Originally posted by: Scali
Originally posted by: Rusin
Larrabee is huge and very expensive chip to make. One 300mm wafer could hold only about 64 Larrabees when for comparison one 300mm wafer could hold 94 Nvidia's 65nm GT200 chips. Which means that Larrabee couldn't fight against GTX 285 price wise.
You don't know that.
nVidia has to have a third party like TSMC manufacture their GPUs.
Intel does everything in-house, and on a huge scale. Intel's production facilities are also more advanced than TSMC's, and their 45 nm process is very successful and mature, where TSMC is struggling with 40 nm, and 55 nm is still the bread-and-butter of nVidia and AMD GPUs.
Aside from that, yes you may get 94 GT200 chips out of a 300mm wafer, but how many of those are GTX285? Probably a minority, as most of them are salvaged as GTX260/275/295.
So it's really hard to make a comparison between nVidia and Intel... There are so many factors involved here.
Intel has proven before that they can beat a competitor with a much larger chip. The Pentium 4/D were much larger than the competing Athlon XP/64/X2 processors. Instinctively you might think that AMD would get the lowest prices and/or the highest profits, but in fact it was Intel undercutting AMD's prices with the Pentium D series, and Intel had the better business results during that era, so they would have had the higher profit margins.
I think Intel will take advantage of their production capabilities in a similar vein here.