• 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.

NVIDIA Chief Architect: Unified Pixel and Vertex Pipelines ? The Way to Go.

?It?s far harder to design a unified processor - it has to do, by design, twice as much. Another word for ?unified? is ?shared?, and another word for ?shared? is ?competing?.

Err, no it doesnt. Unified has nothing in common with 'shared' and 'shared' has nothing in common with 'competing'.

He really needs to learn his english better...

Kill me now 🙂
 
Originally posted by: Drayvn
?It?s far harder to design a unified processor - it has to do, by design, twice as much. Another word for ?unified? is ?shared?, and another word for ?shared? is ?competing?.

Err, no it doesnt. Unified has nothing in common with 'shared' and 'shared' has nothing in common with 'competing'.

He really needs to learn his english better...

Kill me now 🙂
Click to expand...

/casts level 3 lightning bolt on Drayvn
 
Originally posted by: Drayvn
?It?s far harder to design a unified processor - it has to do, by design, twice as much. Another word for ?unified? is ?shared?, and another word for ?shared? is ?competing?.

Err, no it doesnt. Unified has nothing in common with 'shared' and 'shared' has nothing in common with 'competing'.

He really needs to learn his english better...

Kill me now 🙂
Click to expand...

They have to share resources, so they have to compete for the shared resources.
Strange links aside, the gist of what his said is fairly correct I believe.
 
Originally posted by: Drayvn
?It?s far harder to design a unified processor - it has to do, by design, twice as much. Another word for ?unified? is ?shared?, and another word for ?shared? is ?competing?.

Err, no it doesnt. Unified has nothing in common with 'shared' and 'shared' has nothing in common with 'competing'.

He really needs to learn his english better...

Kill me now 🙂
Click to expand...

This is is quote from NVIDIA's chief architect. Something tells me that he he has somewhat of a grasp on how to build a video chip. In this context, what he says makes sense.
 
This reminds me a bit of Intels 64bit "When it's needed" and really then it was really rushed...
Click to expand...
This isn't the same thing. Intel was saying that there was no market need for a 64-bit chip, so they wouldn't give end users the added capability even though they had the technology. nVidia is saying that is doesn't make sense for them to design/produce a chip with a unified shader at this time from a design and manufacturing standpoint because it isn't feasible. My guess is that they are working on unified shader tech for a future generation, but that given the current manufactirung capabilites nVidia could not design a chip with unified shaders that they could successfully prduce and sell in mass quantities.

Edit: that being said... the end result might be the same. We will have to see if ATI's unified sharder architecture helps them gain a lead in nVidia.
 
Presumably, somebody has looked at the profile of the different kinds of shading operations. Does anybody know how variable such a ratio is? The only technical reason one might want to generalize processing units is if this ratio varies wildly depending on what's being rendered.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top