Tegra 3 on track to be NVIDIA's most valuable business
Forbes’ main interest is what drives stock price of course, and they currently peg the NVIDIA’s mobile business as representing about a third of NVIDIA’s roughly $21 per share price. That’s not to say it makes a third of NVIDIA’s profits, but rather that as the fastest-growing part of their business investors are assigning more importance to it. Of course NVIDIA also cares about its stock price, and right now its traditional strongholds are looking at a bleak forecast. As PC sales stagnate Forbes sees NVIDIA's chipset business shrinking, with standalone desktop and professional GPUs expected to barely hold their own over the coming half decade.
In contrast, Forbes sees NVIDIA raking in $800 million this year from mobile, and double that by the end of 2013. Given that rate of growth, they feel that Tegra 3, and certainly Tegra 4 will become the most valuable driver of stock price in NVIDIA’s arsenal of products in the very near future. Of course NVIDIA didn’t just happen into a new market waiting to be discovered; they are in a knock-down drag-out fight with various other ARM chip vendors, including Texas Instruments, Qualcomm, and to a lesser degree Samsung. And don't forget that Chipzilla itself - Intel - has set its sights on taking a decent chunk of the mobile chip market over the next few years.
It’s not clear yet whether in the long term the mobile chip market can support so many players – the PC market could not, so many of these companies are fighting to retain the biggest growth industry in chip making. In the short term this should drive a dazzling amount of innovation and price reductions (think: $199 Kai tablets), so as a consumer you can sit back and enjoy the fruits of this competition, because they are playing for keeps.
1. remixfa posted on 31 May 2012, 17:46 3 6
"and to a lesser degree.. samsung"
That part needs to change. Samsung is the worlds leading supplier of ARM chips. They handily beat Qualcomm, Ti and most definitely Nvidia. If anything, it would be "to a lesser degree, Intel", since their mobile SoC business is just at its birthing stages and unproven. They may be chipzilla in the x86 world, but in the mobile world they are barely existing.
There was an article on PA about that this month. Come on.
3. schecter7 posted on 31 May 2012, 18:41 3 3
Wrong. Samsung actually is a minor player in the ARM space. Apple designs its own SoC- Samsung just serves as their fab - which is a different business. As a fab Samsung is pretty small too
4. hung2900 posted on 31 May 2012, 20:21 1 0
It's about the semiconductor foundry market, it's nothing nobody mentions about it. In fact that in the article "Samsung revenue does not include ASIC business from Apple", so the number is not correct. Look at here:
SS market share isn't "pretty small" and it will rise strongly in 2012.
About semiconductor market, SS has been the world 2nd supplier
However, everything above is about semiconductor, not ARM space. How can you say "Samsung actually is a minor player in the ARM space"
9. schecter7 posted on 31 May 2012, 21:27 2 1
So you see Apple's impact on Samsung's fab business. Without Apple they are at the bottom and with Apple's orders included they can claim the fourth spot. Yet all included it doesn't compare to TSMC. That's why I said it's 'pretty small'.
I think the article was about the chip makers not foundries.
It was also obviously about 'ARM Space'. We're talking about smartphones here. Otherwise you have to include those billions of penny chips all companies make and these ARM products would not make it to this article.
11. remixfa posted on 31 May 2012, 21:56 0 1
they STILL wouldnt be at the bottom. Every top handset that isnt an iphone is a samsung. At worst they would be #2, but samsung as a company outsold EVERYONE else, including apple for Q1 2012 by a decent margin, so more than likely they would still be #1. Having Apple under their belt just makes their lead insurmountable.
12. schecter7 posted on 31 May 2012, 22:06 0 0
Without Apple's orders, Samsung as a foundry ranks 9. Now I'd let you decide if that's bottom or not.
Now you're mixing up stuff even more. It was about fab and chip maker. Now you're tossing the whole smartphone into the mix. Way to go, dude.
As all articles will tell you - Apple feeds Samsung's fab. Samsung's fab business will continue to make to the bottom of the list without Apple. There will always be a fab to take Apple's orders. Fab is a disposable part of the equation. As long as Apple gets the job done from Samsung's cheap fab, Apple will keep them around. Now again I'll let you decide who has whom under belt - lol.
5. remixfa posted on 31 May 2012, 20:48 0 0
Qualcomm goes through TMSC to manufacture their snapdragon chips, or at least some of them.
Samsung is the top producer of ARM chips, it doesnt matter who they are for, they PRODUCE/supply them.
The top handsets of the last 3 years, the SGS1, SGS2, SGS3, Note, 3gs, i4, i4s, and others are all produced using samsung chipsets. Those phones alone make up 50-60% of the entire smartphone market in that time span, if not more.
Also, your foundary link, which includes EVERYTHING those companies make, not just ARM chips proves my point regardless. Samsung is the ONLY ARM manufacturer mentioned on that list.
this isnt the article i was thinking about, but it eludes to the fact.
7. hung2900 posted on 31 May 2012, 21:04 0 0
Yep, the semiconductor foundry model ( or semiconductor fabrication plant operation) includes all IC products such as graphic card, ARM chips and other platform chips,...
8. schecter7 posted on 31 May 2012, 21:09 0 0
Still wrong.The term 'Supplier' has been used in the article to refer to chip makers and most of them are fabless these days. Lol... 'produce' is not the right term. Obviously, you are not familiar with chip industry. A fab is a factory just like Foxconn. Whoever designs the chip actually 'makes' it. It's an eternal fact. Anyone familiar with the chip industry will take it for granted.
If fabs really 'made' the chips, then TSMC will be the obvious leader - lol and we didn't have to talk at all.
It actually totally matters who the fabs fabricate the chip for - cause those customers actually make/design the chip. Fab is a simple foundry - that got outsourced from US just like all other commodity business. It's nothing fancy and they just implement the designs from chip makers.
You probably forgot all those samsung phones didn't use Samsung chips. That's why Qualcomm, TI are still bigger players in the ARM market. Apple will also be bigger 'Supplier' than Samsung as iphones outsold all the phones you mentioned.
10. schecter7 posted on 31 May 2012, 21:31 0 0
LOL...dude, you just said - Samsung is only ARM manufacturer on that list ???
You're kidding - right? Who made those snapdragons, omaps, tegra, and whatnot? Any clue?
13. remixfa posted on 31 May 2012, 22:09 0 0
the article is talking about the companies themselves. TI, Intel, Samsung, Qualcomm, Nvidia. No where in the conversation does it mention TMSC foundaries.
They are #1 in the world for total chip production, but that is not part of the conversation.
And again, when it comes to ARM ONLY, samsung has nearly half of the entire market all to itself from them and Apple's orders. Everyone else combined does not equal samsung's ARM shipments.
Its really not hard math, I dont understand why your not understanding it.
total smartphone sales Q1 2012 = 144 million
samsung smartphones 45 million
apple iphones 33 million
78 million phones sold with samsung chips
78/144 = 54% of all Q1 2012 smartphone sales had samsung chips in them.
40% of all androids sold in Q1 2012 were samsung galaxy phones.
14. schecter7 posted on 31 May 2012, 22:17 1 0
Wow...Can't you just stop confusing yourself for once?
So you don't wanna count TSMC because they are not chip makers - that was my point too.
Then again you want to include Apple's chipsets into Samsung's count just because they fabbed those? Either fab way (where Samsung doesn't compare to TSMS) or chip maker way (where Samsung falls behind Qualcomm, TI, Apple), you're wrong.
Like I said a good amount of Samsung's handsets used chipsets from Qualcomm and TI. Check it out.
15. schecter7 posted on 31 May 2012, 22:27 1 0
Oh I see that you're claiming iphones use samsung chipsets. LOL - seriously? So when you take the chipset out of an iphone, what does the brand look like? Apple - right? Yes, cause they designed it which also means they made it - haha.
2. hung2900 posted on 31 May 2012, 18:07 0 0
Tegra SoCs are NEVER be able to compete with Exynos in term of quality. However, the fact is that they are not direct rivals, so "lesser degree" is acceptable.
6. mercorp posted on 31 May 2012, 20:53 0 0
I want a 10-core ARM clocked at 3ghz...with an ultra-powerful mali gpu next.
16. BattleBrat posted on 01 Jun 2012, 01:57 0 0
I just realized that both my tablet and my phone have TI processors. I have played with a transformer prime and a DROID X2, and was impressed with both...