

Vince

Vince

Vince

Man of Honour
Joined
30 Oct 2003
Posts
13,257
Location
Essex
It's all about that x86 license in the consumer and server cpu space. That's the stumbling block for most, ask nVidia.

There are 4 companies that hold an x86 architectural license and sadly these guys aren't one of them. It's not like you can even buy or sub license from one of the 4 as the terms are very much non transferable, It's intel proprietary in the same way AMD64 is amd proprietary. It's not something you can just obtain.
 
Last edited:

AMDPower

AMDPower

AMDPower

Soldato
Joined
24 Feb 2004
Posts
2,713
Vince said:
It's all about that x86 license in the consumer and server cpu space. That's the stumbling block for most, ask nVidia.

There are 4 companies that hold an x86 architectural license and sadly these guys aren't one of them. It's not like you can even buy or sub license from one of the 4 as the terms are very much non transferable, It's intel proprietary in the same way AMD64 is amd proprietary. It's not something you can just obtain.
Click to expand...

Does not this whole IP scenario promote unfair competition or lack of it. I can understand when a company has intellectual property right but some things companies gain IP for are ridiculous. I remember reading about apple wanting to patent touch screen unlock gesture rights, which I find ridiculous. So I can understand issuing ip for different transistor designs or new production technology like EUV but I am not sure what exactly Intel own here. I really believe patents hinder innovation, I appreciate need to protect intellectual property but in this case companies like Intel and AMD should not be allowed to hog the table. Of course they should be rewarded to for handing out licences but making it difficult for other companies to join the cpu/gpu game by withholding licencing or making it difficult to obtain should not be allowed.

I have to be honest I don't understand the whole IP issue very well, do these things not expire after certain time period?
 

Phixsator

Phixsator

Phixsator

Soldato
Joined
10 Oct 2012
Posts
4,421
Location
Denmark
AMDPower said:
Does not this whole IP scenario promote unfair competition or lack of it. I can understand when a company has intellectual property right but some things companies gain IP for are ridiculous. I remember reading about apple wanting to patent touch screen unlock gesture rights, which I find ridiculous. So I can understand issuing ip for different transistor designs or new production technology like EUV but I am not sure what exactly Intel own here. I really believe patents hinder innovation, I appreciate need to protect intellectual property but in this case companies like Intel and AMD should not be allowed to hog the table. Of course they should be rewarded to for handing out licences but making it difficult for other companies to join the cpu/gpu game by withholding licencing or making it difficult to obtain should not be allowed.

I have to be honest I don't understand the whole IP issue very well, do these things not expire after certain time period?
Click to expand...

Yeah i'm not a fan of the current way patents work either. Perhaps a "short" duration of 10 years to a patent with no ability to re-patent so it goes into public domain. Should give companies enough time to harvest the fruit of their labor without stopping innovation. Perhaps there's a better way, i dunno, something has to change though. IMHO only one thing matter in the end, innovation.
 

Vince

Vince

Vince

Man of Honour
Joined
30 Oct 2003
Posts
13,257
Location
Essex
Phixsator said:
Yeah i'm not a fan of the current way patents work either. Perhaps a "short" duration of 10 years to a patent with no ability to re-patent so it goes into public domain. Should give companies enough time to harvest the fruit of their labor without stopping innovation. Perhaps there's a better way, i dunno, something has to change though. IMHO only one thing matter in the end, innovation.
Click to expand...

I work for a Legal 500 Interlectual Property Law firm, one of the oldest in London. I don't see anything changing any time soon.

The only reason AMD have the license is that in the early days of x86 Intel were the sole provider of silicon, this upset their customers as "if" intel went down as a company there was no second provider of similar compatible goods. If I remember rightly Intel tried to pull the license from AMD when AMD managed to make a superior product based on an Intel design. I think the monopolies commission stepped in and leveled the playing field, later AMD64 created a cross license agreement on x86, x64. VIA and one other company, I dont remember its name "B & something or other I think" also came to acquire x86 architectural licensing.

If intel wanted to they could throw the license at anybody who wanted it for a fee but x86 is something that they keep incredibly close to their chests. It's basically the gatekeeper to their fortunes.
 

Vince

Vince

Vince

Man of Honour
Joined
30 Oct 2003
Posts
13,257
Location
Essex
Th0nt said:
I would have thought IBM would have been able to muscle in with their clout at the time, didnt they make their own like risc or something?
Click to expand...

IBM were already producing cpu's for big banks etc, mainframe CPU's in the likes of the AS400 which was widely used across financial institutions. They made CPU's just not traditional x86 cpu's. Now they have sold their micro electronics division to Global foundries (facilitated by the company I work for). IBM were in many ways well ahead of their time doing years ago what AMD are doing now in perfecting MCM designs. Today they are a shadow of what they were imo.

Having re-read the article in the OP it clearly states they are going after the datacenter and nowhere does it mention consumer markets so perhaps they aren't even looking at x86. Perhaps they are going after that segment in the market that doesn't require those instruction sets.
 
Last edited:

Phixsator

Phixsator

Phixsator

Soldato
Joined
10 Oct 2012
Posts
4,421
Location
Denmark
Vince said:
I work for a Legal 500 Interlectual Property Law firm, one of the oldest in London. I don't see anything changing any time soon.

The only reason AMD have the license is that in the early days of x86 Intel were the sole provider of silicon, this upset their customers as "if" intel went down as a company there was no second provider of similar compatible goods. If I remember rightly Intel tried to pull the license from AMD when AMD managed to make a superior product based on an Intel design. I think the monopolies commission stepped in and leveled the playing field, later AMD64 created a cross license agreement on x86, x64. VIA and one other company, I dont remember its name "B & something or other I think" also came to acquire x86 architectural licensing.

If intel wanted to they could throw the license at anybody who wanted it for a fee but x86 is something that they keep incredibly close to their chests. It's basically the gatekeeper to their fortunes.
Click to expand...

Yeah I remember that whole thing. So in the end x86 would have to be killed off somehow by a competitor, similar to what amd tried with amd64. I suppose this is no easy task as adoption would be a pain to get and if it did succeed we would just have a new company with sole ownership. See what I don't like the way patents work? :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom