• Welcome to TechPowerUp Forums, Guest! Please check out our forum guidelines for info related to our community.

NVIDIA's NVLink Fusion Stays Proprietary, Third Parties Can Only Work Around It

AleksandarK

News Editor
Staff member
Joined
Aug 19, 2017
Messages
3,251 (1.12/day)
To expand its growing influence in the data center market, NVIDIA recently launched the NVLink Fusion program. This initiative enables select partners to integrate their custom-designed chips into the NVIDIA system framework. For example, a partner can connect its custom CPU to an NVIDIA GPU using the 900 GB/s NVLink-C2C interface. However, this collaboration comes with significant restrictions. Any custom chip must be connected to an NVIDIA product, and the company maintains firm control over the critical software that manages these connections. This means partners cannot create truly independent, mix-and-match systems. NVIDIA retains control over the essential communication controller and PHY layers in the NVLink Fusion, which initializes and manages these links. It also mandates a license for third-party hardware to use its NVLink Switch chips.

In response, a growing coalition of tech giants, including AMD, Google, and Intel, is championing an open-standard alternative. Their UALink Consortium released its 1.0 specification in April 2025, defining a public standard for linking up to 1,024 accelerators from any vendor. While NVIDIA currently offers superior raw bandwidth, UALink represents a move toward greater flexibility and cost efficiency. According to reports, eight companies expressed interest in NVLink Fusion. However, the frustration of working with a communication link with limited visibility results in designs that are not always optimal and efficient. NVIDIA sets these standards from the beginning, so any company willing to work with NVLink Fusion is aware of these limitations from the outset. Cloud hyperscalers, such as AWS, GCP, and Azure, have expressed interest among the reported eight customers, so they might swallow this pill and continue working with NVIDIA to gain access to the IP despite the limited information available.



View at TechPowerUp Main Site | Source
 
Nvidia’s approach - all your base are belong to us
AMD’s approach - you get a base and you get a base and you get a base, you all get bases
Intel’s approach - we don’t need no stinkin’ bases but seriously please buy one of our bases…please.
 
Last edited:
The words "nVidia" and "proprietary" in the same sentence?!? This cannot be!!!
 
Maybe it's finally the time to ditch Nvidia for ever?
My next setup in 2026 will be fully based on Intel.
Right now customers are exhibiting addictive behaviors when it comes to Nvidia products. Because of this, we are seeing more and more scams, price gouging, bad behavior from the manufacturer, etc that take advantage of this emotional state. Addiction to stuff is somewhat normal but typically seen with complete products like cars, electronics, food, etc. I think this is the first time I've seen addictive behavior for just a part (GPU) of a complete product. Hopefully, these emotional states will wear off as fast as they arose.
 
Maybe it's finally the time to ditch Nvidia for ever?
My next setup in 2026 will be fully based on Intel.

Not anytime soon, Intel will have to have a major breakthrough in CPU's for me to consider it over AMD, and AMD actually need to release their GPU's for much cheaper or have a much better product than Nvidia for me to consider it again.
 
Nvidia keeps any advantage it can have close. We can't really blame them, they are the company they are today by following this path and in the end it's their tech they can do whatever they want with it. It's anti-consumer, but their choice to make.

The fun part is that, if NVlink loses it's advantages in let's say 5 years and Nvidia decides to open it in 10 years, seeing that everyone else has gone with a competing open standard, there will be people praising Nvidia as the company that supports open standards.
 
As always, proprietary monopoly must be broken for the world be become a healthier and less depressing place.

A middle finger to Nvidia and everybody else go with Ultra Accelerator Link and Ultra Ethernet.
 
Not anytime soon, Intel will have to have a major breakthrough in CPU's
Which starts from 2027 because of 18A-P node, than in 2029/30 they will be the first in the world to introduce the B2B Tunnel Fet transistor.
 
Last edited:
Right now customers are exhibiting addictive behaviors when it comes to Nvidia products. Because of this, we are seeing more and more scams, price gouging, bad behavior from the manufacturer, etc that take advantage of this emotional state. Addiction to stuff is somewhat normal but typically seen with complete products like cars, electronics, food, etc. I think this is the first time I've seen addictive behavior for just a part (GPU) of a complete product. Hopefully, these emotional states will wear off as fast as they arose.
People are addicted to performance and top of the line graphics, that's why they buy Nvidia. Nobody cares about the company, we care about the products.
 
Ahhh yes, another of those "the more you buy, the more you save" charts...

1750341695030.jpeg


Everything stays proprietary.... until it no longer is financially viable (or forced to by some FRAND thing)...
At this point the only people sufferring from any potential price gouging is those who are willing to keep paying money to Nvidia for AI products...
 
so what happen to AMD infinite fabric? i thought people said it was superior than nvidia nvlink in the past.
 
People are addicted to performance and top of the line graphics, that's why they buy Nvidia. Nobody cares about the company, we care about the products.
Sorry, I mixed two topics into the discussion.

On topic, Nvidia doesn't have a performance lead. They have a proprietary lock-in technology scheme going. Their hardware performs nominally to AMD's for instance but customers are locked into CUDA and other proprietary Nvidia products. This is very bad for everyone.

Off topic, I mentioned how end-users are addicted to Nvidia products. Again, Nvidia doesn't have that much better performance compared to the competition at specific price points but there is an emotional component around Nvidia tech now. This is also very bad for everyone. It's so bad that end-users were willing to accept a performance 'dropping' feature (RT) that is not widely used and poorly implemented in most games with no possibility of current GPUs allowing future proofing no matter how much money you spent. The more RT implemented especially mandatory RT the faster the performance drops on current GPUs forcing upgrades. On top of all that, RT has no appreciable image quality improvements but so many end-users think they cannot game without it. RT definitely doesn't make games more 'fun'.

This is ALL very bad for us.
 
Nvidia is unlikely to let go of the bone. They will abandon the gamer market, lie, corrupt, anything to hold the AI market in its grip.

"When it comes to benchmarking, we like how AMD demonstrates clearly when their solutions are working well by presenting easy to follow reproducible instructions for their MLPerf runs. This is in contrast to Nvidia’s MLPerf submissions which are very hard to reproduce."

 
so what happen to AMD infinite fabric? i thought people said it was superior than nvidia nvlink in the past.
Probably a lack of interest / investment, and no doubt somewhat AMD not wanting to publish certain 'undocumented' information on how its implemented / used in their own products.
Essentially, not sure AMD have been in the position Nvidia is in terms of having parters wanting to add to the product stack.
 
Sorry, I mixed two topics into the discussion.

On topic, Nvidia doesn't have a performance lead. They have a proprietary lock-in technology scheme going. Their hardware performs nominally to AMD's for instance but customers are locked into CUDA and other proprietary Nvidia products. This is very bad for everyone.
In what way don't they have a performance lead though? Even in productivity - which is what nvlink is used for anyways, I think nvidia is generations ahead of amd, no? That's what I've heard at least.

Off topic, I mentioned how end-users are addicted to Nvidia products. Again, Nvidia doesn't have that much better performance compared to the competition at specific price points but there is an emotional component around Nvidia tech now. This is also very bad for everyone. It's so bad that end-users were willing to accept a performance 'dropping' feature (RT) that is not widely used and poorly implemented in most games with no possibility of current GPUs allowing future proofing no matter how much money you spent. The more RT implemented especially mandatory RT the faster the performance drops on current GPUs forcing upgrades. On top of all that, RT has no appreciable image quality improvements but so many end-users think they cannot game without it. RT definitely doesn't make games more 'fun'.

This is ALL very bad for us.
RT has nothing to do specifically with nvidia, I don't why you mix the them. All GPU vendors are heavily pushing RT performance in their GPUs. I mean the whole point of RDNA 4 was RT performance. So - that argument is completely irrelevant here.

Nvidia do have much better performance in general. Price points are not very relevant here, people buy high end nvidia gpus cause it's their only option, there is nothing emotional about it. Every single person with a 5090 or similar GPU would instead buy the AMD one if that existed. It doesn't. I think amd end users are the emotional ones since they keep bringing up these weird arguments about why their favorite company isn't doing that well.
 
Nvidia’s approach - all your base are belong to us
AMD’s approach - you get a base and you get a base and you get a base, you all get bases
Intel’s approach - we don’t need no stinkin’ bases but seriously please buy one of our bases…please.
Intel’s approach is more like "Here's a base worse than anyone else's and more expensive, so what's going on, you buying, right ?"
 
Nvidia is unlikely to let go of the bone. They will abandon the gamer market, lie, corrupt, anything to hold the AI market in its grip.

"When it comes to benchmarking, we like how AMD demonstrates clearly when their solutions are working well by presenting easy to follow reproducible instructions for their MLPerf runs. This is in contrast to Nvidia’s MLPerf submissions which are very hard to reproduce."

Even the links you provided about amd's superiority call amd's marketing claims a reality distortion field. :D
 
Sorry, I mixed two topics into the discussion.

On topic, Nvidia doesn't have a performance lead. They have a proprietary lock-in technology scheme going. Their hardware performs nominally to AMD's for instance but customers are locked into CUDA and other proprietary Nvidia products. This is very bad for everyone.

Off topic, I mentioned how end-users are addicted to Nvidia products. Again, Nvidia doesn't have that much better performance compared to the competition at specific price points but there is an emotional component around Nvidia tech now. This is also very bad for everyone. It's so bad that end-users were willing to accept a performance 'dropping' feature (RT) that is not widely used and poorly implemented in most games with no possibility of current GPUs allowing future proofing no matter how much money you spent. The more RT implemented especially mandatory RT the faster the performance drops on current GPUs forcing upgrades. On top of all that, RT has no appreciable image quality improvements but so many end-users think they cannot game without it. RT definitely doesn't make games more 'fun'.

This is ALL very bad for us.
Chasing Max settings futur proofing for GPU has always been a vain quest. The few times that it happened was because the devs couldn't push that much further either because of the consoles, or poor generational gains. If it's not RT, some game devs would have found something else that would put the GPUs to it's knees.

I'm starting to sound like a breaking record but, " using x feature doing to do the same thing but faster" has never been the direction taken in game dev graphics. additional performance is used to push the amount of details further. It's just that we past the era of the massive generational IQ jump, but more into the "incremental uppgrades that are subtle, but still impact performance".
 
so what happen to AMD infinite fabric? i thought people said it was superior than nvidia nvlink in the past.
AMD is in an open ecosystem and relies on partners.
AMD opened infinity fabric to run on switches (pcie switches) and Broadcomm had announced a partner product in dec'23 but for some reason didnt bring it to market.
https://www.servethehome.com/next-g...nfinity-fabric-xgmi-to-counter-nvidia-nvlink/ (near end of article xgmi)

So AMD had plans for scale-up before NVL-72 but failed to get enough partner traction. IF on the per server level is also not chonky enough. As its a GPU-GPU mesh network rather than a switched arch.
So if you want to pump from 1 gpu to all its great, but gpu-gpu it is... weak. 1/7th the bandwidth. Same total, but per gpu is 1/7th.

1750348544554.png

from https://semianalysis.com/2025/06/13/amd-advancing-ai-mi350x-and-mi400-ualoe72-mi500-ual256/
 
Last edited:
Not sure why people are a little bent out of shape.. it is their code..

How about someone go write something that is similar and then you can do what you want with it :confused:
 
Not sure why people are a little bent out of shape.. it is their code..

How about someone go write something that is similar and then you can do what you want with it :confused:
Your point would be relevant if there was no such thing as open source. Open source is also someone's code but that someone freely shares it. In a better world, open source centric companies should be on top and closed, proprietary companies would be on bottom or not exist at all.
 
Open source is also someone's code but that someone freely shares it. In a better world,
Someone's code for sure, not a corporation..

In a better world, open source centric companies should be on top and closed, proprietary companies would be on bottom or not exist at all.
I am not sure if I can get behind that one. I guess it would depend.
 
Back
Top