3 ms·

ARM helped Nuvia develop a core for servers where ARM wanted more marketshare. Qualcomm buys Nuvia and decides to put the Nuvia core in laptops and phones first

ARM helped Nuvia develop a core for servers where ARM wanted more marketshare. Qualcomm buys Nuvia and decides to put the Nuvia core in laptops and phones first. Now of course, ARM is not happy about that. They spent resources to help Nuvia develop the core for servers. Now Qualcomm is using the Nuvia core to compete with stock ARM Cortex designs in phones, laptops, and servers. ARM makes money from ISA and stock-ARM core licensing. They make way more money if you use their stock cores than if you only use their ISA. Oryon would only be using the ISA. Apple SoCs also use only the ISA. Not only does ARM lose money from Qualcomm switching from Cortex cores to Oryon cores, they now have a legitimate competitor for Cortex SoCs other than Apple. Qualcomm was also the the strongest lobbyist against the Nvidia/ARM deal. They don't want the competition from stock ARM cores backed by Nvidia. They don't want to compete with a combined Nvidia+ARM. They just want to compete with stock ARM cores with their Nuvia cores. Other ARM vendors like Mediatek, Samsung have no ability to create better cores than Nuvia's cores. They can only rely on stock ARM core designs. Therefore, Qualcomm's Nuvia-derived cores should always be the high end* while other ARM vendors can only fight in the mid-range, which have much lower margins. Had Nvidia acquired ARM, Qualcomm would have been competing against ARM + Nvidia IP + Nvidia money. I actually bought some Qualcomm stocks because I saw how Qualcomm outmaneuvered ARM. *Assuming that stock ARM cores won't surpass Qualcomm's Nuvia-derived cores

adrian_b 2y ago
I have not heard anything about ARM helping Nuvia in any way. The legal complaint of ARM has been that the license they had granted to Nuvia was limited in scope, i.e. it allowed Nuvia to only design a core for server CPUs, so as soon as Nuvia has repurposed that core, the existing ARM license has been lawfully terminated. Moreover, ARM has argued that even if the buyer of Nuvia, Qualcomm, has an ARM license for CPUs that can be used in laptops, this license is not applicable to the Nuvia cores, because a significant part of their design has already happened under the Nuvia license, so it has become illegal after that license had been terminated. So ARM wants that Qualcomm should either buy a new, more expensive license, or destroy all the design work leading to the Nuvia cores and start a new cleanroom design of laptop cores, to be used perhaps in their 2029 laptop products. Without access to the text of the secret contracts between ARM and Qualcomm and between ARM and Nuvia, it is impossible to decide which of the legal arguments of Qualcomm or of ARM are a complete BS. Normally such contracts should have been unambiguous enough that such a legal fight should have never been possible, but it seems that at least one of the parties has concluded that it is possible to twist the meaning of the contracts according to their business interests. In any case, conditioning a design license in function of the application domain seems abusive. What could be acceptable would be only a per-device royalty fee that is computed differently depending on the application domain.
- aurareturn 2y ago
  The licenses provided Nuvia access to specific Arm architecture, designs, intellectual property, and support in exchange for payment of licensing fees and royalties on future server products that include processor cores based on Arm’s architecture, designs, or related intellectual property. Arm provided preferential support for Nuvia’s development efforts, with Arm seeking to accelerate research and development in next-generation processors for data center servers to support that sector’s transition to Arm technology. This is from the legal filing.
  - adrian_b 2y ago
    The paragraph about "support" is void of any content. Arm does indeed provide significant technical support to the companies that buy Arm IP, as it is normal for any vendor, but that does not apply to companies like Nuvia. For companies which buy ISA licences, there is very little need for technical support, at most some clarifications about how to implement the compliance tests. There are only a handful of companies with ISA licenses, which have only very infrequently needs for technical support, so even if a single Arm employee is assigned for this task there is no need for "preferential support" in order to respond immediately to any support request. "Arm seeking to accelerate research and development in next-generation processors for data center servers to support that sector’s transition to Arm technology" just means that Arm has continued to act as a competitor for Nuvia, in developing their own Neoverse server cores and related infrastructure. It is true however that only because the Arm CPUs have a minor share of the server market for now, the progress for one of them can still have a synergetic effect on the others, instead of an antagonistic effect, so there is a little truth in the claim of Arm that they have worked "to support that sector’s transition to Arm technology", but in any case that does not mean that Arm has spent any cent with the support of Nuvia. All the text that is public about the Arm-Qualcomm conflict is useless, because it avoids to quote the relevant paragraphs of the contracts between Arm and both companies, which would have clarified instantly which party is right.
- rcxdude 2y ago
  Even if ARM's legal reasoning has a relatively low chance of success, I suspect the likely difference in the value of the contracts is enough that it's worth them trying anyway, either to cause enough of a threat to extract some kind of settlement from Qualcomm or for a chance of a really big payout. It's probably not a great long-term plan: such actions are likely to hasten work on RISC-V alternatives at Qualcomm and all the other manufacturers witnessing the attempt.
tibbydudeza 2y ago
Afaik the Ex Apple folks did not use the ARM cores - they developed their own from scratch after the learnings they got from Samsung for their first ARM SoC in the iPhone and later their own A series.
sneak 2y ago
How does ARM license the ISA? Isn’t this cloneable like the shape of an API? Intel never permitted the 586 pentium clones. Why does ARM get this veto if the cores are developed from scratch? I understand that in the Nuvia case they were not developed from scratch. I just don’t understand why Apple and Qualcomm don’t just remove ARM licensed tech from their chips and maintain ISA compatibility with clean room implementations. What is stopping that?
- rcxdude 2y ago
  ARM has patents on various parts of the ISA itself (the same applies to x86: the main difference is x86 patents are well enough split between AMD and Intel they are essentially forced to cross-license). You can't make a compatible version without a patent license at least. (And the ISAs have evolved since they were first made, with new patents involved: you can now make a very old version of an ARM core without a license, but such a chip would be irrelevant for most anything today).
Aissen 2y ago
Anyone knows where the claim that the Nuvia licence was server-specifc comes from? This seems to be a bad copy-pasta from the Reuters article (which does not claim this), and no company ever claimed this AFAIK. Edit: the answer can be found in the court documents, here Qualcomm's Sept 22 answers to Arm's claims: https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.ded.79892/gov.uscourts.ded.79892.15.0.pdf https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.ded.798... ; the gist is that Arm claims Nuvia's licencing fee was higher than Qualcomm's because it was negotiated with the intent of making server chips. Qualcomm admits as much: > Defendants further admit that NUVIA and ARM intended the licensing fees and royalties set forth in the NUVIA ALA to apply to future server products, not products for other markets
yjftsjthsd-h 2y ago
> Now Qualcomm is using the Nuvia core to compete with stock ARM Cortex designs in phones, laptops, and servers. What stock Cortex designs in laptops and servers? If ARM had provided good chips for those uses, none of this would have been a big deal!

adrian_b 2y ago

I have not heard anything about ARM helping Nuvia in any way. The legal complaint of ARM has been that the license they had granted to Nuvia was limited in scope, i.e. it allowed Nuvia to only design a core for server CPUs, so as soon as Nuvia has repurposed that core, the existing ARM license has been lawfully terminated. Moreover, ARM has argued that even if the buyer of Nuvia, Qualcomm, has an ARM license for CPUs that can be used in laptops, this license is not applicable to the Nuvia cores, because a significant part of their design has already happened under the Nuvia license, so it has become illegal after that license had been terminated. So ARM wants that Qualcomm should either buy a new, more expensive license, or destroy all the design work leading to the Nuvia cores and start a new cleanroom design of laptop cores, to be used perhaps in their 2029 laptop products. Without access to the text of the secret contracts between ARM and Qualcomm and between ARM and Nuvia, it is impossible to decide which of the legal arguments of Qualcomm or of ARM are a complete BS. Normally such contracts should have been unambiguous enough that such a legal fight should have never been possible, but it seems that at least one of the parties has concluded that it is possible to twist the meaning of the contracts according to their business interests. In any case, conditioning a design license in function of the application domain seems abusive. What could be acceptable would be only a per-device royalty fee that is computed differently depending on the application domain.

aurareturn 2y ago
The licenses provided Nuvia access to specific Arm architecture, designs, intellectual property, and support in exchange for payment of licensing fees and royalties on future server products that include processor cores based on Arm’s architecture, designs, or related intellectual property. Arm provided preferential support for Nuvia’s development efforts, with Arm seeking to accelerate research and development in next-generation processors for data center servers to support that sector’s transition to Arm technology. This is from the legal filing.
- adrian_b 2y ago
  The paragraph about "support" is void of any content. Arm does indeed provide significant technical support to the companies that buy Arm IP, as it is normal for any vendor, but that does not apply to companies like Nuvia. For companies which buy ISA licences, there is very little need for technical support, at most some clarifications about how to implement the compliance tests. There are only a handful of companies with ISA licenses, which have only very infrequently needs for technical support, so even if a single Arm employee is assigned for this task there is no need for "preferential support" in order to respond immediately to any support request. "Arm seeking to accelerate research and development in next-generation processors for data center servers to support that sector’s transition to Arm technology" just means that Arm has continued to act as a competitor for Nuvia, in developing their own Neoverse server cores and related infrastructure. It is true however that only because the Arm CPUs have a minor share of the server market for now, the progress for one of them can still have a synergetic effect on the others, instead of an antagonistic effect, so there is a little truth in the claim of Arm that they have worked "to support that sector’s transition to Arm technology", but in any case that does not mean that Arm has spent any cent with the support of Nuvia. All the text that is public about the Arm-Qualcomm conflict is useless, because it avoids to quote the relevant paragraphs of the contracts between Arm and both companies, which would have clarified instantly which party is right.
rcxdude 2y ago
Even if ARM's legal reasoning has a relatively low chance of success, I suspect the likely difference in the value of the contracts is enough that it's worth them trying anyway, either to cause enough of a threat to extract some kind of settlement from Qualcomm or for a chance of a really big payout. It's probably not a great long-term plan: such actions are likely to hasten work on RISC-V alternatives at Qualcomm and all the other manufacturers witnessing the attempt.

tibbydudeza 2y ago

Afaik the Ex Apple folks did not use the ARM cores - they developed their own from scratch after the learnings they got from Samsung for their first ARM SoC in the iPhone and later their own A series.

sneak 2y ago

How does ARM license the ISA? Isn’t this cloneable like the shape of an API? Intel never permitted the 586 pentium clones. Why does ARM get this veto if the cores are developed from scratch? I understand that in the Nuvia case they were not developed from scratch. I just don’t understand why Apple and Qualcomm don’t just remove ARM licensed tech from their chips and maintain ISA compatibility with clean room implementations. What is stopping that?

rcxdude 2y ago
ARM has patents on various parts of the ISA itself (the same applies to x86: the main difference is x86 patents are well enough split between AMD and Intel they are essentially forced to cross-license). You can't make a compatible version without a patent license at least. (And the ISAs have evolved since they were first made, with new patents involved: you can now make a very old version of an ARM core without a license, but such a chip would be irrelevant for most anything today).

Aissen 2y ago

Anyone knows where the claim that the Nuvia licence was server-specifc comes from? This seems to be a bad copy-pasta from the Reuters article (which does not claim this), and no company ever claimed this AFAIK. Edit: the answer can be found in the court documents, here Qualcomm's Sept 22 answers to Arm's claims: https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.ded.79892/gov.uscourts.ded.79892.15.0.pdf https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.ded.798... ; the gist is that Arm claims Nuvia's licencing fee was higher than Qualcomm's because it was negotiated with the intent of making server chips. Qualcomm admits as much: > Defendants further admit that NUVIA and ARM intended the licensing fees and royalties set forth in the NUVIA ALA to apply to future server products, not products for other markets

yjftsjthsd-h 2y ago

> Now Qualcomm is using the Nuvia core to compete with stock ARM Cortex designs in phones, laptops, and servers. What stock Cortex designs in laptops and servers? If ARM had provided good chips for those uses, none of this would have been a big deal!