Affiliate Disclosure
If you buy through our links, we may get a commission. Read our ethics policy.

ARM deal nears closure with Nvidia mulling $40B purchase from SoftBank

Softbank and Nvidia are reportedly close to making a deal over the sale of ARM Holdings, one that could be finalized in the next week and could see the British chip design firm handed over for more than $40 billion.

Nvidia and Softbank have been in talks for several weeks over the matter, with initial murmurs of a sale or IPO of ARM by Softbank in July followed later in the month by the two entering "advanced talks." Over a month later, the two sides are apparently getting very close to closing a deal.

According to people familiar with the talks speaking to the Wall Street Journal, a deal could be made early next week, so long as it doesn't hit a sudden roadblock. As to the value of the deal, it is expected to be a cash and stock transaction that would be for more than $40 billion.

For Softbank, the deal would be beneficial as it would make a considerable profit. The Japanese communications giant acquired ARM in 2016 for $32 billion, which would mean Softbank will have earned at least $8 billion in profit over four years from the acquisition.

It is claimed Softbank CEO Masayoshi Son has been working on the deal with a small team of executives, including ARM CEO Simon Segars, CFO Yoshimitsu Goto, Vision Fund CEO Rajeev Misra, and Vision Fund executive Akshay Naheta.

Initial reports on a possible sale of ARM alleged Apple was approached for potential bid, which apparently reached preliminary talks but stalled. As Apple licenses the ARM chip architecture used in its A-series SoCs, it seemed plausible for Apple to have an interest, but report sources suggested it would be a poor fit with the rest of the company's business structure.

A purchase of ARM by Nvidia would give the graphics chip producer access to more patents and intellectual property to enhance its own offerings, as well as giving itself more of an opening to move deeper into processor sales. However, the deal may hit regulatory hurdles, as ARM licenses its technology to many other companies, including Apple, AMD, Intel, and Qualcomm, and Nvidia's control over a vital license that its competitors need would raise questions by critics if the deal goes through.



25 Comments

killroy 17 Years · 286 comments

Too many legal land mines in this sale. An IPO would be better and keep things out of court.

tmay 11 Years · 6456 comments

I don't imagine that Apple has concerns one way or the other. Apple is likely at a point where they have in house capability and have licensed necessary IP to create their own proprietary ISA, while also large enough to create the design and validation tools needed to fab at TMSC, or whomever.

I would prefer that ARM reside in Japan or the UK, and not Taiwan, simply for National Security reasons.

cloudguy 4 Years · 323 comments

tmay said:
I don't imagine that Apple has concerns one way or the other. Apple is likely at a point where they have in house capability and have licensed necessary IP to create their own proprietary ISA, while also large enough to create the design and validation tools needed to fab at TMSC, or whomever.

I would prefer that ARM reside in Japan or the UK, and not Taiwan, simply for National Security reasons.

You can't create any ARM designs without licensing from ARM Holdings. Even if it were possible somehow, Apple's existing line of processors - A, T, S, U, W, H - are all based on designs that they currently licensed from ARM. Creating 6 new lines of processors in a way that doesn't infringe on the MANY RISC-based CPU patents - and there are tons as RISC has been around since the early 1980s - would take years, and one would have no idea about such real world issues as performance, heat and scalability. Speaking of real world issues, Apple would be responsible for things like creating a new instruction set, architecture, microcode etc. as well as publishing all that stuff and securing patents for it. They also would need to build an entire application stack on top of the new architecture AND migrate their existing applications for their hardware to it, while still supporting the 2 billion iOS devices on the previous architecture for the 5-6 years that all those devices last. 

Another thing: basic R&D like this isn't Apple's deal. It is amazing that so many people are convinced that it is. In fact, Apple doesn't do originality. Instead they take existing technology - stuff that has been around for awhile and has been proven - and incorporate them into their existing design language. At most, one could say that they excel at taking parts innovated or improved by others and using them to make new great products. But the truth is that nothing in Apple's present existence or their previous history indicates that they are capable of coming up with a "new" CPU design, or even a major advance on an existing design. Even their own CPUs, in addition to being based on the existing ARM design, were the result of acqui-hiring PA Semiconductor. Even something MUCH SIMPLER such as a fingerprint scanner, they had to buy a company that already had the tech, where Qualcomm and Samsung created their own using their own R&D departments (which is why they were able to make under-the-screen fingerprint scanners so quickly). 

cloudguy 4 Years · 323 comments

killroy said:
Too many legal land mines in this sale. An IPO would be better and keep things out of court.

Nah. First off, a company creating tech and licensing it to competitors is nothing new. Recall that Sony had no issues licensing Blu-Ray tech to everyone else in the industry who wanted to make Blu-Ray players, including not a few companies that took their IP and used it to make far more money off Blu-Ray players than Sony did. Also specific to this case, there is no other way to monetize the IP otherwise. Is Nvidia going to start making smartphones, tablets, computers etc.? Meanwhile if anything does happen - whether through malice, neglect or even incompetence - Apple and the rest of Nvidia's licensees can and will hammer them in lawsuits and win.

Apple doesn't do this because Apple - see above - Apple isn't into basic R&D. They do R&D for their own products for which it isn't in their interests to license. 

As for the IPO thing ... Softbank investigated that, largely because it was the stated preference of ARM Holdings' current employees, previous owners/stakeholders as well as many of the licensees. The problem is that there is absolutely no way that ARM Holdings is going to generate anywhere near $32 billion in an IPO. ARM Holdings doesn't make/sell products. They are what a lot of folks on this board would not hesitate to call a patent troll were ARM to ever sue Apple or vice versa. Their only value is to an existing company that wants to bring their R&D in house. 

Nvidia is pushing an to create an ARM-based edge computing platform (something about parallel processing on GPUs to take advantage of architectural capabilities that do not exist in CPUs because of the way that CPUs are designed to handle instructions) to sell to data centers and cloud companies. They are satisfied with the software but right now are basically running it on commodity hardware. They want to create their own custom ARM-based data center GPU hardware that is designed specifically for and optimized for their platform software and the data center workloads. If they are able to buy ARM and dedicate their R&D resources towards this design issue, they are going to dominate this market - which is very lucrative and on the verge of exploding but is also niche because it requires specialized hardware and software that is very difficult and expensive and not many companies have the expertise or capability to provide or any real way of getting it anytime soon - and this $40 billion will pay for itself many times over. But if they are not able to, then that will give the competition - which does exist - time to catch up by coming up with a similar platform but with better hardware (or software) or another approach to edge computing altogether. 

But the bottom line, Nvidia's reasons for buying ARM have nothing to do with consumer devices like phones, tablets, PCs and smartwatches. Nvidia's competitors in the ARM-based enterprise hardware space have some reasons to be concerned but that is about it.

tmay 11 Years · 6456 comments

cloudguy said:
tmay said:
I don't imagine that Apple has concerns one way or the other. Apple is likely at a point where they have in house capability and have licensed necessary IP to create their own proprietary ISA, while also large enough to create the design and validation tools needed to fab at TMSC, or whomever.

I would prefer that ARM reside in Japan or the UK, and not Taiwan, simply for National Security reasons.
You can't create any ARM designs without licensing from ARM Holdings. Even if it were possible somehow, Apple's existing line of processors - A, T, S, U, W, H - are all based on designs that they currently licensed from ARM. Creating 6 new lines of processors in a way that doesn't infringe on the MANY RISC-based CPU patents - and there are tons as RISC has been around since the early 1980s - would take years, and one would have no idea about such real world issues as performance, heat and scalability. Speaking of real world issues, Apple would be responsible for things like creating a new instruction set, architecture, microcode etc. as well as publishing all that stuff and securing patents for it. They also would need to build an entire application stack on top of the new architecture AND migrate their existing applications for their hardware to it, while still supporting the 2 billion iOS devices on the previous architecture for the 5-6 years that all those devices last. 

Another thing: basic R&D like this isn't Apple's deal. It is amazing that so many people are convinced that it is. In fact, Apple doesn't do originality. Instead they take existing technology - stuff that has been around for awhile and has been proven - and incorporate them into their existing design language. At most, one could say that they excel at taking parts innovated or improved by others and using them to make new great products. But the truth is that nothing in Apple's present existence or their previous history indicates that they are capable of coming up with a "new" CPU design, or even a major advance on an existing design. Even their own CPUs, in addition to being based on the existing ARM design, were the result of acqui-hiring PA Semiconductor. Even something MUCH SIMPLER such as a fingerprint scanner, they had to buy a company that already had the tech, where Qualcomm and Samsung created their own using their own R&D departments (which is why they were able to make under-the-screen fingerprint scanners so quickly). 

You do realize that Apple created the first 64 bit ARM implementation before ARM actually provided its own ARM 64 bit implementation.

https://appleinsider.com/articles/19/12/02/a7-how-apples-custom-64-bit-silicon-embarrassed-the-industry

Apple has never been challenged in SOC's since.

"Apple doesn't do originality" is a bullshit meme.