Intel charges customers that want Intel Atom chips without the accompanying 945GSE chipset a higher price. Or to put it bluntly, the Intel Atom chip in NVIDIA Ion-based systems costs more than the Atom CPU in netbooks based around Intel’s chipset. So not only will customers wind up paying more for NVIDIA Ion comptuers because of the higher performance graphics processor, but they’ll also have to help foot the bill for more expensive Atom processors.

That’s all old news. What’s new today is that NVIDIA CEO Jen-Hsun Huang told the press that he thinks the pricing is unfair… but that he doesn’t plan to lodge an antitrust complaint. Not yet anyway.


Oh, and Huang also confirmed just how deep Intel’s discount on the whole three-chip set is. He says you can buy the CPU plus chipset for $25, while the CPU itself costs $45.

Support Liliputing

Liliputing's primary sources of revenue are advertising and affiliate links (if you click the "Shop" button at the top of the page and buy something on Amazon, for example, we'll get a small commission).

But there are several ways you can support the site directly even if you're using an ad blocker* and hate online shopping.

Contribute to our Patreon campaign


Contribute via PayPal

* If you are using an ad blocker like uBlock Origin and seeing a pop-up message at the bottom of the screen, we have a guide that may help you disable it.

Subscribe to Liliputing via Email

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 16,216 other subscribers

13 replies on “NVIDIA: Intel’s Atom pricing is anti-competitive”

  1. I cant wait till the first half decent ARM, MIPS and other architectured netbooks come in an byte them in the ass while AMD sits with their thumbs up their fartholes (two anal comments in one sentence might indicate Im gay.).

    We need competition.

  2. Yet Intel can’t understand why they are getting hit with record fines and being sued all over the globe.

    From just a week ago: “EU regulators on Wednesday slapped a record 1.06 billion euro ($1.45 billion) fine on Intel Corp for antitrust violations and ordered it to halt illegal efforts to squeeze out arch-foe AMD….
    The decision may also force U.S. regulators to act, analysts say, with South Korea and Japan already accusing the company of antitrust violations.”

  3. Intel should only advert 2 prices…atom by itself & atom/945 combo. I wonder if they really are doing the line item deal or not.

    Seems this all becomes a moot issue when pineview comes out.

  4. I think it was reported that he said that when you bought the Atom and the chipset, you got the Atom for $25 (no chipset cost was mentioned).
    When you bought the Atom by itself, then it was $45.

    1. Yeah, if the combo was a total of say $99, then buying a Atom alone would be better than trowing away a $75 chipset just to save $20.

  5. Can’t they just buy the CPU-Chipset combos, discard the chipset, and end up with $25 chipset-free Atoms?

    Or does the CPU come hardwired to the thing?

    1. From what I’ve read, it would cost companies a non-trivial amount of money to remove the processor from the chipset solution. This seems to imply that the chips require more than simple “unplugging”.

      Even if it wasn’t hard-wired, you can image having to carefully unplug the atom chip by hand. And then having to carefully wash the old thermal compound off by hand. Given the only $20 savings, that alone might make this operation unprofitable…

  6. They’ve got guts over at Intel, I’ll give them that. This pricing, and then the new integrated chipsets coming later this year….how on earth can they *not* expect regulators to look at this unfavorably?

Comments are closed.