I wonder what this means for Intel's Arc lineup. Would be a bit crazy to have privileged access to a competitor's roadmap through just owning a chunk of them. I also have to admit I really hope they dont cancel them. A triopoly is at least better than a duopoly (or realistically, a monopoly as AMD's competitiveness in gpus is pretty questionable)

▲

Workaccount2 7 days ago | parent | next [-]

It probably kills any prospect of Intel releasing a market disrupter card that many were calling for - a 64GB or 92GB card with even middling performance for under $1k.

It's pretty clear AMD and Nvidia are gatekeeping memory so they can iterate over time and protect their datacenter cards.

Intel had a prime opportunity to blow this up.

▲

vid 7 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

That's what I think of, along with favour from their new investment sibling, the US government. AMD doesn't want to be super competitive, they like their margins and being second choice in a hypetastic market. Even though Arc has very low adoption, it was making signs of doing scrappy things, like enabling two 24GB GPUs on one card from third party vendors, which got the hobby/upstart community pretty excited. Ultimately it's not a real market giving the people what they want via competition, it's all contrived by politics and the biggest players.

▲

thescriptkiddie 7 days ago | parent | prev [-]

imho the entire point of this for nvidia is to kill arc

	▲	simne a day ago \| parent \| next [-]
		They will not, because need to save at least weak competition, or anti-trust regulators will use very high taxes against Nvidia. This is reason, why Intel all previous decades saved tiny stripe for competitors (sure, AMD , but also like Cyrix or Sys), but immediately hit brakes, when some competitor becomes too competitive - to show regulators, that market is still competitive, is not just monopoly. The size of stripe for outsiders is not right parameter here, but more important outsiders will not show bright products in most important niches. So idea, Arc will not die fast, but it will constantly lag, to be only second or third. How one could cut wings to GPU? Well first, delay top products, for example installing slow RAM and use too high temperature margins, so chip will run on slower frequency than could. Second, as I hear, Arc drivers still not ideal and some games don't run smooth. Third, cut all long term perspective initiatives, like WebGPU. ps Other examples, you may seen strange behavior of IBM, Commodore/Atari, when they avoid to implement some very obvious things, and that is - they visited by regulators, and warned about approaching of formal margin, and after that visit, hit brakes, to limit their products, to avoid become next ATT.
	▲	rkomorn 7 days ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		Which is arguably kind of weird because where is it actually competing with NVIDIA? A hypothetical future, I guess? But also, does this amount of ownership even give them the ability to kill anything on Intel's roadmap without broad shareholder consensus (not that that's even how roadmaps are handled anyway)?