Sounds pretty interesting. If this turns out to be as big they say it will, will AMD be in even more trouble?
...as big they say it will...
I didn't notice anyone saying it would achieve
big volumes just
big (MIPS/folding/...) benchies (and that was by implication, rather than directly stated). And big benchies may well translate pretty easily to big mindshare, but that doesn't necessarily result in big sales. As far as I can see, people who have powerful rigs, like folding, etc., because they can, but few people buy more powerful rigs just to get big folding numbers.
The extent to which I can see this causing trouble for AMD, is the extent to which it causes trouble for the graphics-chip-company-that-used-to-be ATI.
There are a number of specialist fields, basically Scientific Simulation - Weather, SPICE, CFD, combustion simulation (and folding) - where this or the Cell processor approach potentially offer big gains. But that potential is only achieved if it is easy enough to access. That's where this does have a real worth,
if the libraries make things easy enough to compile in a whole load more speed. The trouble is that may end up selling a few thousands of cards more, globally.
On the other hand, if you are faced with the choice between two graphics cards, both of which give similar and adequate frame rates in today's games, yet one gives a big kick to your folding scores, which you going to choose? And you'll probably do that even if you don't immediately want to go for folding as a pastime, because something might use it, even if its not folding.
But that will only sway the decision when it is close. If one card gives twice the rates of the other in today's games (and you won't know the rates in tomorrow's, even though that's what you want to know), you'll go with the higher one.