WTF? SGI is going to rely on ATi for graphics cards.

[Random Variable]

I guess they had to do something to stop losing money.

The new Onyx4 UltimateVision system uses ATI workstation video cards instead of the SGI-designed graphics systems the company has relied on for years, said Shawn Underwood, marketing director for SGI's visual systems. The systems start at less than $45,000 but in high-end configurations with 64 of SGI's MIPS 16000A processors cost well over $300,000.

http://news.com.com/2100-1010_3-1025324.html?tag=fd_top

 

[digitalsm]

I dont know how they think this will stop more of their customers from leaving them. I know they have other customers besides special effects and animation studios, but I would think losing a number of companies that have in the past buy 200+ new systems every couple years, hurts. Not to mention they will likely be losing Pixar sometime in the next year or so.

 

[Czar]

werent they using Quadro cards before?

 

[Random Variable]

Originally posted by: Czar
werent they using Quadro cards before?

They were using Quadro cards with their IA-32 workstations (which were discontinued a couple of years ago). The graphics subsytems for their large-scale visualization systems were designed entirely in-house.

 

[Czar]

Originally posted by: Vespasian

Originally posted by: Czar
werent they using Quadro cards before?

They were using Quadro cards with their IA-32 workstations (which were discontinued a couple of years ago). The graphics subsytems for their large-scale visualization systems were designed entirely in-house.

then, they must have used wildcats for the higher end models which the ati card is replacing?

cant belive they did that also themselves:Q (damn talanted people though)

 

[bluemax]

Wasn't that a feature of those ATI R300 Processors? You could use a whole bunch of them in tandem?
That'd make for a good graphic workstation...

 

[Random Variable]

Originally posted by: Czar

Originally posted by: Vespasian

Originally posted by: Czar
werent they using Quadro cards before?

They were using Quadro cards with their IA-32 workstations (which were discontinued a couple of years ago). The graphics subsytems for their large-scale visualization systems were designed entirely in-house.

then, they must have used wildcats for the higher end models which the ati card is replacing?

cant belive they did that also themselves:Q (damn talanted people though)

They've never used Wildcat cards. Let me put it this way: Yesterday, NONE of their products used graphics cards from ATi, nVidia, 3Dlabs, or any other company. Everything was designed in-house. They did, however, use cards from nVidia when they were selling IA-32 workstations.

 

[Czar]

Originally posted by: Vespasian

Originally posted by: Czar

Originally posted by: Vespasian

Originally posted by: Czar
werent they using Quadro cards before?

They were using Quadro cards with their IA-32 workstations (which were discontinued a couple of years ago). The graphics subsytems for their large-scale visualization systems were designed entirely in-house.

then, they must have used wildcats for the higher end models which the ati card is replacing?

cant belive they did that also themselves:Q (damn talanted people though)

They've never used Wildcat cards. Let me put it this this way: Yesterday, NONE of their products used graphics cards from ATi, nVidia, 3Dlabs, or any other company. Everything was designed in-house. They did, however, use cards from nVidia when they were selling IA-32 workstations.

cool, hope this plays out well for both of them

 

[apoppin]

Originally posted by: Czar

Originally posted by: Vespasian

Originally posted by: Czar

Originally posted by: Vespasian

Originally posted by: Czar
werent they using Quadro cards before?

They were using Quadro cards with their IA-32 workstations (which were discontinued a couple of years ago). The graphics subsytems for their large-scale visualization systems were designed entirely in-house.

then, they must have used wildcats for the higher end models which the ati card is replacing?

cant belive they did that also themselves:Q (damn talanted people though)

They've never used Wildcat cards. Let me put it this this way: Yesterday, NONE of their products used graphics cards from ATi, nVidia, 3Dlabs, or any other company. Everything was designed in-house. They did, however, use cards from nVidia when they were selling IA-32 workstations.

cool, hope this plays out well for both of them

Me too . . .

I believe this say something about their confidence in ATI in current and future graphics solutions.

 

[Mr.IncrediblyBored]

The systems are used for graphically challenging chores such as looking at oil field computer models, reviewing new car designs or simulating military combat. Even Procter&Gamble has used them to visualize airflow over Pringle's potato chips to maximize the speed they can be packed in cans without crumbling.

!

 

[dullard]

Originally posted by: KnightBreed

The systems are used for graphically challenging chores such as looking at oil field computer models, reviewing new car designs or simulating military combat. Even Procter&Gamble has used them to visualize airflow over Pringle's potato chips to maximize the speed they can be packed in cans without crumbling.

!

Yep that is similar to the type of work I've done. And for that work SGI is far overpriced and not very well performing. I for one think this is a good step for SGI. They have been dying a slow death for nearly a decade. SGI cannot compete with AMD and Intel on the processor side. SGI cannot compete with ATI and nVidia on the graphics side. All the money they poor into those losing battles means their products will be much more expensive and at the same time slower than the competition. The only way for SGI to survive is to become more of a company like Dell - but one that focuses on building high quality high performance workstations.

This quote from CNet sums it up quite well:

The new SGI system's performance will be five times better than its predecessor, while the price-performance ratio will be 40 times better, Russell said.

Note: You can pretty much replace SGI with Sun in my entire post.

 

[dexvx]

Originally posted by: dullard
Note: You can pretty much replace SGI with Sun in my entire post.

Except SGI is changing as the wind changes, and Sun is not.

 

[jazzhound]

Originally posted by: dullard

Originally posted by: KnightBreed

The systems are used for graphically challenging chores such as looking at oil field computer models, reviewing new car designs or simulating military combat. Even Procter&Gamble has used them to visualize airflow over Pringle's potato chips to maximize the speed they can be packed in cans without crumbling.

!

Yep that is similar to the type of work I've done. And for that work SGI is far overpriced and not very well performing. I for one think this is a good step for SGI. They have been dying a slow death for nearly a decade. SGI cannot compete with AMD and Intel on the processor side. SGI cannot compete with ATI and nVidia on the graphics side. All the money they poor into those losing battles means their products will be much more expensive and at the same time slower than the competition. The only way for SGI to survive is to become more of a company like Dell - but one that focuses on building high quality high performance workstations.

This quote from CNet sums it up quite well:

The new SGI system's performance will be five times better than its predecessor, while the price-performance ratio will be 40 times better, Russell said.

Note: You can pretty much replace SGI with Sun in my entire post.

But SUN has other avenues to generate their monies. I've always regarded SGI as an highend production house of graphical intensive application. SUN does more stuff like servers that rival IBM and others, if I understand it.

So this is a confidence issue? I hope ATI can gain some ground on Nvidia and put out a marquee product for the CGI market.

 

[Random Variable]

UltimateVision can be configured with up to 8GB of graphics memory, while InfiniteReality4 could be configured with up to 160GB of frame buffer memory and 16GB of texture memory. UltimateVison sounds like a downgrade to me.

 

[dexvx]

Originally posted by: jazzhound

But SUN has other avenues to generate their monies. I've always regarded SGI as an highend production house of graphical intensive application. SUN does more stuff like servers that rival IBM and others, if I understand it.

So this is a confidence issue? I hope ATI can gain some ground on Nvidia and put out a marquee product for the CGI market.

SGI is highend, but the workstation class video cards are catching up far faster than SGI is developing. In 5 years (TNT/Rage128 to Radeon 9800Pro/GF FX5900 Ultra), the workstation market has gained far more in % speed than SGI has.

Sun stuff is basically being beaten down from all sides. On the workstation side - x86 solutions beat them handily. Small/Midrange servers, Xeons are handing them down, and Opteron only means more trouble for them. Now at the highend, Itanium II's/Power4's are pounding them down. The only thing Sun has going for them is the fact that they were THE legacy product.