Discussion about this post

User's avatar
OutspokenGeek's avatar

Thanks for the interesting take when most seem to think that ARM is overvalued.

I'm curious to see what you and others think about why someone didn't buy Nuvia for their actual ARM server CPU design and instead Qualcomm snagged them who had infamously scrapped their server CPU efforts a while ago.

Why would any of the hyperscalers not want a world class design team actually designing an ARM server CPU? I know a server CPU is a lot more than just the main CPU core, but all of them have internal efforts anyway. Maybe not Amazon since they bought Annapurna a while ago, but it could have been a good fit for the others.

Were they afraid of Apple and the Apple lawsuit? They just want to focus on power efficient ARM CPUs and expect AMD to be good enough at the high end? They expected ARMs own designs to catch up? Only the legal team at Qualcomm had the chops to stand up to Apple?

Expand full comment
reinf_learning's avatar

Thanks very interesting. Though the calculation of royalty/Grace CPU seems high. Royalty/core is 50c-$1 in infrastructure segment and ARM said Cobalt 100 gets to the top end of $1 because it's a subsystem with 2x royalty so Nvidia will be towards the bottom end. Suggests possibly $37 of royalty content/Grace CPU (74 cores x $0.5 per core). Makes material upside near-term difficult even with a lot of units. And if you think that kind of upside is possible you should probably stick to Nvidia because that's way ahead of consensus! Any pushback?

Expand full comment
8 more comments...

No posts