No (no.delete@this.thanks.com) on January 29, 2013 3:32 pm wrote:
> David Kanter (dkanter.delete@this.realworldtech.com) on January 29, 2013 1:52 pm wrote:
> > Most phone vendors have no manufacturing, and little IP that
> > you'd re-use with a server. They also aren't likely
> > to be much cheaper than a $200 Intel chip. I think the real
> > issue is that they may come in with a more tightly
> > integrated platform that lowers total cost. But there isn't a huge amount of room to move down...
>
> Why do you think 'phone vendors' would be involved? Think about who else in the industry might
> have being doing much higher throughout computing than is done in general purpose computers,
> hasn't been using x86 for the past couple of decades and has lots of fabric IP to reuse.
>
>

High throughput computing, no x86 => NVidea, but they have no fabric IP and they are relatively small.
High throughput computing, lots of fabric IP to reuse => IBM, but they have big x86 server business, and, unlike HP and Dell, show no interest in ARM servers.
Fujitsu - similar to IBM
Oracle - similar to IBM and Fujitsu, except x86 server business less critical for companies bottom line. But their SunFire fabric is outdated.
Xilinx - no signs of interest in ARM cores beyond Cortex-A9, the company is even smaller than NVidea.
LSI - too silent.

So whom do you have in mind?