nVidia: Intel Atom Pricing "Pretty Unfair" Comments

I don't like Intel's Atom pricing and its effect on Ion pricing. But I don't think any court should rule against it. Companies of all types offer lower prices for items when purchased in bundles.

Why does everyone these days demand a legal ruling against something that they merely dislike?

Well... Looking at Pineview (integrated atom + graphics) round the corner this situation should sort itself out ... What about the ARM route for Nvidia?

pimlicosound: There's no issue with discounting for bundles. There is an issue when the discount is in essence predatory pricing intended to drive competitors out of the market - this violates competition law and is an illegal practice in Europe (but not the US). Obviously, none of us know whether this is actually a case of predatory pricing, but given how huge the discount is and the bitter words between Intel and nVidia, it's not impossible. Time will tell.

First this is a rather obvious case of predatory pricing when the individual component costs almost twice as much as a whole bundle! And its not like volume pricing is an issue here, nvidia would be buying a huge amount of this product.

But secondly why is nVidia bending over bakwards to buy the Atom. The real value in what they are trying to do lies in the graphics chipset they have already created. So why not just get an AMD CPU and put in there and move on?

Or get something else althogether put it in an market it to OEMS to make linux based solutions for HTPCs and netbooks?

As it is all nVidia is doing is making intel seem even more important in the eyes of the consumer. They need to take a different approach instead of relying on regulators who IMO will do nothing considering that Intel feels so comfortable with pricing that any old fool knows is predatory. So regulatory action most likely will not be taken.

@Ed: It depends on what you think of as being "more". Intel is rightly calculating that the market is placing a higher value on its Atom chip sold solo, for use in Ion, than it does upon its Atom+945 bundle. If people want the CPU more than they want the bundle, Intel is entirely right, and within its rights, to charge more for it.

Seems to me Intel are running scared of what Nvidia will bring to the platform. Given its Nvidia's GPU that bring meaning to it; for me - HD playback. As we discussed in other threads what has Intel got to loose "trying it on"? Its just a 'chest fight' between them. Also the current hit by the EU on Intel does not seem to worry shareholders as far as I can see....

How about a doing some research before republishing Nvidia propoganda? Intel sells Atom's for as little as $20 on their own. You can verify this because Intel actually publishes a price list on their website. Go try to find a chip price list on Nvidia's web site. Call this what it is: Nvidia just wants Intel to sell its Atom's at no profit, so Nvidia can make big money on graphics chips.

anon: The $20 Atoms are from the Z5xx series, which are intended for MIDs. nVidia's Ion platform isn't for MIDs, so talking of $20 Atoms is meaningless in this context. For a netbook, you'd be looking at the Atom N270 - which is listed for $44 on Intel's price list. For nettops, the Atom 330 is listed at $43. The single core Atom 230 is listed at $29 - and even that is more than the Atom+chipset bundle.

pimlicosound: That doesn't compute, given that you could simply buy the chipset bundle and throw away the chipset.

If I recall Intel also soldered the chipset on in this case, so upgrading the CPU or using it elsewhere is blocked. Which is amusing given all the "environmental" and "sustainable" pap they spread on their website.