Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by ansible 2104 days ago
> They didn't need to acquire ARM to make a chip that's still superior to just about everything else on the market 5 years later.

Technically superior, yes. But at a price point for even the high-end flagship phones? No. The Tegra are quite expensive.
2 comments
packetlost 2104 days ago
Considering the Nintendo Switch is based on a Tegra SoC (likely the Tegra X1), and only costs $300~ I don't think cost is the primary issue. nVidia is mostly targeting platforms with higher performance requirements over building lower performing chips used in phones. They have different thermal and power draw requirements.
link
tw04 2104 days ago
That's just not even a little bit accurate. The K1 tablet retailed at $199 - they absolutely could sell it at a price that meets a high-end smartphone price.

https://www.droid-life.com/2015/11/17/nvidia-releases-the-sh...

link
monocasa 2104 days ago
The K1 tablet was Nvidia trying to get rid of a bunch chips they were unable to sell.

You don't see Qualcomm out there making their own phones because they couldn't sell the chips they manufactured.

link
tw04 2104 days ago
> The K1 tablet was Nvidia trying to get rid of a bunch chips they were unable to sell.

Based on... what? The only reason there wasn't an X1 tablet was because of the exclusive deal with Nintendo.

I don't see Qualcomm out there making phones because they make far more money extorting others. If they didn't have the ability to push their patent portfolio down the throats of anyone who wants to make a phone that can actually connect to a cellular network, they would absolutely be making their own handsets.

link
monocasa 2103 days ago
> Based on... what? The only reason there wasn't an X1 tablet was because of the exclusive deal with Nintendo.

The fact that it's the same innards as an original Shield tablet, just rebranded and launched for a bargain basement price on what was supposed to be a flagship quality chip? A chip that didn't get any major users?

And can you cite this exclusive deal with Nintendo from somewhere other than a rumor site?

> I don't see Qualcomm out there making phones because they make far more money extorting others. If they didn't have the ability to push their patent portfolio down the throats of anyone who wants to make a phone that can actually connect to a cellular network, they would absolutely be making their own handsets.

Why would that stop Qualcomm? If they have so much pull and vertical integration is what you want to be doing, then why haven't they done that in addition to selling their chips to others? It makes sense for Samsung since they literally manufacture a great deal of the screens and other components anyway, and for Apple since they have the margins to pull it off. But it doesn't really make sense for anyone else except to dump extra inventory that you couldn't sell as glorified dev kits.

link