NVIDIA Responds to Tesla's In-house Full Self-driving Hardware Development

[VSG]

Tesla held an investor panel in the USA yesterday (April 22) with the entire event, focusing on autonomous vehicles, also streamed on YouTube (replay here). There were many things promised in the course of the event, many of which are outside the scope of this website, but the announcement of Tesla's first full self-driving hardware module made the news in more ways than one as reported right here on TechPowerUp. We had noted how Tesla had traditionally relied on NVIDIA (and then Intel) microcontroller units, as well as NVIDIA self-driving modules in the past, but the new in-house built module had stepped away from the green camp in favor of more control over the feature set.

NVIDIA was quick to respond to this, saying Tesla was incorrect in their comparisons, in that the NVIDIA Drive Xavier at 21 TOPS was not the right comparison, and rather it should have been against NVIDIA's own full self-driving hardware the Drive AGX Pegasus capable of 320 TOPS. Oh, and NVIDIA also claimed Tesla erroneously reported Drive Xavier's performance was 21 TOPS instead of 30 TOPS. It is interesting how one company was quick to recognize itself as the unmarked competition, especially at a time when Intel, via their Mobileye division, have also given them a hard time recently. Perhaps this is a sign of things to come in that self-driving cars, and AI computing in general, is getting too big a market to be left to third-party manufacturing, with larger companies opting for in-house hardware itself. This move does hurt NVIDIA's focus in this field, as market speculation is ongoing that they may end up losing other customers following Tesla's departure.



View at TechPowerUp Main Site

 

[Xzibit]

Tesla never had Xavier.

Nvidia wants to compare to something the Tesla cars never had. If Nvidia wants that comparison they should reveal how much they were selling their previous solution to Tesla and how much the Xavier solution would have cost. There is a reason why it was cost effective to produce it in-house. Instead they want the comparison to be on the Drive AGX Pegasus that consumes 500w to a 72w Tesla solution.

 

[SystemMechanic]

To be fair , Nvidia was prolly charging them $$$

 

[Deleted member 158293]

So it was worthwhile for Tesla (and Jim Keller at the time) to go through the relatively much harder route of designing a whole new product by themselves rather than using nvidia's available off the shelf part.

Must be some real good reasons for Tesla to spend that kind of cash, time, and resources to do this themselves on top of everything else they have to do. Doesn't look good at all for nvidia.

 

[TheGuruStud]

Didn't they use AMD IP for this new chip?

 

[Xaled]

Nvidia should just move away from AI and other similar fields where "brainless fanboys" can't help you and where "ultimate cheating and dishonesty" just won't help them too. They can't bribe reviewers or rely on fanboys when people's life is on the line (as in self-driving)

 

[Vya Domus]

They're like children.

 

[Fabio]

tesla give up on nvidia because of... DRIVER PROBLEM. roflmao

 

[stimpy88]

nGreedia is just nice, warm and cosy to work with.

Just like its nice warm and cosy to be a customer of nVidia.

What a lovely company they are.

 

[notb]

To be fair , Nvidia was prolly charging them $$$

Yes, it's likely that Nvidia is quite expensive. They target premium brands: Mercedes, BMW, Audi, Lexus, Volvo etc.
Tesla is on an aggressive campaign to get market share. Their cars are pretty cheap for what they offer. But it has to mean some savings.

Both Volvo and Tesla sell premium hatchbacks for around $40k (Volvo V40 and Tesla 3). Volvo makes enough margin to afford Nvidia AGX and Tesla doesn't. Simple stuff.

Also, Tesla is not making a profit at the moment. It might simply be that shareholders demanded Musk to cut production costs.

Tesla never had Xavier.

Nvidia wants to compare to something the Tesla cars never had. If Nvidia wants that comparison they should reveal how much they were selling their previous solution to Tesla and how much the Xavier solution would have cost. There is a reason why it was cost effective to produce it in-house. Instead they want the comparison to be on the Drive AGX Pegasus that consumes 500w to a 72w Tesla solution.

The problem is that AGX Pegasus is a chip of the future. It's designed to cover level 5, which is many years away. However, thanks to this chip car makers can develop and test cars.
Until level 5 becomes a thing, power consumption of these systems will be greatly reduced.

Also, lets not demonize these 500W. It's a car. It draws 15kW during steady 50km/h (30mph) driving.
Air-conditioning in a cheap hatchback draws 2000-3000W. AC in a premium sedan can hit over 10kW.

Moreover, 500W is peak power - used when there are a lot of signals to analyze (junctions, large traffic etc).
Going straight on a half-empty highway, it'll draw maybe 10%. We know this for sure because <50W chips (like Nvidia's basic Xavier) can already do that.

Didn't they use AMD IP for this new chip?

Because AMD is famous for their FPGAs?

 

[Recus]

Looks like AMD fanboys are happy but will they take responsibility for 21 times faster roadkills by AI cars?

 

[ZhangirDuyseke]

Nvidia should just move away from AI and other similar fields where "brainless fanboys" can't help you and where "ultimate cheating and dishonesty" just won't help them too. They can't bribe reviewers or rely on fanboys when people's life is on the line (as in self-driving)

Brainless fanboys?! Ultimate cheating and dishonesty?! Since fucking when Nvidia fans are brainless and Nvidia ever cheated? Why no one points to AMD cheating?! Huh

 

[Vayra86]

If you needed more of a basis for Nvidia's drop in share price of the last 6 months... Its old news really, but you could see this coming. One by one Nvidia's high margin/high volume ventures are getting a kick in the nuts. They are still desperately trying to make some money off their Tegra R&D and they're still not getting it done.

This was never about Pascal gpus or mining. Consumer GPU market is highly predictable, yes even despite mining adventures and even despite Turing's lukewarm reception; there simply is not much of an alternative and the demand still exists. The reason Nvidia's stock soared was because they were looking at several new products and markets, and these are now pretty much locked for them, for the foreseeable future. Their smaller attempts like SHIELD are also not very big sales cannons.

Don't underestimate Elon Musks' power and influence in the automotive business right now. Almost every other car conglomerate has major problems getting their products to market, or even off the assembly line. Audi was and still is struggling for batteries (!). VW has only just gotten serious about developing an actual platform for E-vehicles. In a sense, that is the largest car company in the world forced to admit Elon was right about electric cars. For Audi, its a confirmation that Elon was right about keeping most of his production in-house instead of sourcing everything from everywhere.

Where is this going? Well, when Musk says we're going to do best developing true autonomous vehicles in-house, you can rest assured that is what it'll be, at least for the next ten years. He already pulled out a rabbit by announcing the entire fleet was already self-learning as it is. The man is sitting on the largest self-driving dataset in the world. Meanwhile, everyone else, including Nvidia, was still on the old-boys network style of thinking, making their solution fit in an expensive ecosystem of suppliers.

 

[Steevo]

WTF did you just say to Nvidia, why Nvidia is losing customers and isn't the best you say, preposterous sir, why Tesla's now will drive into the ocean with inferior AI. Nvidia is trained as an elite AI driver and has 3 billion confirmed miles, Nvidia will find you, and Nvidia will end you!!!!

 

[juiseman]

AMD has pretty good workstation GPU's for the price.

 

[HwGeek]

Don't underestimate Elon Musks' power and influence in the automotive business right now. Almost every other car conglomerate has major problems getting their products to market, or even off the assembly line. Audi was and still is struggling for batteries (!). VW has only just gotten serious about developing an actual platform for E-vehicles. In a sense, that is the largest car company in the world forced to admit Elon was right about electric cars. For Audi, its a confirmation that Elon was right about keeping most of his production in-house instead of sourcing everything from everywhere.

Where is this going? Well, when Musk says we're going to do best developing true autonomous vehicles in-house, you can rest assured that is what it'll be, at least for the next ten years. He already pulled out a rabbit by announcing the entire fleet was already self-learning as it is. The man is sitting on the largest self-driving dataset in the world. Meanwhile, everyone else, including Nvidia, was still on the old-boys network style of thinking, making their solution fit in an expensive ecosystem of suppliers.

+1, Indeed- Tesla has massive advantage over others in autonomous vehicles and if Elon Musk says that Nvidia's solutions wasn't good enough for real autonomous driving car and made a choice to spend a lot of $$$ from their very limited Cash-flow and were able to do this only in 3 years, then be assured that other big car manufacturers already looking/working on their custom solutions too, NV is loosing this battle for now IMO, looks like their products used as temporary solutions until company's develop their own solutions and then showing the door to the Jacket man,

 

[voltage]

This sounds much like what Sony did with Nintendo many years ago. need I explain?

for Tesla's sake, I hope they know what they are doing.

 

[medi01]

YOU DON'T HIRE THE DUDE WHO LEAD RYZEN PROJECT TO BUY CRAP FROM HUANG.

but the new in-house built module had stepped away from the green camp in favor of more control over the feature set.

Would you mind separating facts and assumptions please?

The reason Nvidia's stock soared was because they were looking at several new products and markets

Or rather because they managed to bump price up one tier, twice over recent couple of years and consumer found no better answer than to bend over backwards.

 

[Xzibit]

Yes, it's likely that Nvidia is quite expensive. They target premium brands: Mercedes, BMW, Audi, Lexus, Volvo etc.
Tesla is on an aggressive campaign to get market share. Their cars are pretty cheap for what they offer. But it has to mean some savings.

Both Volvo and Tesla sell premium hatchbacks for around $40k (Volvo V40 and Tesla 3). Volvo makes enough margin to afford Nvidia AGX and Tesla doesn't. Simple stuff.

Also, Tesla is not making a profit at the moment. It might simply be that shareholders demanded Musk to cut production costs.

The problem is that AGX Pegasus is a chip of the future. It's designed to cover level 5, which is many years away. However, thanks to this chip car makers can develop and test cars.
Until level 5 becomes a thing, power consumption of these systems will be greatly reduced.

Also, lets not demonize these 500W. It's a car. It draws 15kW during steady 50km/h (30mph) driving.
Air-conditioning in a cheap hatchback draws 2000-3000W. AC in a premium sedan can hit over 10kW.

Moreover, 500W is peak power - used when there are a lot of signals to analyze (junctions, large traffic etc).
Going straight on a half-empty highway, it'll draw maybe 10%. We know this for sure because <50W chips (like Nvidia's basic Xavier) can already do that.

obviously you didnt hear the presentation. The AP had to be under a budget of 100w total.

 

[Prima.Vera]

Finally GREED is rewarded as it should have been. The callous prices nVidia has on the Professional market (and not only...) are finally getting payed off.
Hope that others will do the same as Tesla. /happy.

 

[ratirt]

Yes, it's likely that Nvidia is quite expensive. They target premium brands: Mercedes, BMW, Audi, Lexus, Volvo etc.
Tesla is on an aggressive campaign to get market share. Their cars are pretty cheap for what they offer. But it has to mean some savings.

Have you ever sit in a Tesla and do you really know what are the prices? I assume you don't. Tesla made the right choice doing this for their own sake and of course from the technology point and a competitor point which will make this particular market growth increase. Competition is always good in a fair and gentle manner.
Price point doesn't indicate the cars actual value or if it's a premium brand/product. That of course is what you consider premium. Same goes for technology. I'd rather focus on a specific product not the brand cause this vary greatly.

 

[Steevo]

YOU DON'T HIRE THE DUDE WHO LEAD RYZEN PROJECT TO BUY CRAP FROM HUANG.


Would you mind separating facts and assumptions please?


Or rather because they managed to bump price up one tier, twice over recent couple of years and consumer found no better answer than to bend over backwards.

Do you mind providing proof of what you claim are assumptions? Most press releases are copied and a few key words are changed to fit the news site reader base.

Ngreedia have a long track history of undercutting features. HDR performance losses on 1xxx series cards for example, when AMD had almost none. Nvidia was forcing lower quality through drivers that HDR rendering exposed. Tessellation in games they backed was being forced on to levels that provided no tangible quality (concrete barrier, water under ground that couldn't be seen), but was there to lower performance when run on competition. Physx that featured non real time precooked effects, that of course was listed as real time and was only there to slow down competitive hardware, then removing the ability to run Phsyx on a Nvidia card if a competitive card was also present.

Working in machine automation professionally gives me knowledge into what issues are faced when a vendor doesn't give almost complete diagnostic access to the system.

 

[Vya Domus]

when a vendor doesn't give almost complete diagnostic access to the system.

Well to be fair Tesla still employs a lot of IP which isn't theirs so they are yet to gain full control over their silicon, it's still a step forward though.

 

[notb]

obviously you didnt hear the presentation. The AP had to be under a budget of 100w total.

Of course I didn't. Did you? Seriously?

The 100W budget makes no sense. The car still uses 15kW just for slow cruising.
Stronger AI chip would give them great possibilities and advantages. This frugal one will give them maybe 5km of range on top of 350km Tesla 3 already has. Awesome.

Tesla S comes with a 200W sound system by default, but they let you upgrade to 560W. Think about that.
Yet, a fundamental part for an autonomous car will be limited to 100W. Good job. And great message for all the people concerned about autonomous cars' safety.

I really doubt power is a problem. Tesla has plenty of it. I think they simply can't afford a more powerful solution (neither Nvidia's nor own).

Have you ever sit in a Tesla and do you really know what are the prices?

I have and I know the prices. So?

Tesla made the right choice doing this for their own sake and of course from the technology point and a competitor point which will make this particular market growth increase. Competition is always good in a fair and gentle manner.

They decided to save money on a fundamental component for an AI car. They could save money on countless other parts.
For example they could use cheaper interior materials. At the moment it's much better than what most Americans are used to, but far from Mercedes. There is room to cut costs.

 

[medi01]

Yes, it's likely that Nvidia is quite expensive. They target premium brands: Mercedes, BMW, Audi, Lexus, Volvo etc.

Which of those can boast double digit margins?
It's a cuthroat market.

Most press releases are copied and a few key words are changed to fit the news site reader base.

Which goddamn press release stated that was the reason, why are you people so freaking easy at making shit up?!!??

Musk, no less, told forbes Tesla's own chip was 10 times faster.
That's as direct a statement about PERFORMANCE of the chip as it gets, where did the crap about "more features" come from again??!!?

News here is that even a low volume car manufacturer (dozens of thousands, perhaps 1-2 hundred thousand annually at this point) cann tell Huang to go have kamasutra with himself and roll out own chip and use it instead.
Quite surprising.