Intel Iris & Iris Pro Graphics: Haswell GT3/GT3e Gets a Brand

[NTMBK]

The market crashed because x86 crashed. dGPUs are tied to the x86 market. When OEMs selling less x86 PCs they are selling less dGPU, too.
On the other hand nVidia's revenue increased last year in Q3 and Q4 with a declining x86 market.

Did you actually read that quote above? "Almost 37.3 million desktop PCs shipped worldwide in the quarter, an increase of 2.7% compared to the previous quarter" and "Total AIB shipments decreased this quarter, from the previous quarter by 17.3% to 14.5 million units". Desktop sales were UP. Discrete GPU sales were DOWN. Your argument is bogus.

We hearing this since Sandy Bridge. And nothing happend. Right now the biggest threat to dGPUs is ARM and the whole smartphone and tablet market.

So a 17% fall in shipments is nothing?

 

[Silverforce11]

680 sold out because the production was terrible...

As for pricing- look in VC&G. Lots and lots of users are complaining that Titan is just too expensive for them, and they're not going near it. Now extrapolate that to a future where low and mid range cards are dead, and every dGPU costs the same as a Titan. How many of us, tech enthusiasts, are going to go for that?

Why would mainstream.. let alone mid-range cards will be dead? Are you kidding me, that somehow Intel with its tiny dies devoted to the iGPU is going to threaten a 150 (mainstream)-300mm2 (mid-range) discrete die with its own dedicated fast vram in the GB quantities??

 

[blackened23]

Did you actually read that quote above? "Almost 37.3 million desktop PCs shipped worldwide in the quarter, an increase of 2.7% compared to the previous quarter" and "Total AIB shipments decreased this quarter, from the previous quarter by 17.3% to 14.5 million units". Desktop sales were UP. Discrete GPU sales were DOWN. Your argument is bogus.




So a 17% year on year fall in shipments is nothing?

I'm not trying to be rude and i'm not saying this in a derogatory manner. But look at who posted it. He doesn't have an objective opinion on anything that may involve nvidia, and since this discussion mentions them from time to time, you know what the inevitable response will be.

 

[Arkadrel]

680 sold out because the production was terrible...

As for pricing- look in VC&G. Lots and lots of users are complaining that Titan is just too expensive for them, and they're not going near it. Now extrapolate that to a future where low and mid range cards are dead, and every dGPU costs the same as a Titan. How many of us, tech enthusiasts, are going to go for that?

Not very many.

That ll mean the "graphics" race will be slowing down alot, because most users will be gameing on a IGP.
With the oddball richman, that still has the GTX TITAN of that time.

OR

PC gameing dies completely.
Market will shrink, until game developers just end up ignoreing it.
Consols are where the games will be.


I think the option where games are still made for PC, but designed at IGP performance levels,
is the better of the 2 options.


Edit:

2D graphics still rock:
(Project Eternity (Baldurs gate 3)):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=AUleDEFkUtE

 

[Silverforce11]

Not very many.

That ll mean the "graphics" race will be slowing down alot, because most users will be gameing on a IGP.
With the oddball richman, that still has the GTX TITAN of that time.

OR

PC gameing dies completely.
Market will shrink, until game developers just end up ignoreing it.
Consols are where the games will be.

Its like climate change modelling.. all these assumptions, ignoring reality.

"Let's assume mid-range GPUs will die off..." yeah, fancy that. All of a sudden, next-gen games will just use as much resources as current games, they are NOT ALLOWED to push the boundaries. THEY MUST CONFORM!

 

[SiliconWars]

Did you actually read that quote above? "Almost 37.3 million desktop PCs shipped worldwide in the quarter, an increase of 2.7% compared to the previous quarter" and "Total AIB shipments decreased this quarter, from the previous quarter by 17.3% to 14.5 million units". Desktop sales were UP. Discrete GPU sales were DOWN. Your argument is bogus.

Peddie often get it wrong and in this case how can it be right when both Intel and AMD had lost cpu revenue last quarter? There is no chance that shipments of desktops were up vs last year Q4.

 

[mrmt]

The market crashed because x86 crashed. dGPUs are tied to the x86 market. When OEMs selling less x86 PCs they are selling less dGPU, too.
On the other hand nVidia's revenue increased last year in Q3 and Q4 with a declining x86 market.

The x86 market crashed? I didn't see that from Intel revenues. I saw the market shrinking, not crashing. The only thing crashing in the x86 market was AMD, but not the overall market.

They are not slowing down their R&D. Both waiting for 20nm. There is no reason to do the same thing again. It costs only money. Right now they are doing other things. For example nVidia designed a new low power dGPU (GK208).

They are not slowing down? So why didn't they launch an architectural refresh in the same node, like they did in the previous generations?

BTW: nVidia's R&D in discrete GPUs is on a all time high with $900 millions this year.

This isn't dGPU R&D, this is the GPU for the entire company. Everything including Tegra and Shield. Given that AMD wants Tegra revenues to go up big time, the bulk of the R&D surely isn't on their GPU.

Wow, we are going back to the good old days: Software graphics provided by a CPU. :awe:

Not that, but the kind of calculation made by the dGPU in professional applications can be made by the CPU with AVX2. As this is included in the CPU, and you need a CPU to drive your workstation, at least a portion of the dGPU Quadro users won't upgrade in the next round, further eroding Nvidia revenues.

 

[blackened23]

Silverforce, You live in some sort of strange alternate reality where gaming drives 100% of computing sales. I'm afraid that isn't the case. If it were, nobody would buy an ipad or macbook. I'm a gamer too but this is the wrong angle from which to develop a counter-argument.

Look, nobody is saying this will happen next week. But if you look at the trends in sales, one of two things can happen. Discrete costs will either prohibitively high, or AMD/nvidia will be forced out of that market due to intel encroaching on their low end / mid range territory. Maybe not this year, or next. But trends indicate that it will happen.

 

[NTMBK]

Not very many.

That ll mean the "graphics" race will be slowing down alot, because most users will be gameing on a IGP.
With the oddball richman, that still has the GTX TITAN of that time.

OR

PC gameing dies completely.
Market will shrink, until game developers just end up ignoreing it.
Consols are where the games will be.


I think the option where games are still made for PC, but designed at IGP performance levels,
is the better of the 2 options.


Edit:

2D graphics still rock:
(Project Eternity (Baldurs gate 3)):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=AUleDEFkUtE

Yeah, I certainly think the "graphics race slowing" is the more likely of the two. In my opinion the recent PC resurgence is due to it being an open platform that is easy to release games for with low development costs, not because of PC MASTER RACE graphics supremacy. As long as a top end iGPU can handle console ports, PC gaming will be fine.

 

[sontin]

Did you actually read that quote above? "Almost 37.3 million desktop PCs shipped worldwide in the quarter, an increase of 2.7% compared to the previous quarter" and "Total AIB shipments decreased this quarter, from the previous quarter by 17.3% to 14.5 million units". Desktop sales were UP. Discrete GPU sales were DOWN. Your argument is bogus.

So a 17% year on year fall in shipments is nothing?

Maybe you should read the article:

Year to year for the quarter the market decreased 10%. Shipments decreased to 14.5 million units, down 1.6 million units from this quarter last year. The desktop AIB segments decreased in the low end, which we think is to be expected as embedded graphics processors satisfy the requirements of a market with no new or interesting applications or games—as long as Moore’s Law is working and the software developers are complacent, the embedded processors will do well.

In Q1 Intel sold 7% less CPUs and AMD 40%. The low-end market is declining and that effects the low end dGPU market, too.
nVidia increased revenue because they increased the prices of their GPU. Something Intel will do in the future, too.

 

[mrmt]

Peddie often get it wrong and in this case how can it be right when both Intel and AMD had lost cpu revenue last quarter? There is no chance that shipments of desktops were up vs last year Q4.

Just look at what Nvidia did with their GPU business. When they were betting the farm on GPGPU. They started to report their PSB revenues alone, and they showed a nice growth in the last few years. Now that PSB revenues are stagnating, and that GPU revenues are also stagnating, they folded the two business lines into one on their financial reports.

AMD GPU business has become a joke. From a 600MM business they are almost down to half of this value. And they simply didn't make any money at all on it.

You may disagree with JPR numbers, but the downward trend is there for everyone to see.

 

[SiliconWars]

I agree dGPU is going down but it is mostly to do with desktop sales going down and an increase in APU's. I disagree that desktop sales are going up because that doesn't make any sense.

 

[ShintaiDK]

680 sold out because the production was terrible...

As for pricing- look in VC&G. Lots and lots of users are complaining that Titan is just too expensive for them, and they're not going near it. Now extrapolate that to a future where low and mid range cards are dead, and every dGPU costs the same as a Titan. How many of us, tech enthusiasts, are going to go for that?

Thats just not right. The 680 was selling like hotcakes and they was ripped from the shelves. The steam numbers during the sale also skyrocketted past AMDs numbers for all the previous time.

And I havent seen much with problems compared to the normal.

The only cards in trouble of IGPs now is lowend/value segment.

 

[Blitzvogel]

Yeah, I certainly think the "graphics race slowing" is the more likely of the two. In my opinion the recent PC resurgence is due to it being an open platform that is easy to release games for with low development costs, not because of PC MASTER RACE graphics supremacy. As long as a top end iGPU can handle console ports, PC gaming will be fine.

Yeah, but those top end iGPUs on Nvidia's end will require you to buy the top end CPUs to get them. Anyone buying a top end GPU on desktop would probably be someone wanting a high end dedicated graphics card.

The new generation of consoles and new games I think will push the entire industry forward some.

 

[MightyMalus]

What drives GPU sells? Games, computation and displays(resolution).

Games aren't pushing the boundaries, they are ports. And Displays aren't either, unless its niche Professional Screens or some Apple "retina" screen.

With the cap of 1080p resolutions on consoles this coming generation. I wouldn't be surprised if a high end iGPU in Q42014/Q12015 runs those ports "console perfect".

In a way, everything else, is what's giving so much strength to the iGPU's.

The new generation of consoles and new games I think will push the entire industry forward some.

IMO, if they increase the importance of accurate computations(not estimates) in games, we will see much more value for the cards.

 

[SiliconWars]

Thats just not right. The 680 was selling like hotcakes and they was ripped from the shelves. The steam numbers during the sale also skyrocketted past AMDs numbers for all the previous time.

http://store.steampowered.com/hwsurvey/videocard/

To put it into perspective, the 680 has not outsold the 7970 by more than 2-1. That surprised me as I thought it would be closer to 3-1.

 

[sontin]

The x86 market crashed? I didn't see that from Intel revenues. I saw the market shrinking, not crashing. The only thing crashing in the x86 market was AMD, but not the overall market.

But i thought we talking about selling cpus and not revenue?

They are not slowing down? So why didn't they launch an architectural refresh in the same node, like they did in the previous generations?

Because there is no reason to do it. There is no new process or problems with the architecture.

This isn't dGPU R&D, this is the GPU for the entire company. Everything including Tegra and Shield. Given that AMD wants Tegra revenues to go up big time, the bulk of the R&D surely isn't on their GPU.

Then i guess you should read more about nVidia:
Slide 14: http://phx.corporate-ir.net/External.File?item=UGFyZW50SUQ9MTc5NzUyfENoaWxkSUQ9LTF8VHlwZT0z&t=1

Not that, but the kind of calculation made by the dGPU in professional applications can be made by the CPU with AVX2. As this is included in the CPU, and you need a CPU to drive your workstation, at least a portion of the dGPU Quadro users won't upgrade in the next round, further eroding Nvidia revenues.

People who using Quadro cards need them to accelerate their graphics workload. They don't stop spending money if there is something which give them an advantage.
I think you talking about the HPC market. And i think it's clear that CPUs are not the only way to go to get more performance.
BTW: nVidia's Project Denver give them the opportunity to going away from x86 and Intel. Providing the whole package is a huge step forward.

 

[AtenRa]

Intel has over-taken the $150-$250 GPU territory? Intel doesn't even scratch the paint on cards like the gtx660/ti or 78xx.

Again, you and other market surveyors have not broken down the decline of PC sales into categories. The mass market was never driven by gamers with $1000 GPUs, never said it was.

The mass market is already driven by crap PC boxes without any discrete at all, given that regular GPU surveys have Intel as 2/3 of the GPU brands. All it did is kill off $50-75 discrete, which was rubbish to begin with and was just included for the sake of pamphlets having a tick on "2GB video memory!!"..

So back to the point, unless you feel that the numbers of gamers devoted to PC gaming is going to significantly drop going forward, there's no threat at all to mainstream, midrange or highend discrete for a long time.

Yeap, sub $100 Discrete was more than 50% of the total GPU sales. They are not saling as much $30-50 crap GPUs anymore.
$100+ discrete is blooming and no iGPU can touch it. AMD may loosing total Discrete GPU market share but they have a very strong $100-200 market stronghold.

For once again, iGPU will never touch the $100+ Discrete GPUs unless AMD and Intel will release a 200+W APUs.

 

[AtenRa]

Whats the die size of a 3820 vs 3770 or 2700?

If die sizes was so important,. Why dont a FX chip cost 2000$? Or why are GPUs not higher priced?

The wafer cost in itself is peanuts.

Its the same nonsense we heard for years in the GPU area until the tables reversed there.

3820 is on 32nm, a much cheaper process than 22nm. Not only that, 3820 uses the same die as higher priced XEONs. But i thought you knew that

 

[Blitzvogel]

What drives GPU sells? Games, computation and displays(resolution).

Games aren't pushing the boundaries, they are ports. And Displays aren't either, unless its niche Professional Screens or some Apple "retina" screen.

With the cap of 1080p resolutions on consoles this coming generation. I wouldn't be surprised if a high end iGPU in Q42014/Q12015 runs those ports "console perfect".

In a way, everything else, is what's giving so much strength to the iGPU's.

IMO, if they increase the importance of accurate computations(not estimates) in games, we will see much more value for the cards.

GT3e doesn't come close to the PS4 though. Even if Intel makes yearly doubling of their graphics power, it would take 3 years before I'd expect any Intel IGP to deliver reasonably comparable visuals. That means increasing bandwidth and perhaps cache and possibly taking more x86 die space, and this would be on a top end CPU. The CPU is what high end buyers want, because they want a dedicated graphics card. Mobile Intel CPUs should definitely get an integrated iGPU, the dual cores especially. But for a top end, perhaps they could stack the GPU and cache on top, so it's easily omitted and a user has the option of not paying for it.

 

[ShintaiDK]

3820 is on 32nm, a much cheaper process than 22nm. Not only that, 3820 uses the same die as higher priced XEONs. But i thought you knew that

Talking about knowledge. Why dont you get your facts straight and stop doing selective reading to try and argue for your misguided visions?

Let me ask you again, what costed more. The 3820 or the 2700? What is the diesize of the 2?

Can we then put the moronic BS about diesizes and direct consumer cost to rest?

If diesize cost was so essential. Then that turd you keep promoting should cost a fortune.

 

[AtenRa]

Did you actually read that quote above? "Almost 37.3 million desktop PCs shipped worldwide in the quarter, an increase of 2.7% compared to the previous quarter" and "Total AIB shipments decreased this quarter, from the previous quarter by 17.3% to 14.5 million units". Desktop sales were UP. Discrete GPU sales were DOWN. Your argument is bogus.

LowEnd sub $100 Discrete GPUs are loosing ground. Cards like HD6450 and GT210/220 are not selling millions of units like they used to be. Thats the reson that the dGPU market is shrinking.

So, more PCs may have been shiped but the majority of those low end PCs now using iGPUs and not those Low End sub $100 dGPUs as was happening before.

You can clearly see this because AMD havent introduced a new sub $100 GCN graphics Card. Every AMD 28nm GCN card is at above the $100 mark, lowest is the HD7750 at $105(Launched price).

 

[NTMBK]

LowEnd sub $100 Discrete GPUs are loosing ground. Cards like HD6450 and GT210/220 are not selling millions of units like they used to be. Thats the reson that the dGPU market is shrinking.

So, more PCs may have been shiped but the majority of those low end PCs now using iGPUs and not those Low End sub $100 dGPUs as was happening before.

You can clearly see this because AMD havent introduced a new sub $100 GCN graphics Card. Every AMD 28nm GCN card is at above the $100 mark, lowest is the HD7750 at $105(Launched price).

Yes, and this can be entirely attributed to the improved iGPUs in Sandy Bridge, Ivy Bridge, Llano and Trinity. So extrapolate from there, what happens to the next segment up (lets say $100 to $150) when Intel and AMD bring out their even more powerful next gen APUs?

 

[sontin]

nVidia offsets the missing low-end with Tegra. Not even that they have much higher margins than with a low end card.

 

[NTMBK]

nVidia offsets the missing low-end with Tegra. Not even that they have much higher margins than with a low end card.

Yes, the large amount of money that they are losing with Tegra is definitely going to replace the income from low end dGPUs...