Larrabee graphics chip delayed, launching only as 'kit'

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
B

BenSkywalker

Diamond Member
Oct 9, 1999
9,140
67
91
Wow, what shocking news, heh.

It's almost like they realized that Larrabee was going to be an abject failure incapable of being competitive and simply was a giant waste of R&D. Seriously, I could have told them that for $100Million and saved them a bundle :p
 
S

shangshang

Senior member
May 17, 2008
830
0
0
Intel will, Intel must, be back in the graphics space and HPC space in some form. I think their future depends on it. So they can't afford to sit and watch AMD and NV move ahead. Too much at stake here. A lot of R&D already invested. I'm thinking they'll be back in 2011.

BTW, why are some of you "consumers" in here, who always say you wanna see good competitions between the vid card makers, seem to be a little giddily happy over this news like a virgin getting her first?! Personally I think this is a devastating blow to consumers.
 
Last edited:
B

BenSkywalker

Diamond Member
Oct 9, 1999
9,140
67
91
BTW, why are some of you "consumers" in here, who always say you wanna see good competitions between the vid card makers, seem to be a little giddily happy over this news like a virgin getting her first?!
Click to expand...

Perhaps because Larrabee wasn't going to be a competitor? The last thing the industry needs is a player who can push monsterous marketting muscle behind a product that we would laugh at as a $20 part. That hurts all of us long term, and using massive marketting to push that horribly designed part is the only option they had to move it.
 
sandorski

sandorski

No Lifer
Oct 10, 1999
70,791
6,350
126
I have always maintained that Larrabee was not gonna be anything special. For us Gamers anyway. They just don't seem to do well for some things. They waste more $ on R&D than AMD does in total R&D. If they want to be a Player in Graphics, they'll need to buy Nvidia.
 
Wreckage

Wreckage

Banned
Jul 1, 2005
5,529
0
0
shangshang said:
BTW, why are some of you "consumers" in here, who always say you wanna see good competitions between the vid card makers, seem to be a little giddily happy over this news like a virgin getting her first?! Personally I think this is a devastating blow to consumers.
Click to expand...

Intel already sells more GPUs than AMD or NVIDIA. This was an attempt to gain and even larger monopoly is all. Not exactly something we need.
 
Last edited:
S

schenley101

Member
Aug 10, 2009
115
0
0
I don't think that larrabee was a waste. i guarantee that that they will use parts of it in the future as parts of there cpus, similar to sandybridge. more importantly, they now have a lot more experience with gpu's for a future attempt in the graphics market.
 
I

Idontcare

Elite Member
Oct 10, 1999
21,110
64
91
BenSkywalker said:
Wow, what shocking news, heh.

It's almost like they realized that Larrabee was going to be an abject failure incapable of being competitive and simply was a giant waste of R&D. Seriously, I could have told them that for $100Million and saved them a bundle :p
Click to expand...

Wonder how much their failed venture in HDTV cost them back in 2004. At least their failed venture into the cellphone market was sold for $600m.

They got money to burn though, as an engineer and scientist I'd much rather see Intel fund academic projects/exercises like Larrabee and Polaris versus just doling out massive dividends to shareholders. That said, were I a shareholder I would be entirely underwhelmed with the leadership at the moment. Between Itanium, Larrabee, and the AMD payoff plus impending EU and NY expenses...not exactly an inspiring track-record.
 
WelshBloke

WelshBloke

Lifer
Jan 12, 2005
33,172
11,350
136
It's a shame it has been canned.

I'd have liked to have seen what Intel could do, especially as it seems to be a very different approach to NV or ATI.
 
WelshBloke

WelshBloke

Lifer
Jan 12, 2005
33,172
11,350
136
nemesismk2 said:
When I heard that Larrabee had been delayed I was disappointed because I honestly wanted to see what it could do. More competition would of been great for us consumers. ;)
Click to expand...

This.

I honestly cant see how anyone interested in these forums would feel any different.
It doesn't matter if you're a rabid ATI/NV fan-boy you'd have to be a bit curious about what Intel would do with a completely new GPU architecture.
Hell we all get really worked up if ATI or NV put out a refresh on their existing lines.
 
sandorski

sandorski

No Lifer
Oct 10, 1999
70,791
6,350
126
WelshBloke said:
This.

I honestly cant see how anyone interested in these forums would feel any different.
It doesn't matter if you're a rabid ATI/NV fan-boy you'd have to be a bit curious about what Intel would do with a completely new GPU architecture.
Hell we all get really worked up if ATI or NV put out a refresh on their existing lines.
Click to expand...

Well, you guys do see what Intel can do! :twisted:

<< AMD fanboy :D
 
IntelUser2000

IntelUser2000

Elite Member
Oct 14, 2003
8,686
3,787
136
BenSkywalker said:
Perhaps because Larrabee wasn't going to be a competitor? The last thing the industry needs is a player who can push monsterous marketting muscle behind a product that we would laugh at as a $20 part. That hurts all of us long term, and using massive marketting to push that horribly designed part is the only option they had to move it.
Click to expand...

If we believe the numbers from Intel's Siggraph 2008 paper, we need approximately 16 Larrabee cores running at 1GHz frequency to achieve 60 fps on FEAR at 1600x1200x4AA.

http://www.techspot.com/review/163-radeon-hd-4770/page7.html

Radeon 4670 gets 47 fps with 1600x1200x4AAx16AF, so its comparable. If they got 32 cores working at 2Ghz it might have had AMD/Nvidia's last gen high-end parts within arms reach.

It's not that bad, but they probably don't have the hardware working at 2GHz with 32 cores and even then its a >600mm2 part competing with chips at half the size like the HD5870, which beats the theoretical Larrabee SKU.

In essence, the RealWorldTech article's conclusion seems accurate. Had it been launched at that spec at early 2009, or even mid-2009 it might have been ok, but
#1. Writing high-performance drivers for gaming is different from having it function as a CPU
#2. Even in mid-2010 it might not have reached the maturity in the hardware they wanted to reach a year back

They will probably focus more on their IGP driver development. Rumors of Clarkdale IGP supporting video transcoding in hardware with upcoming drivers: http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/video/...ext_Generation_Platform_to_Support_GPGPU.html
 
Last edited:
bryanW1995

bryanW1995

Lifer
May 22, 2007
11,144
32
91
looks like intel and nvidia were unable to iron out their differences. This is definitely a net win for nvidia, but probably an even bigger win for amd since both of their competitors are now in a weaker position.

faxon said:
He was banned for making crude comments about Jews and Muslims in a thread here
Click to expand...

LMFAO the bad thing is that he's probably still scratching his head and wondering why he got banned.
 
bryanW1995

bryanW1995

Lifer
May 22, 2007
11,144
32
91
Keysplayr said:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wreckage


I wonder if Fusion will suffer the same fate?

I doubt that. At least at AMD, they have ATI for the graphics.
Click to expand...

porbably not, but it depends on WHY intel had problems. If it's drivers then amd is fine. If it's difficulty with integrating the gpu onto the cpu then amd is probably not ok.

also, keep in mind that they specifically talked about the "high end", ie discreet, larrabbee as being cancelled. Intel could still be planning to use larrabbee with integrated gfx, it could do nothing but improve their current unbelievably shitty igp.
 
IntelUser2000

IntelUser2000

Elite Member
Oct 14, 2003
8,686
3,787
136
bryanW1995 said:
also, keep in mind that they specifically talked about the "high end", ie discreet, larrabbee as being cancelled. Intel could still be planning to use larrabbee with integrated gfx, it could do nothing but improve their current unbelievably shitty igp.
Click to expand...

Their IGP will get MUCH better with Clarkdale:
http://www.anandtech.com/weblog/showpost.aspx?i=658

"Intel has a competitive answer coming early next year, but until then AMD is the wise choice."

Early leak benchmarks had Clarkdale on par with 785G, I think optimistically we can expect 790GX out of it with final release.

Larrabee delay: I should have known. When there were reports Cray making a Sandy Bridge and Larrabee high-end server, it must have meant delay on Larrabee's part. Why not release it with Nehalem, or even Westmere if it was ready?
 
D

Dravic

Senior member
May 18, 2000
892
0
76
I REALLY just wanted to see something diff... a massively parallel processing x86 GPU sounded interesting..


but ask sony how well that many core strat worked out for cell and the PS3.. at the 11hr they went with a traditional GPU too..

and were not even talking driver optimizations yet.. tough row to hoe
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom