Commitments and Contingencies	3 Months Ended
Apr. 26, 2015
Notes to financial statements [Abstract]
Commitments and Contingencies	Commitments and Contingencies Securities Cases In September 2008, three putative securities class actions were filed in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California arising out of our announcements on July 2, 2008, that we would take a charge against cost of revenue to cover anticipated costs and expenses arising from a weak die/packaging material set in certain versions of our previous generation MCP and GPU products and that we were revising financial guidance for our second quarter of fiscal year 2009. The actions purport to be brought on behalf of purchasers of NVIDIA stock and assert claims for violations of Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, or the Securities Exchange Act. On January 22, 2010, Plaintiffs filed a Consolidated Amended Class Action Complaint, asserting claims for violations of Section 10(b), Rule 10b-5, and Section 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act and seeking unspecified compensatory damages. We moved to dismiss the consolidated complaint and on October 19, 2010, Judge Seeborg granted our motion with leave to amend. On December 2, 2010, Plaintiffs filed a Second Consolidated Amended Complaint. We again moved to dismiss and on October 12, 2011, Judge Seeborg again granted our motion to dismiss, this time denying Plaintiffs leave to amend. On November 8, 2011, Plaintiffs filed a Notice of Appeal to the Ninth Circuit. Oral argument was held on January 14, 2014. On October 2, 2014, the Ninth Circuit issued an order affirming the dismissal. On October 16, 2014, Plaintiffs requested a rehearing or en banc review of the Ninth Circuit’s opinion affirming the dismissal. Plaintiffs’ request was denied on November 10, 2014. On February 9, 2015, Plaintiffs filed a petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Supreme Court. On April 15, 2015, we filed an opposition to Plaintiffs’ petition. Patent Infringement Cases On September 4, 2014, NVIDIA filed complaints against Qualcomm, Inc., or Qualcomm, and various Samsung entities with both the United States International Trade Commission, or ITC, and the United States District Court for the District of Delaware for alleged infringement of seven patents relating to graphics processing. In the ITC action, NVIDIA seeks to block shipments of Samsung Galaxy mobile phones, tablets and smart TVs containing Qualcomm’s Adreno, ARM’s Mali or Imagination’s PowerVR graphics architectures. On October 6, 2014, the ITC initiated an investigation of NVIDIA’s claim and the investigation is currently underway. On February 2 and 3, 2015, the court conducted a claim construction hearing on certain claim language from five of the patents at issue. The hearing on NVIDIA’s patents in the ITC action is currently scheduled to begin on June 22, 2015. In the Delaware action, NVIDIA seeks unspecified damages for Samsung and Qualcomm’s alleged patent infringement. On October 22, 2014, Samsung and Qualcomm moved to stay the Delaware proceedings in light of the pending ITC action and NVIDIA did not oppose the motion. The court granted the motion to stay on October 23, 2014. On November 10, 2014, Samsung filed a complaint against NVIDIA and Velocity Micro, Inc., in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, alleging that NVIDIA infringed six patents and falsely advertised that the Tegra K1 processor is the world’s fastest mobile processor. On December 19, 2014, and then on April 10, 2015, Samsung filed amended, longer complaints, but which continued to assert the same claims against NVIDIA. Samsung seeks unspecified damages and an injunction prohibiting NVIDIA from any future violations. NVIDIA answered the second amended complaint on April 16, 2015, and asserted counter-claims against Samsung for infringing four of NVIDIA’s patents and for non-infringement and invalidity of the six patents asserted in Samsung’s second amended complaint. On April 24, 2015, Samsung moved to sever NVIDIA’s counter-claims for patent infringement. On May 19, 2015, the court severed NVIDIA's counter-claims from the main action and set a trial date on those counter-claims for June 2016. On the same day, NVIDIA voluntarily dismissed its counter-claims from the case. Trial on Samsung’s claims is currently set to begin on January 11, 2016. On November 23, 2014, Samsung filed a complaint against NVIDIA, among others, in the ITC claiming infringement of four United States patents. Samsung seeks to permanently bar several products purportedly relying on these allegedly infringed patents in the United States. On December 23, 2014, the ITC initiated an investigation of Samsung’s claims. A hearing on Samsung’s patents is scheduled to begin on August 18, 2015. NVIDIA and Samsung have also challenged the validity of certain of each other’s patents through inter partes review before the United States Patent and Trademark Office. NVIDIA has filed three requests for inter partes review on three of Samsung’s asserted patents. Samsung has filed three requests for inter partes review on three patents asserted by NVIDIA. The United States Patent and Trademark Office has not yet decided whether to institute review as to any of the patents. Accounting for Loss Contingencies While there can be no assurance of favorable outcomes, we believe the claims made by other parties in the above ongoing matters are without merit and we intend to vigorously defend the actions. As of April 26, 2015, we have not recorded any accrual for contingent liabilities associated with the legal proceedings described above based on our belief that liabilities, while possible, are not probable. Further, any possible range of loss in these matters cannot be reasonably estimated at this time. We are engaged in other legal actions not described above arising in the ordinary course of its business and, while there can be no assurance of favorable outcomes, we believe that the ultimate outcome of these actions will not have a material adverse effect on our operating results, liquidity or financial position.

Commitments and Contingencies

Securities Cases

In September 2008, three putative securities class actions were filed in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California arising out of our announcements on July 2, 2008, that we would take a charge against cost of revenue to cover anticipated costs and expenses arising from a weak die/packaging material set in certain versions of our previous generation MCP and GPU products and that we were revising financial guidance for our second quarter of fiscal year 2009. The actions purport to be brought on behalf of purchasers of NVIDIA stock and assert claims for violations of Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, or the Securities Exchange Act.

On January 22, 2010, Plaintiffs filed a Consolidated Amended Class Action Complaint, asserting claims for violations of Section 10(b), Rule 10b-5, and Section 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act and seeking unspecified compensatory damages. We moved to dismiss the consolidated complaint and on October 19, 2010, Judge Seeborg granted our motion with leave to amend. On December 2, 2010, Plaintiffs filed a Second Consolidated Amended Complaint. We again moved to dismiss and on October 12, 2011, Judge Seeborg again granted our motion to dismiss, this time denying Plaintiffs leave to amend. On November 8, 2011, Plaintiffs filed a Notice of Appeal to the Ninth Circuit. Oral argument was held on January 14, 2014. On October 2, 2014, the Ninth Circuit issued an order affirming the dismissal. On October 16, 2014, Plaintiffs requested a rehearing or en banc review of the Ninth Circuit’s opinion affirming the dismissal. Plaintiffs’ request was denied on November 10, 2014. On February 9, 2015, Plaintiffs filed a petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Supreme Court. On April 15, 2015, we filed an opposition to Plaintiffs’ petition.

Patent Infringement Cases

On September 4, 2014, NVIDIA filed complaints against Qualcomm, Inc., or Qualcomm, and various Samsung entities with both the United States International Trade Commission, or ITC, and the United States District Court for the District of Delaware for alleged infringement of seven patents relating to graphics processing. In the ITC action, NVIDIA seeks to block shipments of Samsung Galaxy mobile phones, tablets and smart TVs containing Qualcomm’s Adreno, ARM’s Mali or Imagination’s PowerVR graphics architectures. On October 6, 2014, the ITC initiated an investigation of NVIDIA’s claim and the investigation is currently underway. On February 2 and 3, 2015, the court conducted a claim construction hearing on certain claim language from five of the patents at issue. The hearing on NVIDIA’s patents in the ITC action is currently scheduled to begin on June 22, 2015.

In the Delaware action, NVIDIA seeks unspecified damages for Samsung and Qualcomm’s alleged patent infringement. On October 22, 2014, Samsung and Qualcomm moved to stay the Delaware proceedings in light of the pending ITC action and NVIDIA did not oppose the motion. The court granted the motion to stay on October 23, 2014.

On November 10, 2014, Samsung filed a complaint against NVIDIA and Velocity Micro, Inc., in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, alleging that NVIDIA infringed six patents and falsely advertised that the Tegra K1 processor is the world’s fastest mobile processor. On December 19, 2014, and then on April 10, 2015, Samsung filed amended, longer complaints, but which continued to assert the same claims against NVIDIA. Samsung seeks unspecified damages and an injunction prohibiting NVIDIA from any future violations. NVIDIA answered the second amended complaint on April 16, 2015, and asserted counter-claims against Samsung for infringing four of NVIDIA’s patents and for non-infringement and invalidity of the six patents asserted in Samsung’s second amended complaint. On April 24, 2015, Samsung moved to sever NVIDIA’s counter-claims for patent infringement. On May 19, 2015, the court severed NVIDIA's counter-claims from the main action and set a trial date on those counter-claims for June 2016. On the same day, NVIDIA voluntarily dismissed its counter-claims from the case. Trial on Samsung’s claims is currently set to begin on January 11, 2016.

On November 23, 2014, Samsung filed a complaint against NVIDIA, among others, in the ITC claiming infringement of four United States patents. Samsung seeks to permanently bar several products purportedly relying on these allegedly infringed patents in the United States. On December 23, 2014, the ITC initiated an investigation of Samsung’s claims. A hearing on Samsung’s patents is scheduled to begin on August 18, 2015.

NVIDIA and Samsung have also challenged the validity of certain of each other’s patents through inter partes review before the United States Patent and Trademark Office. NVIDIA has filed three requests for inter partes review on three of Samsung’s asserted patents. Samsung has filed three requests for inter partes review on three patents asserted by NVIDIA. The United States Patent and Trademark Office has not yet decided whether to institute review as to any of the patents.

Accounting for Loss Contingencies

While there can be no assurance of favorable outcomes, we believe the claims made by other parties in the above ongoing matters are without merit and we intend to vigorously defend the actions. As of April 26, 2015, we have not recorded any accrual for contingent liabilities associated with the legal proceedings described above based on our belief that liabilities, while possible, are not probable. Further, any possible range of loss in these matters cannot be reasonably estimated at this time. We are engaged in other legal actions not described above arising in the ordinary course of its business and, while there can be no assurance of favorable outcomes, we believe that the ultimate outcome of these actions will not have a material adverse effect on our operating results, liquidity or financial position.