Agree with this on both parts. If you had to have NV IP implemented having MTK do it on their own > having NV do it on their own. MediaTek has come a long way.
Agree with this on both parts. If you had to have NV IP implemented having MTK do it on their own > having NV do it on their own. MediaTek has come a long way.Modern MTK SOCs are leaps and bounds ahead of every Tegra ever made in history of humankind.
Widest doesn't mean the best.
The good part is that modern MTK SOCs are competent at worst; i.e. they're not tegras.
It depends, doesn't it?Nvidia SoC would be very attractive to the kind of people who would buy a top end AMD APU for gaming.
Few. But the thing is Nvidia making an SoC would incentives developers to port their games to ARM, more than anything else.It depends, doesn't it?
How many Windows games will have an aarch64 build?
I don't think Nvidia will be involved enough to be giving developers money for that.Few. But the thing is Nvidia making an SoC would incentives developers to port their games to ARM, more than anything else.
The way it's meant to be played - Runs best on ARM™️. x86 version optimised for 486.I don't think Nvidia will be involved enough to be giving developers money for that.
But maybe I'm wrong.
Between Qualcomm and MTK/Nvidia maybe there will be enough users to pressure developers into it anyway.
Its not that would be too difficult, it mostly depends on the engine and nvidia blobs for their propietary stuff.Few. But the thing is Nvidia making an SoC would incentives developers to port their games to ARM, more than anything else.
I don't think that they would make the effort to enter the market if they didn't intend to induce developers to support the cause through money or donated coders to port their game engines.I don't think Nvidia will be involved enough to be giving developers money for that.
As Qualcomm's exclusivity for Arm-powered processors for Windows PCs is reportedly coming to its end, other chipmakers are getting ready to offer their Arm-based system-on-chips for Windows computers. And, according to a new report from Reuters, MediaTek will be among the companies jumping into the Windows-on-Arm field, with plans to launch their first PC processor late next year.
It could be some sort of cross-licensing agreement. Nvidia gets access to their ARM core related IP to use and customize to their needs and vice versa for Mediatek with regards to some low powered GPU from Nvidia. No money changes hands which is what must've made the deal sweet for both of them.I guess Nvidia is targeting the high-end segment, while Mediatek is targeting the mid-end/low-end segment. It would be funny if as partners, both Nvidia and Mediatek launch products of the same class that compete with each other.
Is the Qcom dream busted?Nvidia is the biggest chance WARM has to be sucessful.
If Mediatek brings their design class to WARM with good pricing, I could see it being successful too.
On terms on investment, R&D etc, Nvidia and Qualcomm are the biggest chances.Nvidia is the biggest chance WARM has to be sucessful.
If Mediatek brings their design class to WARM with good pricing, I could see it being successful too.
The took too long and hyped it way too much.Is the Qcom dream busted?
What dream was that? Youtuber boot-licking?Is the Qcom dream busted?
Gen2 part is pretty far off so for now, yes.Is the Qcom dream busted?
I wonder what the likelihood is of ARM Ltd designing a CPU µArch with TSO.
They can demand all they like, but if the long term WoA market isn't there to justify it they won't put any R&D nehind it.If their customers demand it, they probably will.
Lol, but how about a merge, MTK is now a very competent company and nVIDIA is the biggest GPU company in the sector.Wait for Nvidia buying Mediatek, lol
They can demand all they like, but if the long term WoA market isn't there to justify it they won't put any R&D nehind it.