-If it takes Icelake and 10nm to be on par with Ryzen's GPU, then Intel is seriously behind AMD in graphics power efficiency. They are claiming 2x improvement in Tigerlake with Gen 12, meaning they are expecting great improvements in that generation.
-I'm expecting Tigerlake U's iGPU to increase clocks, not decrease. If I were to guess, 1.3-1.4GHz for the LP parts.
Meanwhile despite the fact that they've reported that mobile Ice Lake parts entered mass production almost a quarter ago, we still have zero released laptops based on this uArch and there are just one vendor which has formally announced ICL laptops (Dell). HP results have leaked but no announcement has been made.
Well, I am certainly interested in whether 10 nm really improves the performance in laptops. After what, 4 years, one would hope so, but TBH, I am not expecting much advance in cpu performance. GPU maybe, but who cares, really? Maybe with an improvement in IPC and if it uses less power, they can maintain performance longer on sustained loads.It's not so much useless as it is extremely low-yield. Most of us won't be able to buy 10nm Intel products for awhile due to limited availability.
Well, I am certainly interested in whether 10 nm really improves the performance in laptops. After what, 4 years, one would hope so, but TBH, I am not expecting much advance in cpu performance. GPU maybe, but who cares, really? Maybe with an improvement in IPC and if it uses less power, they can maintain performance longer on sustained loads.
The only 14nm +10nm gfx Rocket Lake is placed in the H/G segment. The U-series comes with 14nm graphics, The entire desktop lineup isn't even a chiplet, it's plain 14nm, this is for sure not extremely small volume. 32 EUs for GT1 must be something Gen11 based. Obviously Gen11 can be ported to 14nm.
Any thoughts for Gen12 HP DG2? 512= 512 EUs???
; DG2 HW
iDG2HP512 = "Intel(R) UHD Graphics, Gen12 HP DG2"
iDG2HP256 = "Intel(R) UHD Graphics, Gen12 HP DG2"
iDG2HP128 = "Intel(R) UHD Graphics, Gen12 HP DG2"
This is a bit too simple and overdramatic when you say seriously behind. You have to keep in mind that the 64 EU GPU in Icelake-U is only 40mm² big which means Intels area investment into the GPU is still really low compared to AMD for the Icelake generation, therefore the RAW speed on paper is higher for Ryzen Vega.
And 96 EUs beside some other overhauls like 16 EUs per subslice.
Don't know if this really means anything but Raja Koduri liked this tweet...
Perhaps hinting at something bigger and more powerful?
If 512 EU is 260mm2 then 1024 EU at 520 mm2?
And how many EUs could the GPU be if the cache, display/media and memory controllers were removed from the die and positioned underneath via Foveros?
I'm doubtful whether a 200W+ GPU will have any form of 3D integration, because they'll have serious thermal issues.
They would need some kind of active heat pump to remove heat from various layers of the stack and move it to the cooling solution.
3D integration = Foveros?
They would need some kind of active heat pump to remove heat from various layers of the stack and move it to the cooling solution.
That's why I think its crazy that desktops chips are all aiming for 5GHz.
Say in the distant feature we get the microfluidic cooling or whatever exotic things are needed to get them higher.
Then what?
Advanced packaging solutions will enable Intel to continue exponential scaling in computing density by extending transistor density to the third dimension.
So even if they have issues in 10nm, per mm2 their dGPU might be easier to produce than their server CPU.
That would either need a huge boost in the subslice section or make EUs perform less.
Intel moved from 12EUs per subslice to 8EUs in Ivy Bridge, which boosted available resources by 50%.
It could be a dual subslice setup.
RKLD
OpenGL_Gen12.Copy_DS
Rocket Lake could be Gen 12 based, the driver asks for Gen12 instead Gen11.
Maybe. But remember Cannonlake? Intel disabled the iGPU on every die.
...
Ophir: "I actually have a question for you [the journalist] – why do you think we need to have desktop on 10nm?"
You could think that maybe the board of directors have drunk too much Kool-Aid and they still believe 14nm+++++ suffices (despite the fact that they are seriously lacking the capacity to even fulfill their current demand in 14nm CPUs which is why they've reverted to 22nm for some of their products) but hearing that from a senior principle engineer? I'm appalled.
Some other things that he's saying are either completely false or pretentious as well. For instance, Intel themselves admitted that Ice Lake was designed for the 10nm node, so without a working 10nm node there will be no new faster/better/more efficient uArchs and Intel has basically given up on progress. WTF??
Moving the cache off die would be disastrous for GPU performance.If 512 EU is 260mm2 then 1024 EU at 520 mm2?
And how many EUs could the GPU be if the cache, display/media and memory controllers were removed from the die and positioned underneath via Foveros?
This is f2f 3D.Moving the cache off die would be disastrous for GPU performance.
Ok, this is interesting. I read this paper: http://www.gtcad.gatech.edu/www/papers/p90-ku.pdf to help me come up to speed on this.This is f2f 3D.
You can do tons of fun stuff just like that.