• 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.

Intel is making discrete graphics...

S

SickBeast

Lifer
Inquirer link

There you have it. I'm surprised noone else has posted about this yet; it's big news if true (likely true IMO).

I'm actually curious as to what Matrox has been up to all these years. :beer:
 
haha who cares really? They hired bunch of engineers and want to compete from scratch with decades of R & D by nVidia and ATi... intel is going to fail because no way in world they can compete with that two, and then intel will pass the cost of failure to consumers, us.
 
Originally posted by: postmortemIA
haha who cares really? They hired bunch of engineers and want to compete from scratch with decades of R & D by nVidia and ATi... intel is going to fail because no way in world they can compete with that two, and then intel will pass the cost of failure to consumers, us.
Click to expand...
You're crazy. Intel is a behemoth with tons of experince in both manufacturing and CPU design. CPUs are more complex than GPUs from an engineering point of view. Not only that, but intel has their previous integrated graphics cores to use as a basis, some of which had a pretty decent DX9 featureset (they were just slow because they were integrated with very few pipelines, and had to use the system memory).

I don't think it will take more than a year or two for intel to crank out a competetive product, even if they have trouble obtaining good engineers to help them (which shouldn't be hard at all, especialy if they outsource to the right places and/or bring in some skilled immigrant labour from overseas).
 
It is the opposite, the graphics cards have higher processing power and constant innovation (new cores come every 6-9 months)

As for intel innovation, C2D is Pentium III Coppermine alike core, with many tweaks of course, but nevertheless. And AMD Athlon 64 series core has been around for 3-4 yrs now...

No matter how much money intel invests, they cannot overcome difference in technology that ATi and nVidia possess. It is like saying technological backward nation can become global leader in one year.

This move is more a fear from AMD, just in case AMD pulls something like fusion CPU-GPU, so intel is not far behind.
 
Originally posted by: postmortemIA
It is the opposite, the graphics cards have higher processing power and constant innovation (new cores come every 6-9 months)

As for intel innovation, C2D is Pentium III Coppermine alike core, with many tweaks of course, but nevertheless. And AMD Athlon 64 series core has been around for 3-4 yrs now...

No matter how much money intel invests, they cannot overcome difference in technology that ATi and nVidia possess. It is like saying technological backward nation can become global leader in one year.

This move is more a fear from AMD, just in case AMD pulls something like fusion CPU-GPU, so intel is not far behind.
Click to expand...
Like I said, intel has been making graphics chips for about as long as ATI has, and actually has been making them alot longer than nVidia has. I'm pretty sure that they had DX10 integrated graphics in the works, and again, with graphics chips once you have the core feature set covered, they're very scalable; they can just add on tons of pipelines, increase the memory bus, etc., and the chip will usually scale much better than a CPU would (again, because they tend to be "simpler", although with DX10 they are approaching CPU-like complexity).

If you look at nVidia as an upstart with the TNT2 and Geforce cards, they did amazingly well in a short period of time, and pretty much took over the market completely. Intel should never be doubted or second-guessed, as AMD recently learned with the C2D.

The C2D is miles ahead of a P3, and is far more advanced in many ways.

Just because CPU designs are updated every 3-4 years in terms of a major product line refresh, it doesn't mean much to this discussion.

I'm interested to see what intel can crank out in terms of a graphics core using their advanced fab processes. :beer:
 
Originally posted by: postmortemIA
haha who cares really? They hired bunch of engineers and want to compete from scratch with decades of R & D by nVidia and ATi... intel is going to fail because no way in world they can compete with that two, and then intel will pass the cost of failure to consumers, us.
Click to expand...

Size matters. Intel can spend its way out of problems in ways AMD/ATI and NV can't. I'd never bet against them.
 
They have experience with the CPU side of things, but you cant assume that intel will dominate the high end GPU market because theyre intel. Remember the i740? Intel has entered the graphics arena 3 times to my knowledge. (or was it 2?) and each time they failed and pulled out. Just look at theyre integrated solutions compared to its competitors, its technically inferior. (yet they sell more than its competition but that wasnt my point).

GPUs and CPUs are two completely different things. You cant compare the two, but IMO GPUs are more complex than a CPU. On the GPU front, GPUs are constantly changing, tweaking is done through refreshes, and it becomes more and more complex as new technology is added time after time. For CPUs, these architecture mostly go through process shrinks that allow for higher clocks while the architecture remains largely the same for 2~3 years. Even much longer such as the netburst architecture squeezed to death for quite a long time, the k8 archtiecture still going after 3~4 years.

 
this has been posted before

Not a repost of course ... but it simply *confirmed* what we knew 😉

here is a thread i started in CPU/Overclocking that i recently updated:

http://forums.anandtech.com/messageview...?catid=28&threadid=1946032&STARTPAGE=2

Topic Title: Nvidia at work on combined CPU with graphic - On 65nm in 2008
Topic Summary: 10/20 UPDATE: MS to get into making CPUs [!]
Click to expand...

the one i started in video is *Lost* 😛

we all three major players becoming more *competitive* in every way

good for us!
:thumbsup:
 
The i740 was hardly a failure.

Wasn't it one of the most popular cards of it's day? I remember it punching well above its weight, especially cost-wise.

An x86 CPU is a far more complexed beast than a GPU. Do you remember XGi with the Voltari? Their products were pretty much competitive with the previous generation nVidia and ATi parts - and they were just a small company with limited funds.

Intel have been in the graphics game for a long time, and I suspect they already know how to make very good GPUs, it just hasn't made sense for them to do so.

I would love to see Intel throw their muscle behind discrete high-end graphics. I'm sick of ATi and nVidia. Bring back 3dfx...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top