NVIDIA Accuses Intel of Anti-Competitive Pricing for Atom Processor

[cdawall]

Intel own atom and the platform. Intel can do whatever they want. lol.

not really if you were given premision to make shirts with my pants and you spent a ton of money and developed a better shirt than me and i went and said well hey my shirt sucks ass but i have a ton of them and you can not only get them for free but i will give you a discount on my pants as well.


do you think someone would have an issue with that? you just spent your development money making me shirts and i went and said hey f*** you your shirt means i can't sell my shitty ones so i'm going to cut you out of the business. that is anti competition and intel should have to answer to that.

 

[Wile E]

not really if you were given premision to make shirts with my pants and you spent a ton of money and developed a better shirt than me and i went and said well hey my shirt sucks ass but i have a ton of them and you can not only get them for free but i will give you a discount on my pants as well.


do you think someone would have an issue with that? you just spent your development money making me shirts and i went and said hey f*** you your shirt means i can't sell my shitty ones so i'm going to cut you out of the business. that is anti competition and intel should have to answer to that.

Issue or not, it's not illegal to offer heavy discounts on a package deal. Intel has done nothing wrong here. nVidia is still free to buy the chipset/cpu bundle, and just trash the chipset if they want.

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.

 

[GSG-9]

This is nothing more than a bundled discount, and nVidia blowing smoke up everyone's asses, yet again.

Once again its at least ethically wrong as there is no price for the chipset, its a subsidy, they are paying customers $25 to cut out nvidia and take their product, customers can choose both and trash the board yes. But for this to be ethically sound Intel would have had to sell the Atom for at least $50 with chipset. Please don't go off about how ethics don't make laws, if you want to know what I think about the legality of the matter go read one of my earlier posts.

 

[btarunr]

It sounds like OEM vs Retail.

Retail you get a fancy box, the processor, and a three year limited warranty.

OEM, you get an anti-static bag, processor, chipset, and 30-day limited warranty.

You don't get a "retail Atom" anywhere. Intel doesn't sell Atom in processor-in-a-box form. $45 is per chip (in a tray, in the same form one would would get X58 northbridge, ICH10, etc.).

 

[FordGT90Concept]

You don't get a "retail Atom" anywhere. Intel doesn't sell Atom in processor-in-a-box form. $45 is per chip (in a tray, in the same form would would get "X58 northbridge", "ICH10", etc.).

But, does the $45 chip have a better warranty or something that would explain the price differential?

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.

 

[btarunr]

But, does the $45 chip have a better warranty or something that would explain the price differential?

I don't know that.

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 NVIDIA inflated that price to the press, Intel would have caught it in its response, since someone is falsely representing its prices.

 

[Wile E]

Once again its at least ethically wrong as there is no price for the chipset, its a subsidy, they are paying customers $25 to cut out nvidia and take their product, customers can choose both and trash the board yes. But for this to be ethically sound Intel would have had to sell the Atom for at least $50 with chipset. Please don't go off about how ethics don't make laws, if you want to know what I think about the legality of the matter go read one of my earlier posts.

I don't see anything ethically wrong with it either. Like I said, take the combo discount, and trash what you don't want. It doesn't have to hurt nVidia at all.

 

[FordGT90Concept]

I doubt Intel would make a deal of it unless NVIDIA was about to file charges. At which point, Intel would use false representation in its counter-suit against NVIDIA which may encourage NVIDIA to give up/settle.

 

[Sugarush]

Issue or not, it's not illegal to offer heavy discounts on a package deal. Intel has done nothing wrong here. nVidia is still free to buy the chipset/cpu bundle, and just trash the chipset if they want.

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.

Selling a product below cost is not a discount it's called dumping and is illegal.

 

[Yukikaze]

Selling a product below cost is not a discount it's called dumping and is illegal.

The question is whether it is below cost. It is entirely possible Atom + 945 for 25$ is still not below cost.

 

[DaC]

I don't see anything ethically wrong with it either. Like I said, take the combo discount, and trash what you don't want. It doesn't have to hurt nVidia at all.

Isn't the ATOM processors soldered to the board already ?
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.

 

[Sugarush]

The question is whether it is below cost. It is entirely possible Atom + 945 for 25$ is still not below cost.

Agree, but it looks a lot like it, and I guess that's why Nvidia are complaining, but not taking it to court, as they don't have any reliable info on this.

To me it kinda looks that way: Intel is basically halving Atom's price plus throwing in a chipset...

 

[Yukikaze]

Agree, but it looks a lot like it, and I guess that's why Nvidia are complaining, but not taking it to court, as they don't have any reliable info on this.

To me it kinda looks that way: Intel is basically halving Atom's price plus throwing in a chipset...

Yeah, but if the cost of both is below it, Intel can do it as much as they like. Bundle prices aren't illegal, although I can definitely understand nVidia's complaining.

 

[GSG-9]

The question is whether it is below cost. It is entirely possible Atom + 945 for 25$ is still not below cost.

If the Atom is normally $50 yes, it is below cost.

I don't see anything ethically wrong with it either. Like I said, take the combo discount, and trash what you don't want. It doesn't have to hurt nVidia at all.

Its ethically wrong because Intel licensed Nvidia to make this product, Nvidia paid for that right, and invested in designing the product, invested millions. Now intel is trying to cut them out after giving them a license, if they do that by using the pricing stated above in my post it is unethical.

 

[Yukikaze]

If the Atom is normally $50 yes, it is below cost.

No it isn't.

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$.

 

[HTC]

I think this is a bad business practice and, if it isn't, it should be illegal.

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!

 

[GSG-9]

manufacture/procurement cost of the end product.

I understand, I thought you were saying we did not know for sure that intel charged 25 and 45/50 for the atom/chipset.

I think this is a bad business practice and, if it isn't, it should be illegal.

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!

Yeah unethical, but it may not be illegal, if it goes to court we will find out, I don't think there is president on something like this, maybe there will be after this?

 

[Wile E]

Isn't the ATOM processors soldered to the board already ?
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.

I don't believe Atoms have to come soldered to the board. If they did, that means even the companies that did use both Atom and the chipset would also have to use Intel's board design. That doesn't seem to be the case. I'm pretty sure they get both Atom and the chipset in trays.

I still see nothing wrong with this practice. It's neither unethical, nor illegal. It's capitalism at it's finest.