Rumor - Puma to be hot, slow.

[PlasmaBomb]

TSMC aren't updating to 45nm production until 2009...

 

[formulav8]

For anykind of gaming, playback this platform will be far superior to Intels typical trashy, near worthless igps. The Intel fannys can hype this down all they want but their precious Intel has some of the worse IGPs in the industry.



Jason

 

[Sheninat0r]

And now for something completely different...

http://www.engadget.com/2008/0...tely-different-100-la/
http://www.custompc.co.uk/news...pletely-different.html

 

[bfdd]

Originally posted by: myocardia

Originally posted by: bfdd
Wait are they literally saying games run in slow mo on Intel platforms and AMD platforms are fast paced? I've NEVER seen a comparrison like that before. The two Intel platforms weren't even getting chopiness like it had really bad frames they were literally running in slow motion.... To me that looks setup to make the AMD rig look better. Even if the other two machines were getting 10 and 20 fps respectively running a benchmark they should still all end at the same time cause the FPS is just what you see now what the game is doing...? I'm confused that looked ridiculous.

Well, there are two different ways to benchmark a game, assuming you know how to write code. You can run the benchmark for a certain amount of time, like the benchmarks we use, then display the FPS at the end, or you can have a finite amount of total frames, and make the system display every frame, making the slowest system take longer, like what was done in that video.

Of course, that benchmark had absolutely nothing to do with CPU power. That was a comparison of the GPU power of those laptops. That's why they used laptops, instead of desktops. If all three systems had had an 8800 Ultra or 3870X2, the two Intel machines would have finshed slightly faster.

I understand that, but even if you're forcing every frame to be rendered it wouldn't look like it was watching a slow mo replay on the NFL I don't believe, that would mean MORE frames wouldn't it?

 

[Idontcare]

Originally posted by: PlasmaBomb
TSMC aren't updating to 45nm production until 2009...

45nm production is already underway at TSMC:

http://www.tsmc.com/english/b_...tform/b010101_45nm.htm

Qualcomm introduced 45nm parts fabbed at TSMC last fall (Nov 2007):
http://www.qualcomm.com/press/...duces_Single_Chip.html

More antecdotal articles discussing TSMC's run-up to 45nm readiness:

TSMC catches up with Intel on 45nm production

TSMC Takes Lead in 45nm IC Mass Production

This one should catch a few eyes:
TSMC sampling 45nm AMD Fusion processor

TSMC to Make Chips Using 40nm Fabrication Process

TSMC Storms IEDM

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/45_nanometer

 

[myocardia]

Originally posted by: formulav8
For anykind of gaming, playback this platform will be far superior to Intels typical trashy, near worthless igps. The Intel fannys can hype this down all they want but their precious Intel has some of the worse IGPs in the industry.

Actually, no gaming computer ever made, whether laptop or desktop, uses IGP. IGP= the antithesis of a gaming computer. Of course, I'm sure that all of the AMD fanboys will be claiming otherwise, as all fanboys always do, when the truth gets in the way of their agenda.

 

[CTho9305]

Originally posted by: Idontcare

Originally posted by: PlasmaBomb
TSMC aren't updating to 45nm production until 2009...

Qualcomm introduced 45nm parts fabbed at TSMC last fall (Nov 2007):
http://www.qualcomm.com/press/...duces_Single_Chip.html

You missed an important line from that article: "The QSC solutions are scheduled to sample in the fourth quarter of 2008."

 

[Viditor]

Originally posted by: myocardia

Originally posted by: formulav8
For anykind of gaming, playback this platform will be far superior to Intels typical trashy, near worthless igps. The Intel fannys can hype this down all they want but their precious Intel has some of the worse IGPs in the industry.

Actually, no gaming computer ever made, whether laptop or desktop, uses IGP. IGP= the antithesis of a gaming computer. Of course, I'm sure that all of the AMD fanboys will be claiming otherwise, as all fanboys always do, when the truth gets in the way of their agenda.

"The only real constant in the Universe is change"...think about it!

 

[Vesku]

Originally posted by: myocardia

Originally posted by: formulav8
For anykind of gaming, playback this platform will be far superior to Intels typical trashy, near worthless igps. The Intel fannys can hype this down all they want but their precious Intel has some of the worse IGPs in the industry.

Actually, no gaming computer ever made, whether laptop or desktop, uses IGP. IGP= the antithesis of a gaming computer. Of course, I'm sure that all of the AMD fanboys will be claiming otherwise, as all fanboys always do, when the truth gets in the way of their agenda.

The only claim being made is that Puma has been demoed with playable framerates for HL2 while the Intel IGP is not able to deliver at the same resolution and settings.

There is no evidence that Intel IGP will catch up this year. Should really save this comparison for when Puma laptops hit the street though.

Intel Core2 = good
Intel manufacturing process = good
Intel IGP = bad

 

[bfdd]

I'd like to point out also, I don't think Intels IGPs are all that go. It's just that video doesn't make any sense to me.

 

[Cookie Monster]

Good luck trying to load up a game without it crashing. The driver side of intel IGPs are horrendous. And if they do manage to run, they either barely break the 5 fps barrier or incorrectly render the game. Whats the point of integrated graphics if the darn thing cant even run a game properly? IGPs should provide casual gaming, without the need for even a low end discrete video card.

 

[Idontcare]

Originally posted by: Cookie Monster
Good luck trying to load up a game without it crashing. The driver side of intel IGPs are horrendous. And if they do manage to run, they either barely break the 5 fps barrier or incorrectly render the game. Whats the point of integrated graphics if the darn thing cant even run a game properly? IGPs should provide casual gaming, without the need for even a low end discrete video card.

I've often wondered how one of these passively cooled $20 Radeon X1550 cards would fair against an Intel IGP for gaming.

It's not DX10, so no aeroglass in Vista though. But if the performance is comparable or better in gaming...

 

[Idontcare]

Originally posted by: CTho9305

Originally posted by: Idontcare

Originally posted by: PlasmaBomb
TSMC aren't updating to 45nm production until 2009...

Qualcomm introduced 45nm parts fabbed at TSMC last fall (Nov 2007):
http://www.qualcomm.com/press/...duces_Single_Chip.html

You missed an important line from that article: "The QSC solutions are scheduled to sample in the fourth quarter of 2008."

You were supposed to nitpick over this being the LP (low-power) flavor of the node, whereas the GP (general purpose) and HP (high performance) flavors are very much a late 2008 affair.

The SUN stuff, truly high performance 45nm (IBM/AMD/Intel caliber) won't be out till 2009.

But I mentioned this above. I'd expect the timeline lag between LP and HP to decrease at 32nm as the 45nm SUN stuff was decided too late into the 45nm development cycle to have much hope of pulling in the schedule so the lag is a one-time issue that is easily explained.

 

[v8envy]

Originally posted by: Idontcare


I've often wondered how one of these passively cooled $20 Radeon X1550 cards would fair against an Intel IGP for gaming.

It's not DX10, so no aeroglass in Vista though. But if the performance is comparable or better in gaming...

They would be significantly better. The X1550 is a dx9 cpu because it's... a rebadged and slightly improved 9600XT! It's no 9700Pro or 6600GT, but it's more than the minimum to play HL2 at reasonable frame rates at 1024x768 and maybe even 1280x1024.

Intel's IGP, otoh, is about a quarter of this for the most recent models. Intel's IGPs compare poorly with the X200 AMD chipset, which is similar hardware but half the clock of the X1550.