• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

AMD position on GPUs in a CPU socket

Edrick said:
http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/other/...ccelerators_in_CPU_Sockets_Make_No_Sense.html

Interesting since they believe that Fusion is a perfect solution. So half CPU, half GPU is great, but a full GPU in a CPU socket is not. I do not follow their logic. I think they just might be trying to down play Knights Ferry.
Click to expand...
AMD needs mass market chips. Knight's Ferry is not that. They are downplaying it, but they are also right. The masses will benefit more from faster GPUs, and beefier AVX extensions (not that I like Intel's handling of them, but c'est la vie). Even an Atom core is high-performance compared to what they have in Knight's Ferry.

AMD needs to be able to have one design, with a reliability-tweaked server variant, power-tweaked mobile variant, and give desktop CPUs the middle leftovers. Spreading that out over more than a low-power (Bobcat++) and a high-performance (BD++) chip will be too thin (it may be that even that is too thin).

NVidia has much more to be concerned with, when it comes to Knight's Ferry. Intel has hardware cache coherency and fast caches to counter Tesla's FLOPS.
 
The way they were first showing it, I got confused too. For some time I was quite sure they were moving to CPU socket using QPI.

Knights Corner isn't in any way a GPU(the texture units in original Larrabee was taken out and they enhanced DP FP throughput) so maybe AMD is referring to someone else, perhaps Nvidia?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top