Intel shows no love for anyone! not even ATI!

Oh you've got a blog - well done.

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!

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?

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.

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

agreed, somewhat

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

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.