the payments are for the rights of nvidia technology. Since larrabee was a bust, Intel had decided that they would be better off buying nvidia technology for their chips. Why are people arguing with this?


http://www.engadget.com/2011/01/10/inte ... s-signs-c/


http://www.techradar.com/news/computing ... ech-920689


and straight from the horses mouth


intel did not decide to pay nvidia because they were afraid of being sued or for anti trust bla bla. They decided that nvidia had technology they could use and they sought to reconcile and buy their way out of their failing graphics plan. This all occurs after intel found that larrabee was never going to make a graphics chip that could actually compete. Intel tryed and tryed with larrabee but ti wasnt a project that engineers thought of. it wasnt their scientist that dreamed it up, it was their upper management. The ones who know nothing of the actual workings of the technology. Larrabee was decided by management by people who didnt know crap about how stuff works. Intel wants to convert everything in the world to x86 so they can control every aspect of computing. This dream will never happen. Larrabee failed as a GPU, it was never realistic. Just a dream of men in power to have more power.

Nvidia said all that, after intel made it crystal clear to them that they WOULD NOT be allowed to continue making chipsets for intel CPU's beyond socket 775. What else would you expect them to say?

And Larrabee was only one possible application of the tech behind it, yes it went nowhere as a GPU, but then it was never seriously meant to be a GPU in the first place despite all the PR and bluster to the contrary. However the tech behind Larrebee IS making its way into Xeon Phi, where it was always intended to go in the first place.

what else would i expect them to say? what? are you kidding me? there is nothing trivial about it. Your trying to invent this alternate reality that simply doesnt exist. I know you can never back down once you say something. no matter how bizarre it is or how much evidence there is to the contrary you always try to bend and spin things ultimately to no end. It could be a useful trait in some other scenario perhaps. I always try to make things very very clear and stay consistent to the matter. In this matter, i just dont get how your able to sway it. let me just put this together again....

you know that intel is paying nvidia 1.5 billion dollars in a license agreement. you can say whatever you want to about what the money was for but i posted statements from the company that actually receives the payments that clearly tell us what intel is paying for. Not only do you see the clear words saying the payments were for graphic technology for intel's upcoming chips, you also know that intel igp had improved greatly beginning with the chip nvidia says the technology was for. You cannot possibly be too dense to see the absolute unmistakable connection. It has been totally laid out for you now. Get your head out your as and lets start making some real progress.

The technology from larrabee may very well continue on to evolve into the Xeon Phi. But for you to completely blow off what the license deal was for, its completely not even remotely related. You connect things somehow that dont even go together. none of what you are saying makes sense as a whole. do you really see things like so? sometimes i wonder if your even for real or just playing games or something....

in case you are not lets analyze your warped imagination. Just because intel may find use of some of their larrabee technology in a product one day does not mean that this new product was the real plan all along. You have nothing to show this at all. Really everything goes against this. its pretty ridiculous that you keep insisting it. here is a story..... my plane to London has to make an emergency landing in new york where i get off and have to stay for a couple days. My extremely jealous girl friend finds out and all hell breaks loose. She becomes 100% totally convinced that i was always intending on going to new york "in the first place" and that London was just a trick or ploy. Now of course this is just crazy, but imagine a jealous raging girl friend saying this insane stuff, "that was your plan all along, to go to new york wasnt it! i bet you never planned to go to London! didnt you!". No matter how much i try to talk sense to this girl she never backs down. Even with printed proof of such things as a real ticket to London, she still has it in her head and nothing in this world can change her mind. Nothing

its your feelings and imagination completely over riding reality. Her emotion over powering reality. Its a completely crippling ability that anyone can fall victim of. Logic has no place when one is blinded by things like emotion.....

Intel's failed larrabee GPU project lead them to nvidia where they bought technology for the future chips such as sandy bridge and so on. This is clearly been shown to you. Intel has since found a place for larrabee technology in a product called the Xeon PHi. This is chip is still in the development stages and has yet to find a place in the real world. Whether its successful or not remains to be seen. This is how i see it.

Until you can back up your wild claims that it was the real plan all along you should probably quit making statements like so. lets stick to logic in our debates and stay away from emotionally charged psycho girlfriend mentalities. If what you claimed had truth to it you wouldve presented it already. If we stick to logical debates there is a lot more to gain. Sometimes you have to let go and see that logically things may be different than you thought. Sometimes you have to retract to grow. No one knows everything and we all can learn something new.

anyway, think on it. i am just extremely tired and rambling. worked all night and still havent slept.

peace

The fact that no GPU Larrabee part is launching, but a HPC product (Xeon Phi) is isn't proof enough for you?

The licensing agreement for graphics tech between nvidia and intel is for integrated gpu's, it was never for Larrabee, which was to be software only plus a tiny amount of FF texure logic.

Larrabee being a GPU was nothing but a bogey man tale to blind people to intels real GPU efforts and mask what Larrabee and successors was really intended for.

Are you guys talking about the same thing? You both keep emphasizing different events.

Larrabee really didn't produce anything but a SW SDK and further research. That further research begat Knights Ferry which has yet to be released or prove itself.

Intel evidently got tech from Nvidia - not from Larrabee - that allowed them to improve their CPU graphics substantially for SB and IB.

As to Intel never "meaning to make Larrabee a GPU", that goes against everything that Intel did. They did create a GPU - but evidently it was way too slow to compete. Then they went back to the drawing board with a similar concept for Knights Ferry but for the HPC market.

i think they may find it is also too slow to compete against thousands of more efficient cores. It is going to depend on the programming - adoption on the SW end whether it is successful or not.

yes, we were talking about the same thing. if you follow the post in order from page 15 you will see how it flows. grstanford jumped in when jaydip questioned my saying the payments were for nvidia graphics technology. I know its not common knowledge but there is information out there and i have clearly shown proof of my claims.

now grstandford is squirming and kicking trying to find a way to uphold his original positions no matter how completely off it is. It seems he can never admit that he could be wrong even the slightest. I am trying meet him halfway though. I have debates all the time and often i end up learning a new way of looking at things. It is progressive to me and i feel like its benificial to me when i learn something. So in the grand scheme, this debate is me reaching towards a more meaningful outcome.

With grstandford it may be a lost cause but i feel like i am actually making progress at least on one matter in the discussion. There are several things going on in these but lets just focus on the one matter that i feel we have made progress on. originally we had gstan saying these things about me saying the nvidia licensing payments are for graphic technology, why else would intel be paying them?


then after i posted clear evidence stating from nvidia what the deal gives nvidia, he still does a song and dance:

clearly he was trying to hold to the fact that intel wasnt paying nvidia for graphic technologies and after i presented actual statements of such he claims nvidia was now just saying these because intel wouldnt let them make chipsets beyond socket 775???? it really makes zero sense at all. It doesnt even remotely go together but thats just in his nature.

But i say i have made progress because now with this post he starts saying this:



you see now he takes the position like he is telling me something. Like now we are all of a sudden talking about the license agreement being about nvidia technology for larrabee?????
although i never made any such claim and nothing in these post remotely even go there it is still progress because it is 100% exactly what a stated from the beginning. this part specifically:

Way back when i first brought it up to jaydip leading to gstan jumping in. Here is those words:


so now we have come full circle on that particular matter. Back to where gstanford has completely changed his position and it lines 100% to where i was originally at but he doesnt even realize it. He still acts as if he is setting the record straight by adding the last part:



well duh! no one ever said it was!

But even if he doesnt realize it, we are making progress. As i have presented very clearly the chain of actions to prove it so. I would like an environment where people learn from one another and i strive to create such a place. Gstanford is a tough one, he never bends or is willingly open and it is nice to try to get through to him even if he doesnt even realize that you have.

When he challenged what i said i backed it up and cornered him into a corner. leaving no alternative but to see things from the position i originally stated. To me, ultimately, that is more important then him seeing i was right.

No. intel had to compensate nvidia for the loss of their chipset business ***AND*** they had to license graphics tech from nvidia. the 1.5 billion is a mixture of both. Intel could probably have gotten the graphics tech cheaper if not for forcing nvidia out of chipsets. Either intel compensated nvidia of their own accord or regulatory authorities would have forced them to.

As for his other claims of larrabee being a boogie man and a ploy or what ever, this is way way out there and he has nothing to back it up. It makes no sense, it doesnt add up. It is completely out of this world.

We have to remember why we are even at this point to understand why he holds on to such a strange claim. It started when the larrabee was brought up as proof that intel didnt always win. jaydip countered that larrabee helped intel just look at their graphics. I countered saying look at nvidia for intels graphics improving not larrabee. and now grstanford is making wild claims that larrabee wasnt a failure but a part of a huge ploy to trick the world. Its all based on his high opinion of intel and that they could never fault anything. Everything they touch is gold therefor it has to be some grand divine like explanation. he cannot take the real truth. Just an emotionally fueled drive that defies all logic.

What he claims is so far out there. the only way a person could fool themselves that much would be by letting themselves be completely lost in passion. Its very powerful and overwhelming. It is admirable.

Whatever you reckon Ocre. It was a way for intel to get game developers interested in them, since their IGP name to that point was mud, and noone took them seriously. They built up a graphics infrastructure under the pretense of it being for Larrabee when it was actually for their IGP's.

i can agree that the chipset loss would make nvidia a little hardened. but it doesnt change anything that i have said. whether the chipset loss effected their relationship or not, intel sought after nvidia patents for their HD graphics. There were all sorts of issues between the two and the settlement was a truce in many ways.

Actually the bickering goes back a lot further than chipset loss. all the way to the beginning of the original plans to make larrabee. It was a long road that ended with intel finally settling with nvidia. ultimatly intel couldnt get around it. They needed technology that nvidia had and all their mega power pulls didnt result in any good. It just may have cost them a ton of cash in the end. Every bit of this was over graphics, Larrabee, chipsets, and finally the settlement.