Future of IGP graphics and discrete GPU's with upcoming IB!

[blackened23]

Has anyone thought about this?

Now we've all heard about intel drastically improving iGPU performance on the ivy bridge by up to 300%. To me that is exiting news, since it will up the ante against nvidia/AMD and this will make high performance PC's baseline for new computer purchases. Think about it : The average joe who buys a computer from dell will get a horribly old graphics card such as a 55xx or 66xx. Or a 3 year old nvidia card. Now if intel seriously ups the ante on integrated graphics, I could see this causing a major shift in nvidia/AMD strategy. They will no longer be able to compete effectively in the low cost market, leaving them to compete only with high end discrete graphics cards.

Lets say that the IB iGPU has performance close to lets say...a 5850. What effect do you guys think this will have on the industry? Positive or negative? Will this put nvidia/AMD gpu's out of business or will it force them to abandon the low end market and make ONLY high end discrete cards?

 

[videopho]

If your theory holds true it will then be bad news for hi end users like us.
prices will skyrocket since hi end cards will not be produced in masses.
Think, Toyota has to sell Lexus line for living, not its bread & butter's: Corolla or Camry.

 

[Vesku]

Unless they are sandbagging, Intel has given Llano level as the general graphics tier IB will be competing in. Wouldn't surprise me if the fastest HD4000 did a bit better than that disregarding Image Quality, but I think we are at least a year away from IGP completely taking over the <$70ish discrete graphics market.

 

[Edrick]

Lets say that the IB iGPU has performance close to lets say...a 5850. What effect do you guys think this will have on the industry? Positive or negative? Will this put nvidia/AMD gpu's out of business or will it force them to abandon the low end market and make ONLY high end discrete cards?

No matter how good Intel's IGP gets, they can only fit so much on a CPU with a TDP of 95W. Also take into account that the DDR3 dual channel memory will be a bottleneck for IGPs.

AMD/Nvidia have 300W to play with and almost unlimited memory bandwidth. They have the flexability to use newer/faster RAM technologies.

So just as IB's great IGP rolls out with 300% improvement, as will AMD/Nvidia's 28nm GPU which should really be a big improvement (+50%)over current generations. Sure the real low end cards will take a hit, but the bread and butter mainstream/high end cards will still hold their status in the market.

 

[Anarchist420]

No matter how good Intel's IGP gets, they can only fit so much on a CPU with a TDP of 95W. Also take into account that the DDR3 dual channel memory will be a bottleneck for IGPs.

AMD/Nvidia have 300W to play with and almost unlimited memory bandwidth. They have the flexability to use newer/faster RAM technologies.

So just as IB's great IGP rolls out with 300&#37; improvement, as will AMD/Nvidia's 28nm GPU which should really be a big improvement (+50%)over current generations. Sure the real low end cards will take a hit, but the bread and butter mainstream/high end cards will still hold their status in the market.

I agree, I personally don't think intel is going in the right direction. They need to create a unique technology or use an existing one like MoSys 1T-SRAM or super high bandwidth eDRAM like the Xbox 720 is expected to use. They could also load it with SRAM cache which would reduce the bandwidth issue, but then the die would be to large and power consumption too high.

AVX is actually very weak compared to nvidia's GPUs, but if they could somehow widen the vector units to 1 gbit each (in addition to being able to get 64 bit floating point and integer precision with reasonable performance), get more memory bandwidth, and just add Texture addressing and filtering units, then they could just do the blending and depth ops in software.

24 IB cores @ 3.5 GHz (20 being used in graphics mode) with 1024 bit wide vector units and texture units would be faster than adding 16 ROPs at 1GHz onto the die if they found a way to get more bandwidth or less latency. However, emulated blending and depth would increase bandwidth needs even more (there would no longer be lossless color+z compression), but that doesn't mean that there aren't ways around DDR3 not providing enough bandwidth.

 

[gevorg]

No matter how good Intel's IGP gets, they can only fit so much on a CPU with a TDP of 95W. Also take into account that the DDR3 dual channel memory will be a bottleneck for IGPs.

AMD/Nvidia have 300W to play with and almost unlimited memory bandwidth. They have the flexability to use newer/faster RAM technologies.

Sure, but who needs 300watts of GPU power when most modern games are just console ports?... oh yeah, the niche eyefinity crowd! :awe:

 

[Arkadrel]

Has anyone thought about this?

Now we've all heard about intel drastically improving iGPU performance on the ivy bridge by up to 300&#37;. To me that is exiting news, since it will up the ante against nvidia/AMD and this will make high performance PC's baseline for new computer purchases. Think about it : The average joe who buys a computer from dell will get a horribly old graphics card such as a 55xx or 66xx. Or a 3 year old nvidia card. Now if intel seriously ups the ante on integrated graphics, I could see this causing a major shift in nvidia/AMD strategy. They will no longer be able to compete effectively in the low cost market, leaving them to compete only with high end discrete graphics cards.

Lets say that the IB iGPU has performance close to lets say...a 5850. What effect do you guys think this will have on the industry? Positive or negative? Will this put nvidia/AMD gpu's out of business or will it force them to abandon the low end market and make ONLY high end discrete cards?

You must be smokeing some high quality weed
Intel will be lucky if they can get the IGP to match a 5570 in performance.

Ivy Bridge performance for GPU has been leaked.
Thats where the 300% figour is from, its 3x as fast as the HD2000 is.

Notice the HD2000 its 3x as fast as, not the HD3000 (the fastest IGP intel has).

Here you see a Core I3 2100 with a HD2000 IGP, getting 20.5 fps.

300% increase would turn 20.5 fps ---> 61,5 fps.

You see the AMD 5570 discrete card getting over 103 fps.

Meaning Ivy bridge will probably be close to a 5550-5570 in performance.
(Llano IGP is most likely gonna be faster than Ivy Bridge IGP)

 

[Anarchist420]

Sure, but who needs 300watts of GPU power when most modern games are just console ports?... oh yeah, the niche eyefinity crowd! :awe:

I agree with you for the most part. 300W would really only be necessary (IMO) if they used more/faster/double extended precision shaders (and more cache/faster memory controllers) to emulate the back buffer. 24 gpixels/sec (32 ROPs @ 750 MHz) is fast enough for blending.

 

[Anarchist420]

You must be smokeing some high quality weed
Intel will be lucky if they can get the IGP to match a 5570 in performance.

Ivy Bridge performance for GPU has been leaked.
Thats where the 300% figour is from, its 3x as fast as the HD2000 is.

Notice the HD2000 its 3x as fast as, not the HD3000 (the fastest IGP intel has).

Here you see a Core I3 2100 with a HD2000 IGP, getting 20.5 fps.

300% increase would turn 20.5 fps ---> 61,5 fps.

You see the AMD 5570 discrete card getting over 103 fps.

Meaning Ivy bridge will probably be close to a 5550-5570 in performance.
(Llano IGP is most likely gonna be faster than Ivy Bridge IGP)

It would be 4x faster since it's 300% faster. But your point that it's not up to snuff is well-taken.

 

[Edrick]

Sure, but who needs 300watts of GPU power when most modern games are just console ports?... oh yeah, the niche eyefinity crowd!

You are missing the point. Intel has 95W available which needs to cover 2-4 CPU cores AND the IGP. AMD/Nvidia have up to 300W for just GPU and memory (and fan). No matter how good Intel can make an IGP, and I believe Haswell's IGP will be quite good, Nvidia and AMD will always have an upper hand in graphics.

The question of if we will need something better than an Intel IGP in 3-5 years is another debate altogether.

 

[taltamir]

It would be 4x faster since it's 300% faster. But your point that it's not up to snuff is well-taken.

If we want to nitpick, its 4x the speed... 3x faster. The word faster indicates the difference.
120MPH is 60 MPH faster then 60 MPH... not 120MPH faster then 60MPH.

 

[ElFenix]

If we want to nitpick, its 4x the speed... 3x faster. The word faster indicates the difference.
120MPH is 60 MPH faster then 60 MPH... not 120MPH faster then 60MPH.

who wants to bet the marketing wonk who put that number out there didn't think about it that much so it's actually (HD2000*3) performance?

 

[DaveSimmons]

300&#37; faster (= 4x) or 300% of the performance (= 3x) of HD2000 is still only good for light gaming at low resolutions.

 

[Lonyo]

Has anyone thought about this?

Now we've all heard about intel drastically improving iGPU performance on the ivy bridge by up to 300%. To me that is exiting news, since it will up the ante against nvidia/AMD and this will make high performance PC's baseline for new computer purchases. Think about it : The average joe who buys a computer from dell will get a horribly old graphics card such as a 55xx or 66xx. Or a 3 year old nvidia card. Now if intel seriously ups the ante on integrated graphics, I could see this causing a major shift in nvidia/AMD strategy. They will no longer be able to compete effectively in the low cost market, leaving them to compete only with high end discrete graphics cards.

Lets say that the IB iGPU has performance close to lets say...a 5850. What effect do you guys think this will have on the industry? Positive or negative? Will this put nvidia/AMD gpu's out of business or will it force them to abandon the low end market and make ONLY high end discrete cards?

AMD kind of tries to compete with Intel in CPUs and uses their low end products in their own CPUs (sometimes).
NV makes most of its profits (profits) from the higher end GPUs used in non-PC contexts, such as HPC and Workstation systems.

Both companies have already seen the writing on the wall for low end discrete cards for a while (YEARS), and have their own 'coping' mechanisms. It's one reason NV is pushing GPU compute hard, and one reason AMD bought ATI.

 

[happy medium]

A typical 15 inch 1366x768 notebook would easily play more modern games at low/ med settings ,with 4x the power of a hd2000.

 

[Puppies04]

Personally I just wish AMD and Intel would stop wasting money on developing faster integrated graphics and get on with making me an 8ghz quad with 50&#37; better IPC than SB but I guess they will go where ever the money is and as I am currently forced to buy a CPU with integrated graphics then completly ignore it by fitting a discrete GPU they make their money either way.

 

[Puppies04]

A typical 15 inch 1366x768 notebook would easily play more modern games at low/ med settings ,with 4x the power of a hd2000.

Oh definatly.

 

[XX55XX]

Personally I just wish AMD and Intel would stop wasting money on developing faster integrated graphics and get on with making me an 8ghz quad with 50% better IPC than SB but I guess they will go where ever the money is and as I am currently forced to buy a CPU with integrated graphics then completly ignore it by fitting a discrete GPU they make their money either way.

Is that what Sandy Bridge E is for, then? For those enthusiasts who only want raw CPU power and nothing else?

 

[taltamir]

300% faster (= 4x) or 300% of the performance (= 3x) of HD2000 is still only good for light gaming at low resolutions.

true, its wonderful improvement...
But its not 6850

who wants to bet the marketing wonk who put that number out there didn't think about it that much so it's actually (HD2000*3) performance?

I bet you are right ...
I bet that person doesn't even know the difference between percent and percentage point.

 

[Blitzvogel]

*In theory* the full 400 SP Llano should match Redwood at the same clock speed, but b/w says otherwise so I tend to consider Llano about 2/3 the potential as any Redwood part at best. IB will encounter this wall too, so even if IB was 3 or 4x the capabilities of the HD3000, it would probably be at a dead heat with Llano.

However, haven't rumors pointed to IB's top end HD4000 being about 60&#37; faster than HD3000? That would only put it in dedicated Radeon 6450/Geforce 32/48 Cuda Core GPU territory.

 

[Olikan]

However, haven't rumors pointed to IB's top end HD4000 being about 60% faster than HD3000? That would only put it in dedicated Radeon 6450/Geforce 32/48 Cuda Core GPU territory.

rumors point that it's even less than 60%. The x4 performance jump is just at syntetic benchmarks....cofcof.nvidia.cofcof

http://forum.beyond3d.com/showpost.php?p=1584795&postcount=109

 

[TemjinGold]

You are missing the point. Intel has 95W available which needs to cover 2-4 CPU cores AND the IGP. AMD/Nvidia have up to 300W for just GPU and memory (and fan). No matter how good Intel can make an IGP, and I believe Haswell's IGP will be quite good, Nvidia and AMD will always have an upper hand in graphics.

The question of if we will need something better than an Intel IGP in 3-5 years is another debate altogether.

Here's the problem: Intel doesn't NEED to make their IGP that fast. If they can make it fast enough so that the average non-gamer, non-video editor, etc. can do everything they could possibly need with IGP, then nVidia and AMD will lose their bread and butter low end lines.

 

[taltamir]

Here's the problem: Intel doesn't NEED to make their IGP that fast. If they can make it fast enough so that the average non-gamer, non-video editor, etc. can do everything they could possibly need with IGP, then nVidia and AMD will lose their bread and butter low end lines.

non gamers non video editors can do everything they need with an intel IGP from 5 years ago.

The low end lines are only for low end gaming.

The mid range lines are the bread and butter of those companies.

The mid range lines are for gamers and video editors.

 

[OS]

the thermal constraint and budget can be worked around if intel keeps pulling ahead on their manufacturing process.

for memory bandwidth, i think intel is up to quad channel memory now on SB-E, and could possibly be added to IGPs.

high end will still have a market for the forseeable future, but even midrange discrete graphics could possibly have their marketshare eaten away by IGPs in say two more IGP generations.

 

[Denithor]

No matter how good Intel's IGP gets, they can only fit so much on a CPU with a TDP of 95W. Also take into account that the DDR3 dual channel memory will be a bottleneck for IGPs.

AMD/Nvidia have 300W to play with and almost unlimited memory bandwidth. They have the flexability to use newer/faster RAM technologies.

So just as IB's great IGP rolls out with 300% improvement, as will AMD/Nvidia's 28nm GPU which should really be a big improvement (+50%)over current generations. Sure the real low end cards will take a hit, but the bread and butter mainstream/high end cards will still hold their status in the market.

It's even worse when you remember that IB will have a max TDP of 77W for the top-tier parts...