SplinterdogWhy so much suspicion? And please explain 'questionable intentions'.

They seem like they're trolling. There has been nothing to show any intentions from NVidia other than drive advancements and progress as a general rule. There are no indications that will change at all with ARM.

lexluthermiesterPlease explain.

How would they aquire a license? For x86 they need Intel on board (when hell freezes over) and for x86_64 they need AMD (when hell freezes over). If they buy VIA (the third licensee) the licenses might not follow. And the second question is why? Even if they somehow gets permission to make a decent chip and they make it in say five years x86 will eventually go away. Not soon, but entering the x86 CPU market when everyone is looking towards the future where x86 isn't dominant and while we're nearing the end of the capabilites of silicone and they would have to face off against Intel... Nah. That would be a crazy fight and they would gain nothing. But it won't happen anyway because they will not be able to get the licenses required. Much better bet to buy ARM at this point.

FrickHow would they acquire a license? For x86 they need Intel on board (when hell freezes over) and for x86_64 they need AMD (when hell freezes over).

That is not fact. You have just shown a textbook example of the term "speculation". NVidia was making chipsets for Intel and AMD CPU's and had a license for both. Buying a license to do X86/X64 is not outside the realm of possibility.

FrickEven if they somehow gets permission to make a decent chip and they make it in say five years x86 will eventually go away.

Also speculation.

lexluthermiesterThat is not fact. You have just shown a textbook example of the term "speculation". NVidia was making chipsets for Intel and AMD CPU's and had a license for both. Buying a license to do X86/X64 is not outside the realm of possibility.

No shit it's speculation. I'm not Intel or AMD. Why aren't there more x86 designs around if anyone with money could just walk up to them and buy a license? Why would they want competition? I mean there's speculation (I speculate w1z is a marmot dressing up as a pengiun) and speculation (I speculate Intel isn't keen on competition).

Chipset != CPU.

Also speculation.

Note the word "eventually". "Eventually" is a long time. And I did write this:

Not soon, but entering the x86 CPU market when everyone is looking towards the future where x86 isn't dominant and while we're nearing the end of the capabilites of silicone and they would have to face off against Intel...

Note the bolded part. And all of those statements are true: There's no clear path (afaik anyway) beyond silicone and processes shrinking (this affects everyone though, so it might not be a great point, but combine it with the following), the computing landscape has shifted quite a lot and companies are looking at other things than x86, and they would have to fight Intel at their home turf. How long does it take to design, find a manufacturer for, market and release a beefy x86 CPU worthy of attention, after they have convinced AMD and Intel to sell? Note how I'm not saying ARM is the God Emperor 2025AD.

And you did ignore the one thing I hesitated about because it was too much speculation:

they would gain nothing.

But to ask a question: How can VIA and Shanghai make x86 CPU's then? I have no idea, but I'm guessing it's complicated. Intel got pretty upsetwhen AMD spun off Globalfoundries but I'm guessing because it's a joint venture they saw it as ok. Note the word guess.

Xex360Now that nVidia owns Arm (technically not yet) we'll get more powerful SOCs for phones and tablets instead of the powerless Snapdragons that still struggle with old Apple's SOCs.

I find this mocking attempt very humorous.
Qualcomm is not the party who publicizes their chipsets with the "heat-killing plate". They go head to head with Apple in all p/w charts, no other contending vendor can keep up to their double team up.
I can run Zoom on a 2w tablet thanks to Qualcomm. It is the first element that caused a BSOD, so truth be told, it could still keep up if I looked around for the resolution button - I haven't run anything higher than 720p in its lifetime, quite old at that. I would like to see Tegra's keep up for the same duration.

Vayra86LG Optimus 2X also had a Tegra chip, was the first dual core even. Wasn't even that bad, but not great either. Big part of that products' problems were also due to LG and its shit update policy.

www.gsmarena.com/lg_optimus_2x-3598.php

Sorry I think I need to rephrase what I said, I was more focused on their new ARM SoCs, the latest are only used in cars.

Xex360Sorry I think I need to rephrase what I said, I was more focused on their new ARM SoCs, the latest are only used in cars.

Not exclusively but there is a lot of money to be made in automotive automation.

AquinusThe Nintendo Switch is a fine device that I don't have any complaints about.

didn't say the nintendo switched sucks.
Many people like the ps4 and xbox one, but everyone agrees the cpu sucks;)

Imsochobodidn't say the nintendo switched sucks.
Many people like the ps4 and xbox one, but everyone agrees the cpu sucks;)

Nah. It might not be the most powerful CPU in the world, but it's good on power. The fact that you can play a 3D game for hours on a single charge without hearing an audible fan (on the latest revision,) isn't too shabby. You can't really compare the two because the switch can be considered a mobile device. The PS4 and Xbox One aren't. So comparing the two is like comparing apples to oranges. The Tegra chip really isn't too bad given its power consumption. I'm saying this as someone who really isn't a fan of nVidia, but I give credit where credit is due.