Tuesday, May 19th 2009
NVIDIA Accuses Intel of Anti-Competitive Pricing for Atom Processor
Intel was recently awarded a fine of over a billion Euros by the EU for anti-competitive malpractices in the EU. Speaking at Reuters Technology Summit, NVIDIA CEO Jen-Hsun Huang accused Intel of anti-competitive pricing for the Intel Atom processor, although made it clear that NVIDIA won't be pressing charges any time soon.
According to NVIDIA, Intel sells an Atom processor typically for US $45 a piece, while in a bundle with Intel's own chipset consisting of an i945-class northbridge and ICH7-class southbridge for just $25, that's $25 for the processor and Intel chipset. This is driving away motherboard manufacturers from opting for Intel Atom paired with NVIDIA's single-package Ion chipset, which NVIDIA claims, (and reviews have shown,) to offer superior performance and features at almost half the board footprint. "That seems pretty unfair," Huang said. "We ought to be able to compete and serve that market."
Intel was quick to dismiss Huang's accusation. "We compete fairly. We do not force bundles on any computer makers and customers can purchase Atom individually or as part of the bundle," said Bill Calder, a spokesperson for Intel. "If you want to purchase the chip set, obviously there is better pricing." NVIDIA made it clear it doesn't have any immediate plans to lock onto Intel in (yet) another anti-competition case. "I hope it doesn't come down to that," Huang said. "We have to do whatever we have to do when the time comes. We really hope this company [Intel] will compete on a fair basis," he added.
Source:
Reuters
According to NVIDIA, Intel sells an Atom processor typically for US $45 a piece, while in a bundle with Intel's own chipset consisting of an i945-class northbridge and ICH7-class southbridge for just $25, that's $25 for the processor and Intel chipset. This is driving away motherboard manufacturers from opting for Intel Atom paired with NVIDIA's single-package Ion chipset, which NVIDIA claims, (and reviews have shown,) to offer superior performance and features at almost half the board footprint. "That seems pretty unfair," Huang said. "We ought to be able to compete and serve that market."
Intel was quick to dismiss Huang's accusation. "We compete fairly. We do not force bundles on any computer makers and customers can purchase Atom individually or as part of the bundle," said Bill Calder, a spokesperson for Intel. "If you want to purchase the chip set, obviously there is better pricing." NVIDIA made it clear it doesn't have any immediate plans to lock onto Intel in (yet) another anti-competition case. "I hope it doesn't come down to that," Huang said. "We have to do whatever we have to do when the time comes. We really hope this company [Intel] will compete on a fair basis," he added.
92 Comments on NVIDIA Accuses Intel of Anti-Competitive Pricing for Atom Processor
They, at no time, said that if anyone buys the ION chipset, they won't sell them an Atom. All they said is they'll sell Atom cheaper, if you buy our chipset as well. Nothing wrong with that AT ALL.
This is nothing more than a bundled discount, and nVidia blowing smoke up everyone's asses, yet again.
NVidia needs to shut Jen-Hsun Huang up, he's an idiot. He's like the Rush Limbaugh of the tech world.
As you pointed out in the article, those figures did come from NVIDIA and NVIDIA is inclined to distort figures in their favor, being a competitor.
If it's then what you're saying doesn't make any sense because you can't have a clue on how much the process of taking a soldered cpu out of the board to put it in another one would cost (and I guess it's a huge problem, would raise a atom cost for over $45.00 for Nvidia). Plus nvidia gets a "free" waste problem of 945 chipset, nobody wants that.
To me it kinda looks that way: Intel is basically halving Atom's price plus throwing in a chipset...
Below cost means below the manufacture/procurement cost of the end product. If it costs 20$ to make the Atom and chipset, 25$ isn't below cost - It is just cheaper than 50$.
If Intel charged $45 for the Atom and $46 for the bundle, this discussion wouldn't even exist.
Can any of you dudes find anywhere any prices of 2 different products where 1 product by itself is ... 10% more expensive then a bundle of the 2 products?
How about 80% more expensive? Intel's charging 80% more for the Atom by itself then for the bundle, you know!
I still see nothing wrong with this practice. It's neither unethical, nor illegal. It's capitalism at it's finest.