James (no.delete@this.thanks.invalid) on June 4, 2022 4:46 am wrote:
> Doug S (foo.delete@this.bar.bar) on June 3, 2022 8:57 am wrote:
>
> > Though I wonder how long they will stay at Qualcomm. Buyouts like that of Nuvia might require the
> > founders to work for them for 2 to 3 years, but Qualcomm wants them to design CPUs for phones and
> > PCs, not servers. That's exactly the situation that caused them to leave Apple and form their own
> > server focused startup. If they weren't happy at Apple not being able to design server focused
> > CPUs, why would they be happy at Qualcomm doing the same? Especially now that they are a lot richer
> > than they were before and will have the ability to do pretty much whatever they want.
>
> If I was running Qualcomm...
>
> I'd explain that it's easier (with Qualcomm's backing) to get into clients first, and establish a profitable
> phone / tablet / laptop business around Nuvia cores. Once the R&D for the cores is paid for by the
> client business, it's much easier to deliver a credible roadmap for the server parts (the same way
> Intel and AMD have done it) and much harder for Intel or AMD to undercut them on price.
>
> A slower way to the server market, but a surer path.


Qualcomm already tried ARM servers, after they had been in the client business for years. They gave up back in 2018. Maybe having higher performance cores will help, but in the meantime the big cloud companies have gone all-in on designing their own chips so the highest volume potential market for ARM server CPUs has been permanently closed off.

So while what you suggest is possible, if Qualcomm is planning on getting back in the server market they are doing a very good job at keeping it a secret.