Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Nvidia releases Tegra processors

Last response: in CPUs
Share
a b à CPUs
June 2, 2008 9:58:50 AM

Its pretty small and they did state it could play 720p, so it should at least be decent G31-G35-ish I think...

But given on what we know performance degradations we know about really energy efficient chips (I'm talking better than my computer), I'd like to contradict that though (great example being Intel Atom)
Related resources
a b à CPUs
June 2, 2008 11:40:26 AM

^ Proceed with caution, Fudzilla is...

Anyways found slightly more:

http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,1558,2316148,00.a...

Summary: Tegra is ARM 11 surronded by audio and video decoders. Will be coupled with ultra low power Geforce. Useable with Windows CE or Mobile. Two versions at lauch, 600 @ 700MHZ and 700 @ 800MHZ. Later lower power consumption. HDMI may be added to allow playback of HD.

Saves you from reading the entire thing...
June 2, 2008 11:51:00 AM

They also followe3d up with something about Intel using OLEDs, which will give the Atom a nudge, but it wont be enough, Atom uses too much power
a b à CPUs
June 2, 2008 11:52:50 AM

Extra summary from INQ and Fud: Tegra can do 720p with 600mv. Nvirda says 1/10th size and power requirement of Atom, 10x performance of Atom. Can run Quake 3 @ 35FPS. 20 hours of video. Mobile Tegra is fatter than Iphone but may end up slimmer. Has HDMI, analog, headphones and USB 2.

Its amazing how easily you can dilute 5 1page articles into a paragraph...
June 2, 2008 11:56:32 AM

The real question is... is this the product of Nvidias splurging on research of micro processors that has been happening over the past couple of years and or only the acquisition of the firm that made this possible.

Will we be seeing a desktop processor from them any time soon?
a b à CPUs
June 2, 2008 11:57:53 AM

JAYDEEJOHN said:
They also followe3d up with something about Intel using OLEDs, which will give the Atom a nudge, but it wont be enough, Atom uses too much power


Yes, so did Nvidia. Atom's held back by the GMA 950 and to some extent the CPU itself. Its mainly because X86 was never deigned for mobile use, thus leading the ARM architure into glory... One day I think we shall all use ARM or PPC...
a b à CPUs
June 2, 2008 12:01:56 PM

spaztic7 said:
The real question is... is this the product of Nvidias splurging on research of micro processors that has been happening over the past couple of years and or only the acquisition of the firm that made this possible.

Will we be seeing a desktop processor from them any time soon?


I doubt it tho, they have made an ARM processor, it would take quite some time to adapt it to X86. Anyways Nivida I've got to hand it to you, you really know how to steal away my love of AMD... I'm gonna guess a low-power CPU from AMD (not geode) I mean like they've done it once why not again?

I'd love to see what they could come up with...
June 2, 2008 12:08:06 PM

Who knows if nVidia will bother with x86. They expand into various markets, they stomp cpus that are converted to gpgpu apps, they may never need to
a b à CPUs
June 2, 2008 12:16:37 PM

Depends if people are bored enough to code with CUDA...
June 2, 2008 12:25:42 PM

Whats the biggest reason for people going to quads currently? Decoding vids? Audio? All these are currently in beta on gpgpu
a b à CPUs
June 2, 2008 12:28:19 PM

^ Bragging rights...
I mean like I'm still dual-core...
June 2, 2008 12:31:22 PM

Well bragging rights dont look so good when a gpgpu app is crushing a quad by 10x's
a b à CPUs
June 2, 2008 12:32:25 PM

I reckon there's more to GPUs than CPUs...
GPUs simply scale better...
Edit: Grammar
a b à CPUs
June 2, 2008 12:36:53 PM

Jeesh ... I go away and make pumpkin soup for dinner and come back and ...

thanks for the info.

:) 
June 2, 2008 12:40:35 PM

Those same apps will be available for your "lowly" dual core as well
a b à CPUs
June 2, 2008 12:55:39 PM

Retro peoples! its the 60s again! Peace! Rise to the Dual-Core!

^^ Reynod, you cook?
a b à CPUs
June 2, 2008 1:27:23 PM

Whirlpool does the dishes tho ... she never complains.



a c 127 à CPUs
June 2, 2008 2:14:59 PM

JAYDEEJOHN said:
Well bragging rights dont look so good when a gpgpu app is crushing a quad by 10x's


Isnt one of the biggest problems with this the amount of power it takes is more to do thae same job?

The one thing I will wounder is how versitile CUDA is. It may scale very well but can you do multiple processes at once, IE Decode a DVD, encode a AVI, play music and surf the web or will you be stuck to one process at a time. How does the same performance gain from CUDA compare while doing multiple processes?

I just like to question new people to the game. I like nVidias go get em attitude but I feel they are also bitting more than they can chew by pushin Intel.

Atom is not that bad. Its a decent low power CPU and is held back by the chipset. We may see a Atom refresh based off of Nehalem later on. I do feel that nVidia is fudging its numbers a bit but that happens with most companies now a days.

Well this should be an interesting area as we will see nVidia and Intel go for the UMD market, although Intel is a big pushed in that arena so that may be interesting to see how nVidia pushes into it.
June 2, 2008 2:51:38 PM

jimmysmitty said:
Atom is not that bad. Its a decent low power CPU and is held back by the chipset. We may see a Atom refresh based off of Nehalem later on.


I can say for certainty this will not happen. Atom is its own uarch.
June 2, 2008 3:05:57 PM

In the end itll depend somewhat like what fangirl said. If you look at the Fastra model, it wasnt being done in octo sli, so it seems to me yes, they can run multiple, depending on the apps of course. If you have a 4 pci slot setup, why not? And it could even be done better than that. You have to admit, some of the thunder is being taken out of multicore cpus with this news. And its only the beginning
June 2, 2008 3:17:45 PM

For what it is aimed at Tegra is a viable solution. For the Desktop its to specialized. Same goes for CUDA. It is lightning fast with specialized applications and as long as it doesn't have to juggle multiple tasks.
June 2, 2008 3:35:51 PM

I suppose its possible some day an ARM based could show up. How itll fare? Who knows? These are exciting times. To me, these things (gpgpu apps) are as exciting as the Nehalem launch. Which will only be able to do more faster, and better
a c 127 à CPUs
June 2, 2008 3:38:36 PM

JAYDEEJOHN said:
In the end itll depend somewhat like what fangirl said. If you look at the Fastra model, it wasnt being done in octo sli, so it seems to me yes, they can run multiple, depending on the apps of course. If you have a 4 pci slot setup, why not? And it could even be done better than that. You have to admit, some of the thunder is being taken out of multicore cpus with this news. And its only the beginning


So for those who have the cash to burn for 4 9800GX2s and are in a specific market like video editing then yes this would work.

But normal people like myself can't afford 4 9800GX2s and the heat and power consumption of that setup woul be insane.

I see the advantages of CUDA but I do not see it as a viable CPU replacement. Also I am sure with a multiGPU setup you can run more than one process but compares to a CPU that can run multiple processes on one core its still not enough to really push the CPU into nothingness.
June 2, 2008 3:47:05 PM

Im not pointing that system out because itll be able to do what a 3.5Million$ cpu machine can do. Im pointing it out because its not running in SLI, which means more than likely, having more than 1 card means multi apps at one time. At least I hope so. As far as the cpu thing, to me this isnt competition, this is progress. People need to understand this. Except it. In some things, even traditional things, the cpu will have had its day. That leaves the cpu to do what it does best even better in my opinion
June 2, 2008 4:17:17 PM

isn't nVidia making a OBG northbridge for VIA's new multi cure 64 bit CPUs.

I love all this development into the small portable market.

cant waite to afford to pull a paperback sized computer out of my pocket and play some decent games when I'm doing nothing at work.
June 2, 2008 4:20:33 PM

LOL me too. Yeah, nVidia and VIA are colluding together. Like I said, exciting times
June 2, 2008 5:31:10 PM

Maybe a Nvidia and VIA merger may happen?
a c 127 à CPUs
June 2, 2008 6:11:21 PM

I think you are falling into nVidias trap of just believeing everything they say.

Thinking about it a ARM chip vs a x86 chip is kinda like comparing a Core 2 vs a VIA chip. Two different typer of products and each will do what they are meant to do.

I think both will do what is needed but to say the least Intel is a more well known brand even in the small mobile market so nVidia may not just penetrate it like they want.
June 2, 2008 6:18:06 PM

Someone has had to do graphics? Who does the graphics for Mac mobile? I seriously dont know. Is it nVidia or some other iteration?
June 2, 2008 6:35:01 PM

ATI and nVidia have both supplied Mac
June 2, 2008 6:42:46 PM

I just dont see Intel being able to prevent nVidia from doing what they want to. This isnt the server/desktop cpu market here. From what Ive read, arm as well as other cpus are used in this segment. Then nVidia has already footholds here, it just doesnt make sense that Intel would be able to keep nVidia out. If its fair competition, Intel shouldnt have a thig to worry about, let alone try to influence nVidia out of this market
a c 127 à CPUs
June 2, 2008 6:52:14 PM

No but Intel is trying for both the small devices and introducing their own market that will probably become very popular with their new WiMax coming out known as UMDs or Ultra Mobile Devices. These are mainly for surfing the web and such but I am sure will start for gaming and HD video.

With nVidias chip I can see it for cellphones that are pretty small and other devices like that.

I am interested in the UMDs as they will be popular as travel devices. I think Intel might have a nice market for that but nVidia may push into it as well.
June 2, 2008 7:07:03 PM

It appears that nVidia has the phone thing going on (smaller) and heading towards the UMDs, while Intel is trying to get efficient enough to make these UMDs. Using the OLEDs sounds like its going to be needed, as Im not so certain the cpu whether its an arm or an OoO is going to cause the power issues, most likely as always, itll be graphics, where nVidia does have the edge
June 2, 2008 7:20:22 PM

I think Ive misunderstood some of this. Youre saying Atom is aimed at the UMD market, not the phone market. But its a possibility they can use Atom for phones too? Or its main intention is for this UMD market? If its UMD, then the Atom doesnt have near as far to go as I thought.
June 2, 2008 9:37:45 PM

JAYDEEJOHN said:
I think Ive misunderstood some of this. Youre saying Atom is aimed at the UMD market, not the phone market. But its a possibility they can use Atom for phones too? Or its main intention is for this UMD market? If its UMD, then the Atom doesnt have near as far to go as I thought.
Quote:
As Intel's smallest and lowest power processor², the Intel Atom processor enables the latest Mobile Internet Devices (MIDs), affordable Internet-focused notebooks (netbooks), and desktops (nettops). It's also the foundation for the all new Intel® Centrino® Atom™ processor technology, a collection of chips enabling amazing Internet experiences in pocketable devices.
Intel® Atom™ Processor: Intel's Smallest Chip
June 2, 2008 9:45:04 PM

I was caught up in the Intel hype about this chip. It isnt really ready for phones, thats why I was confused. They say it is, but it isnt. Sounds like other companies about
June 2, 2008 11:03:38 PM

I don't think I saw this link in the thread.
Quote:
Make no mistake. Intel’s Atom and Nvidia’s Tegra basically aim for the same market segments. But there are differences and each of these products may go after different segments first, building their defenses over the next several months....The fact that Atom does not include the chipset and graphics functionality, but has to rely on huge chipset is the main reason why Intel can’t compete in the smartphone space at this time - Atom is just too large. Tegra, on the other hand, is one step ahead of Atom and can aim for iPhone-like devices. Intel says that its 2010 Moorestown chip will be small enough for integration in smartphones.

Nvidia Unveils Tegra: A Computer On A Chip - Tom's Hardware
June 2, 2008 11:09:36 PM

Exactly. When Atom was introed , to me it sounded like the smartphone would be a go. Somebody goofed somewheres. Looks good for the UMDs tho, whereas, nVidia has a ways to go to get to the UMDs
June 3, 2008 6:35:21 AM

JAYDEEJOHN said:
Exactly. When Atom was introed , to me it sounded like the smartphone would be a go.


Not a chance; phones require CPUs with minute power consumption. Based on my past experience with ARM chips I doubt that even an ARM clocked at this speed would be viable in a typical phone; and, in any case, why would you want 1080p playback on a phone?

The PC market may be all about performance at any cost, but the cell phone market is about providing the minimum required performance for the smallest possible power consumption.
a b à CPUs
June 3, 2008 7:03:32 AM

MarkG said:
Not a chance; phones require CPUs with minute power consumption. Based on my past experience with ARM chips I doubt that even an ARM clocked at this speed would be viable in a typical phone; and, in any case, why would you want 1080p playback on a phone?

The PC market may be all about performance at any cost, but the cell phone market is about providing the minimum required performance for the smallest possible power consumption.


I suppose you could hook up a tv with the HDMI...
Anyways I don't think the Tegra shall be x86... nvidia + via... making via nano + geforce
June 3, 2008 7:23:18 AM

If this thing replays 720p using 1 watt, I can see what youre saying. Ive read up a lil about this as well as Intels offering. Intel wont be in this market for at least 1 new gen, or Moorstown I think they call it. nVidias already here, has vastly superior graphics, and can do the job. If this gets picked up, (and you think nVidia cant market?) itll do quite well. From a few people I know whove commented about this, theyre saying things just got a whole lot more interesting between Intel and nVidia. I think that the VIA and nVidia hookup will produce the real challenger of the Atom in its current form
a b à CPUs
June 3, 2008 9:02:03 AM

JAYDEEJOHN said:
Those same apps will be available for your "lowly" dual core as well


Its Athlon X2 @ 1.7GHZ and right now it's running x2 flv to ipod converters, x2 word Documents, windows task manger, VLC is playing a DVD of friends, itunes is playing music and I have alot of tabs on. All without major slowdown... I'm laughing as I type... I really don't see the point of quad-core (even tho my computer is maxing out...)
June 3, 2008 9:43:36 AM

Well, if you cant justify it for encoding any longer, then unless they make games/apps that absolutly require a quad me either. As far as apps goes, its looking more and more like therell be less and less need for them do to gpgpu solutions. Who knows. I just dont want something shoved down my throat that can be done better some other way, like usb3
a b à CPUs
June 3, 2008 10:49:50 AM

Ok, then I was like "lets prove dual-core is still the best" so I decided to run 4 instances of the encoder... smart... froze... for about 7 minutes and started to encode happily. Can't say the same to some of my other computers with less than 4GB of RAM.

Anyways I don't see the point of USB 3 (for me). Its not like Microsoft will ever bloat the word document to make it like 24.5MB... and its not like I have enough itunes credit to download many songs...

I don't wanna upgrade because of some fad...
Besides app requirements are pretty modest these days. Anyways I wanna keep all my software the same when I get a new like 64 core computer. That way everything will be like warp speed. I mean like Windows XP is the oldest windows OS I can tolerate... I'll have a separate OS for gaming like I currently do. How nice would it be for everything to load up instantly for everyday work...
June 3, 2008 11:08:13 AM

amdfangirl said:
Ok, then I was like "lets prove dual-core is still the best" so I decided to run 4 instances of the encoder... smart... froze... for about 7 minutes and started to encode happily. Can't say the same to some of my other computers with less than 4GB of RAM.

Anyways I don't see the point of USB 3 (for me). Its not like Microsoft will ever bloat the word document to make it like 24.5MB... and its not like I have enough itunes credit to download many songs...

I want USB3 to connect monitors to my computer. That's what i call an improvement. The point of those improvements is, most of the time, not to make you upgrade right now, but to improve the product in general the next time you actually do.
!