Tom's Hardware Forums » Graphic & Displays » Graphics Cards » Intel shows no love for anyone! not even ATI!
 

Intel shows no love for anyone! not even ATI!

Add a reply



 Word :   Username :  
 
Bottom
Author
 Thread : Intel shows no love for anyone! not even ATI!
 
Ronald- Nazi in disguise.
Profile: old hand
More Information

There were guns, and bombs, and better guns and bombs.
Then it came. The nuclear bomb.
Is Intel going to release the nuclear bomb, to just kill off all other GPUs?
http://technodoglau.blogspot.com/2 [...] -dead.html
nVidia and ATI gotta watch out!

Message quoted 1 times
Message edited by romulus47p lus1 on 05-04-2008 at 12:49:31 PM

---------------
Why so serious?
Related Pr oduct
Register or log in to remove.

Profile: nimble knuckle
More Information

Oh you've got a blog - well done.

Profile: enthusiast
More Information

Hmm, there theories are very ambitious.  I look forward to see how it all pans out.


---------------
http://valid.x86-secret.com/cache/banner/354584.png
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3261/2577559697_bdb9aec12f_o.png
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3098/2577559521_edb3ac038e_o.png14591 3DMark06 6210/6104/4507 Vista 64bit
Ronald- Nazi in disguise.
Profile: old hand
More Information

http://news.softpedia.com/news/Int [...] 2565.shtml
"According to Fosner, multi-core processors could handle life-like animations, such as weather or effects better than dedicated GPUs. For instance, multi-core processors can handle the graphics tasks in a better manner than a high-end graphics board could ever do."

 

Imagine CPU technology can run games well. Yes, Intel's going to add something new to the GPU war, thanks to their CPU experiences.

 

http://news.softpedia.com/news/Int [...] 1081.shtml

 

16 Graphics cores!
nVidia and ATI are sweating buckets!


Message edited by romulus47p lus1 on 05-04-2008 at 01:20:11 PM

---------------
Why so serious?
Profile: enthusiast
More Information

I don't think it will happen so soon though intel raved about the things. while reading this i think they are still in the bucket  
http://www.tomshardware.com/news/n [...] ,5194.html

Profile: enthusiast
More Information

lol, isn't this the route AMD is going with fusion?
CPUs have done graphics in the past
 
Now I wonder how much one of this would cost?

Padawan Eater
Profile: addict
More Information

I might like it if CPUs ad GPUs fuzed. It would make things easier and cheaper for us consumers. idk though, water cooling would have to become standard though. I'm looking forward to all this, lets just hope they speed things up a notch. Ray Tracing vs Rasterization.


---------------
Exile- Kreia what are you Jedi or Sith?  
 
Kreia- Does it matter? Of course it does; such titles allow us to rip the galaxy into two halves: light and dark, good and bad. Perhaps I am neither, and I hold both as what they really are: pieces to a puzzle.
Profile: addict
More Information

I think integrating components with 2 different purposes isn't the best of idea. What I would have liked is multi-socket MB that would allow heterogeneous kinds of processors. For example, if you had a 4 socket board, you could put try different setups like:

  • 1 CPU + 1GPU + 2 free (entry level)
  • 3 CPU + 1GPU (parallel processing)
  • 1 CPU + 3 GPU (graphic workstation)
  • 2 CPU + 2 GPU (balanced gaming rig)


Given that each of there processor could be multi-core, I think it would make systems much more customizable.


---------------
The capacity to learn is a gift; The ability to learn is a skill; The willingness to learn is a choice.  - Rebec of Ginaz
http://valid.x86-secret.com/cache/banner/337014.png
Profile: Ancient Poster
More Information

Zenthar wrote :

I think integrating components with 2 different purposes isn't the best of idea. What I would have liked is multi-socket MB that would allow heterogeneous kinds of processors. For example, if you had a 4 socket board, you could put try different setups like:


Lol, then you can get the best bang for your buck and not have any power wasted? Fat chance. They're not gonna let that happen. :na:


---------------
Q6600@3.6ghz, GA-EX38-DS4 X38 chipset motherboard, 8gb 800mhz ddr2 4-3-3-12, 8800GTS(g92)@780mhz, 1TB 7200rpm 32mb cache hdd, 850watt 12v rails=4x20amp powersupply
Padawan Eater
Profile: addict
More Information

athauglas wrote :

What a crappy blog.  Couldn't you just link us to the full article directly, rather than make us suffer through sampled Daft Punk?
 
Honestly, people need to take that song-on-front-page-plays-automatically BS back to myspace where it belongs--in equally bad company.


let the kid do what he wants sheesh, none forced u to read this post


---------------
Exile- Kreia what are you Jedi or Sith?  
 
Kreia- Does it matter? Of course it does; such titles allow us to rip the galaxy into two halves: light and dark, good and bad. Perhaps I am neither, and I hold both as what they really are: pieces to a puzzle.
Profile: old hand
More Information

All of this Intel killing the graphics card is getting a little out of hand.  What you have to realize is that (1) writing a new engine is hard and (2) games follow the money.  (1) Look how difficult the switch has been to DX10 (or 10.1) and that is only a minor change.  Intel's crazy technology would be a huge change.  Would new games only play on one or the other?  (2) Look at the ATI NVidia battle.  NVidia has more money and thus can "encourage" programmers to optimize for their hardware.  Intel has money, but NVidia is far from dead.  I'd fear that if Intel went forward with this, they could split the industry.  I imagine the only way for this to work FAR in the future is for Intel to buy NVidia to kill them, and then go ahead with their plan.

 

I think Intel is just bluffing.  They are awesome at CPUs, but they know nothing about graphics (as we see from their IGPs).  It would be hard even for Intel to make the entire industry make a change that drastic.


Message edited by EXT64 on 05-05-2008 at 12:36:52 AM

---------------
Gaming: FX-60 @ 2.81GHz (x14, 1.375, 90nm) > A8N-SLI Deluxe > Asus 4850 - 625/1986 > 2GB Corsair XMS 400MHz  
2-3-3-6-1T
HTPC/Light Gaming: X2 5400+ 2.8GHz Brisbane > Gigabyte 780G MATX - 900MHz Core > 2GB Corsair XMS2 800MHz  
4-4-4-12-2T
Padawan Eater
Profile: addict
More Information

agreed, somewhat


---------------
Exile- Kreia what are you Jedi or Sith?  
 
Kreia- Does it matter? Of course it does; such titles allow us to rip the galaxy into two halves: light and dark, good and bad. Perhaps I am neither, and I hold both as what they really are: pieces to a puzzle.
Profile: Eternal Poster
More Information

Not only that, but this is an exspensive venture in a tight market, with low margins. Intel needs not only to deliver a gpu thats competitive, but also needs to write drivers on a consistant basis. Were talking overhead here. What I beliebe is going to happen, if anything actually does at all, is that both ATI and Intel will pretty much put an end to igps, with both selling their ideas of a "fusion" type system, for lower power and decent graphics. The more Intel stirs this up, (with nVidia unfortunately falling for it) the better off they are. Marketing hype, done the Intel way


---------------
Every artist is a cannibal,every poet is a thief,they all kill their inspiration then sing about their grief
Ronald- Nazi in disguise.
Profile: old hand
More Information

athauglas wrote :

Hey, I was interested enough in what he had to say to follow that link.  What greeted me?  Kanye West BLARING his "music"  over whatever I had playing on xmms at the time... Pavarotti or something.  It was pretty irritating.

 

1997 has long since passed us by; people should know NOT to put noisy, distracting rubbish on their main pages by now.

 

How old are you? Do you have a job?
Childish. Seriously, get a life...


Message edited by romulus47p lus1 on 05-05-2008 at 11:00:30 AM

---------------
Why so serious?
Ronald- Nazi in disguise.
Profile: old hand
More Information

Intel's GPUs 10 times more power?
http://news.softpedia.com/news/Int [...] 0326.shtml
ANd a little news about Fusion
http://news.softpedia.com/news/AMD [...] 7252.shtml
And AMD's failure, which made nVidia bleed
http://news.softpedia.com/news/AMD [...] 2234.shtml


Message edited by romulus47p lus1 on 05-05-2008 at 10:59:41 AM

---------------
Why so serious?
If it's not from Yorkshire it's sh1te
Profile: old hand
More Information

jaydeejohn wrote :

Not only that, but this is an exspensive venture in a tight market, with low margins. Intel needs not only to deliver a gpu thats competitive, but also needs to write drivers on a consistant basis. Were talking overhead here. What I beliebe is going to happen, if anything actually does at all, is that both ATI and Intel will pretty much put an end to igps, with both selling their ideas of a "fusion" type system, for lower power and decent graphics. The more Intel stirs this up, (with nVidia unfortunately falling for it) the better off they are. Marketing hype, done the Intel way


 
Your damned on the money i reckon.  They (intel) have, depending on how you look at it, either no experience in (real) pc graphics and are looking to go from hero to zero and magically muscle into the mid range (larabee wont be a wonder machine in performance terms when it arrives - only the slow of brain would believe that) graphics segment by end of 2009 (a hugely lofty goal and they'll be lucky to have anything as powerful let alone as backwards compatible as today top cards) OR you say they've been producing graphics chips for something like 15 years and each one has been a stinker (when asked to do more than run windows and play dvds, and even then some are out of their depth).  Not to mention the fact that they've only just released their FIRST dx10 driver.  Drivers are arguably as difficult as to get right as the hardware is.
 
Either way its alot of talk from intel, and people - all starry-eyed from what the core architecture did to K8 - are taking it seriously.  If intel really take making a decent desktop gpu seriously, and larabee lasts beyond the current intel ceo (I say that not cos i think hes doing anything badly, but he wont be in the job forever and the next guy (or gal) in the big chair might decide that the company should stick to its core business and lets the non gpu-on-a-cpu side of things drop) then it wont likely be a compelling product until its second or third generation.  End of rant.        


Go to:
Add a reply
  Tom's Hardware Forums » Graphic & Displays » Graphics Cards » Intel shows no love for anyone! not even ATI!
 

Google Ads
Ad