How come we only have 3 CPU/GPU brands?

[itsdeonLOL]

There are only a few who can make chips the right way.

[Hiitchy]

Probably just because from a business standpoint, they wouldn't be able to keep up with the supply and demand that NVidia, AMD, and Intel have. There's also the issue of consumer/prosumer brands like Asus, Gigabyte, Zotac, etc etc working to release hardware that works exactly the way it's intended to work if a newcomer to the game appeared.

 

There's also Microsoft... You'd have to somehow figure out how the CPU or GPU is going to not only work with the hardware, but especially with the software.

[Bhav]

There used to be a lot more graphics card manufacturers. They all went down under at the time when Nvidia launched the Geforce 2 MX for under £100. None of them but ATI managed to keep up with Nvidia at that point.

[BlueChinchillaEatingDorito]

It's almost impossible at this point to do any of that stuff without somehow infringing upon the patents of the existing juggernaut chip makers. 

[SpaceGhostC2C]

5 hours ago, sazrocks said:

Not really sure how three competing companies in an industry is a monopoly.

Well, yes, technically it's an oligopoly. 

[vorticalbox]

10 hours ago, sazrocks said:

It’s mainly who actually gets to use the c86 architecture (which, AFAIK is Intel, AMD, and VIA). Other people can’t legally build an x86 cpu as Intel holds the copyright for it and isn’t likely to license it out to any more people.

Actually they would have to lease it. I forget the name but some IP is classed as "required for industry" basically without it stuff would not work and the law states that such IP has to be leased for a fair price.

 

Things like Bluetooth, radio antenna in phone's, RJ45 connectors and so forth full under this category. 

 

I think the main reason no one does it is cost. You would have to have a cpu that offers better price to performance than the stuff already out. 

 

One more note AMD own x64.

[Jito463]

I'm surprised no one mentioned Matrox, yet.  They don't make gaming cards, but they do still produce video cards.

[8uhbbhu8]

16 minutes ago, Jito463 said:

I'm surprised no one mentioned Matrox, yet.  They don't make gaming cards, but they do still produce video cards.

Matrox is still around?!  

[Apepa]

7 hours ago, Hiitchy said:

There's also the issue of consumer/prosumer brands like Asus, Gigabyte, Zotac, etc etc working to release hardware that works exactly the way it's intended to work if a newcomer to the game appeared.

 

There's also Microsoft... You'd have to somehow figure out how the CPU or GPU is going to not only work with the hardware, but especially with the software.

It's more difficult now as Intel and AMD produce the motherboard chipsets as well. Back in the day you could get CPUs from other manufacturers that worked in Intel sockets. My first PC had a Cyrix CPU in a Pentium motherboard.

[Jito463]

3 hours ago, 8uhbbhu8 said:

Matrox is still around?!  

http://www.matrox.com/en/

 

 If I'm not mistaken, they primarily make cards for commercial equipment.

[straight_stewie]

14 hours ago, iiNNeX said:

Have you ever wondered how come nobody else has come up with a CPU or a GPU other than Nvidia, intel and AMD? (rip ATI)

They have. On the CPU side the reason is that x86 is patented, and only three companies (guess who), have the right to design and make new ones.

The other thing that happened is the '90s. Let me explain:

In the '90s everything kind of exploded. Projects became huge and complex, and a thing called Agile prevailed, which allowed even larger and more complex projects to take place. Now nearly every system is so complex that no one person can fully understand them, let alone design them. Gone are the days when some guy in his moms living room can build hardware that changes the world (maybe that can still be done with software, maybe).

It's much harder to build a FAB than it is to wire wrap or solder a few ICs together.

[buyit1986]

15 hours ago, Wauthar said:

CPU wise, there are more than just Intel and AMD. Qualcom and Samsung come to mind, but they're more focussed on the mobile markets.

Back in the day, there used to be loads for both products, but they either went under or got bought by bigger companies.

Don't forget ibm makes custom cpus for military, super computers and mainframes, also I think Oracle is still making sparc or a subsidiary of it for sun workstations and servers 

[ZcanKal]

I'd like to say, R.I.P. the yellow team (3D-FX and Cyrix, even though they didn't work together.)

[Guest]

16 hours ago, DocSwag said:

http://en.zhaoxin.com/solution.aspx?id=3

They still aren't that close though. They also have affiliations with the Chinese government iirc. So I'm not sure how happy the US government would be about it.

35 watts for 8c8t @ 2GHz isn't too bad tbh. If its a cheap price, which it might well be it would be pretty nice!

[Apepa]

41 minutes ago, RorzNZ said:

35 watts for 8c8t @ 2GHz isn't too bad tbh. If its a cheap price, which it might well be it would be pretty nice!

Have we learned nothing from AMD FX?

 

Does Via even have a licence to use the amd64 ISA? I know they have patent rights to x86 from buying Cyrix, but those date back to the 90s.

[Guest]

1 minute ago, Apepa said:

Have we learned nothing from AMD FX?

 

Does Via even have a licence to use the amd64 ISA? I know they have patent rights to x86 from buying Cyrix, but those date back to the 90s.

VIA have been producing low power options for a while so they have the licence just not the technology to compete in the same user space. AMD FX was 125w, this is 35. Great for a budget notebook solution.

[Bhav]

There also was a company whose name I can't remember but I think it started with a V, that tried to enter the GPU market in the DX9 era. Their GPU flopped abysmally and they disappeared.

[ExplosiveSloths]

Intel is planning on making a move in the GPU market, who knows when we'll see the product though/if ever.

 

 

 

[mr moose]

15 hours ago, Bhav said:

There used to be a lot more graphics card manufacturers. They all went down under at the time when Nvidia launched the Geforce 2 MX for under £100. None of them but ATI managed to keep up with Nvidia at that point.

Almost.  3DFX could easily keep up on the hardware side, but they were about to win a landmark IP lawsuit against Nvidia when Nvidia decided it was easier to buy 3DFX than suffer the consequences of having to license half it's IP from 3dfx.  

[Bhav]

21 minutes ago, mr moose said:

Almost.  3DFX could easily keep up on the hardware side, but they were about to win a landmark IP lawsuit against Nvidia when Nvidia decided it was easier to buy 3DFX than suffer the consequences of having to license half it's IP from 3dfx.  

Im not sure about this, I thought 3DFX literally screwed up with the Voodoo 4 / 5.

 

They werent keeping up at all and those cards were terrible.

[BuckGup]

There are a lot more than 2 brands for CPUs. IBM, MIPS, that russian company, and all the ARM chips

[TopHatProductions115]

@Almostbauws

Last I checked, Intel holds the x86 ownership. AMD holds the ownership for the extension, x86_64 (AMD64). Thus, Intel holds the OG while AMD has the better extension that we all use to this day. Correct me if I'm wrong...

[dalekphalm]

On 2/9/2018 at 8:56 AM, iiNNeX said:

Have you ever wondered how come nobody else has come up with a CPU or a GPU other than Nvidia, intel and AMD? (rip ATI)

 

Do you think they are too far ahead for anyone to catch up? Or perhaps something else limiting Startups? Potentially might be too expensive to get into...

 

Let's see your thoughts.

There used to be many CPU manufacturers. I assume you're referring to x86 CPU's specifically? Because there are more than just AMD and Intel making CPU's right now.

 

You have:

1. IBM

2. Qualcomm

3. Samsung

4. Apple

5. NVIDIA (I know you listed them above, but I was unsure if you knew they made CPU's)

 

There are others, but I can't think of them off the top of my head. The difference, of course, is none of these are x86 CPU's.

 

There's actually a 6th:

Via Technologies - these guys DO make x86 CPU's.

 

There used to be more, but the last big player was Cyrix, and they were bought out by VIA anyway, so they live on in memory.

 

For GPU's, there used to be TONS, but the major players were:

3dfx - they made the infamous Voodoo GPU series

S3

 

Also, I know you said "RIP ATI", but just in case you aren't aware, ATI = AMD. AMD bought ATI wholesale and they continued as AMD's graphics division. They are now known as Radeon Technologies Group, which is still a division of AMD. RTG = AMD = ATI.

[mr moose]

34 minutes ago, Bhav said:

Im not sure about this, I thought 3DFX literally screwed up with the Voodoo 4 / 5.

 

They werent keeping up at all and those cards were terrible.

This is the story I hear reiterated the most.

 

https://www.geek.com/games/the-end-of-3dfx-542497/

 

Although there is lots of debate online about how good the last of their products performed, I believe it is just embellished memories because some remember them as awesome while others remember them being shit,  Much like how people view today's brands. I also remember the 4500 and 5500 to be solid performers.  At any rate, what really killed them was not being able to say no to the nvidia buy out.

[Bhav]

15 minutes ago, mr moose said:

This is the story I hear reiterated the most.

 

https://www.geek.com/games/the-end-of-3dfx-542497/

 

Although there is lots of debate online about how good the last of their products performed, I believe it is just embellished memories because some remember them as awesome while others remember them being shit,  Much like how people view today's brands. I also remember the 4500 and 5500 to be solid performers.  At any rate, what really killed them was not being able to say no to the nvidia buy out.

No, Voodoo 4 + 5 were turd:

 

https://www.anandtech.com/show/535/8