Speaking to CNN, Huang said Intel hadn’t liked it one bit when Nvidia started becoming successful with its GPUs, and had made a strategic decision to block Nvidia’s “ability to capture the benefits of our rights,” as laid out by the cross license chipset agreement between the two firms.
“We wanted to expand the market reach of our GPUs,” said Jen Hsun, explaining that as per the agreement, Nvidia had some rights and Intel had some rights over specific IP.
Intel, says Huang, “would like to continue retaining the benefits of the rights they negotiated from us, and we don’t think that’s fair.”
The green queen said this was most noticeable in the notebook space “where Intel bundles everything together and prevents other technology companies like ourselves and GPUs from being able to be purchased by our customers.”
This was a shame, he noted, as punters in the notebook environment couldn’t “benefit from great graphics like they can on desktops.”
Of course, explains Jen-Hsun, Intel comes up with all kinds of excuses for why it simply can’t bung a GPU into everything. “It says it can’t possibly accommodate it from a power level or square inch level, or even a pricing level,” said Huang, adding “it’s all completely nonsense.”
Nvidia, he said, could shove a GPU into even the smallest computers, from MacBook Airs to netbooks.
Unleashing his ego, Huang stated: “We build the world’s best chipsets, we build the world’s best GPUs.
“Our customers are the most discriminating in the world and if it wasn’t for Intel’s behavior we would have a much larger chipset business.”
The lost business opportunity represents “several billion dollars,” according to Huang, who hopes the court decision will reflect this and that the judge “decides to compensate us for lost opportunities as well as neutralising the playing field.”
Huang was adamant there was no reason for Nvidia to settle with Intel out of court, saying “They’re a large company, we’re a large company. We both have vast financial and legal resources.”
Sounds like fighting words.