Which company?t

[jonyb222]

Which company do you think will the least affected/benefit the most from the CPU-GPU confratation that coming up in a few months?

This could also be interpreted as which company will take the lead in the next 1-2 years (in the CPU-GPU segmentthat is)

My vote is on AMD/ATI just cuz they've already good pretty good products on both sides, all they need is to integrate the two technologies together


*Edit* remember this is for CPU-GPU segment and not just CPU alone

 

[Gravemind123]

I think in the end it will be AMD coming out strong if they can pull the CPUs up. They already have the best integrated performance. The problem is if AMD's CPU division keeps failing like it has, then Intel will probably be the best off. nVidia is in trouble because they don't make CPUs, and therefore can't integrate a CPU and GPU easily without partnering with another company and I doubt Intel or AMD would do that.

I think VIA will be least affected though, they will probably keep their current position of budget chipsets, low-power CPUs and integrated graphics.

 

[runswindows95]

Intel and Nvidia are going to be the most affected. If AMD can make a CPU that is at the same level as Intel, then they will benefit the most. VIA will benefit as well with the lower end chips.

 

[justjc]

Reading the comments so far I can see that we havn't all read http://www.theinquirer.net/gb/inquirer/news/2008/04/24/nvidia-declares-war-intel first, that I think is the reason the thread was made. This is the reason behind the following resume.

There is a media war going on between nVidia and Intel.

On their side Intel appearently claimed at IDF Spring 2008 that the power of the GPU can be built into the CPU so a GPU company like nVidia, allhough they have good products, will die.

On the other side nVidia being offended by this claim attacks back by claiming that such a CPU with an integrated GPU will newer be able to compete with discrete graphics. They also reveal the fact that graphics cards have a bigger impact on modern computers than CPUs. Finally they laugh at Larrabee, saying that with the current integrated graphics Intel can't even get WHQL certification, so they doubt they'll be able to make usable drivers for Laughabee.


As for the question there is no doubt AMD will benefit the most.
- They will not be directly involved in the media war, but is on the winning side no matter who wins(CPUs or GPU)
- The war was started by Intels answer to AMDs Fusion processor, however AMD have promised it's partners the ability to upgrade with discrete graphics with Fusion, something Intel haven't.
- If Intel and nVidia stops working together nVidia is more likely to work closely with AMD on making the gaming platform of the future.
- While this war is running no respectable journalist will bother with AMD being a bit behind, and as such AMD gets a little break in the bad press.
- add more here...

 

[croc]

AMD is bleeding money left and right. ATI hasn't had a profitable quarter since AMD bought them.

Nvidia hasn't executed so well of recent, and have NO experience in CPU's,
and NO fabs.

I'd not like being AMD/ATI or Nvidia sitting across the table from Intel, and staring at Intel's pile of chips... (CPU, MB chipsets, integrated GPU's, flash memory, etc...) And then there is their ability to do internal R&D...

But, hey... Its interesting times that we live in.

 

[justjc]

Intel hasn't excactly delivered as fast chips as expected with their Q9000 series and their only experience with discrete graphics product so far, the Intel i740, lasted for 18 months before they threw the towel in the ring

You can read about Intels last attempt in dedicated graphics at C|Net News http://www.news.com/Intel-retreats-from-graphics-chips/2100-1001_3-230019.html and compare with the current situation yourself to make a guess of how well Larrabee will do.

About nVidia not having experience in CPUs the question is why would they need it, they have afterall just declared that it's dead.

When it comes to combined CPU+GPU Intel is playing catch up with AMD who bought ATi, among other things, to make that fusion possible.
To beat AMD to market Intel have planned to make a naphalem processor and add graphics evolved from their current integrated graphics(only Intel knows how many CPU/GPU cores it will have) to launch in early 2009.
AMDs latest plans for Fusion is to launch White Swift a single phenom CPU in late 2009 comming with a GPU with support for Hybrid Crossfire=newer generation that will kick butt on the Intel solution. Later Black Swift a dual core will follow and finally Bulldozer and Bobcat will come and totally integrate the GPU into the CPU.
nVidias spot in all this is that both Intel and AMD in their first versions will have built in support for PCI-e x16 in the processor so discrete graphics will still be an option. Later AMD have plans of making the computer modular, with multiple processor sockets, where companys nVidia can make their own add in module that will have hypertransport access to the CPU for those who wants more graphics power.

I agree interesting times indeed...

 

[jonyb222]

To say the least the next year or so (whatever time till fusion, larabee/nehalem and whatever Nvidia's working on comes out) will be a very interresting one.

Tooo bad it's only coming in 2009-20010, I can't wait to see which will win between Fusion and nehalem/larabee.


BTW: for those who didn't know (myself included) larabee is gonna be on a video card and not in a CPU socket (though they might make it for servers and such)

 

[Hellboy]

To say the least the next year or so (whatever time till fusion, larabee/nehalem and whatever Nvidia's working on comes out) will be a very interresting one.

Tooo bad it's only coming in 2009-20010, I can't wait to see which will win between Fusion and nehalem/larabee.


BTW: for those who didn't know (myself included) larabee is gonna be on a video card and not in a CPU socket (though they might make it for servers and such)

AMD has a working approach with the 780 and a radeon 3400 series which seems pretty good to me working with Crossfire, although Crossfire has never been the success SLI from Nvidia has....

And as a standard video card built in a 790FX ain so bad either...

I hope that there is more to come with the 4000 series video card and that AMD get a substantial lead out of it...

Is Nvidia going the way of 3DFX and getting too cocky for their own good.. No one likes a firm who is cocky as Nvidia seem to be taking on something more than they can chew with Intel....

Intel will, im sure bring something better in to the mainstream with its Labaree technology, but this is only the beginning..

Lets hope AMD wins though as they lost the current processor war..

 

[Hellboy]

Intel hasn't excactly delivered as fast chips as expected with their Q9000 series and their only experience with discrete graphics product so far, the Intel i740, lasted for 18 months before they threw the towel in the ring

You can read about Intels last attempt in dedicated graphics at C|Net News http://www.news.com/Intel-retreats-from-graphics-chips/2100-1001_3-230019.html and compare with the current situation yourself to make a guess of how well Larrabee will do.

About nVidia not having experience in CPUs the question is why would they need it, they have afterall just declared that it's dead.

When it comes to combined CPU+GPU Intel is playing catch up with AMD who bought ATi, among other things, to make that fusion possible.
To beat AMD to market Intel have planned to make a naphalem processor and add graphics evolved from their current integrated graphics(only Intel knows how many CPU/GPU cores it will have) to launch in early 2009.
AMDs latest plans for Fusion is to launch White Swift a single phenom CPU in late 2009 comming with a GPU with support for Hybrid Crossfire=newer generation that will kick butt on the Intel solution. Later Black Swift a dual core will follow and finally Bulldozer and Bobcat will come and totally integrate the GPU into the CPU.
nVidias spot in all this is that both Intel and AMD in their first versions will have built in support for PCI-e x16 in the processor so discrete graphics will still be an option. Later AMD have plans of making the computer modular, with multiple processor sockets, where companys nVidia can make their own add in module that will have hypertransport access to the CPU for those who wants more graphics power.

I agree interesting times indeed...

I remember selling some Intel 740i videocards with the seagull demo and the water comming down the mountain..

It was ok but a bit stuttery in some places and was never that impressed with it... 3DFX rocked then...

 

[Shadow703793]

I voted VIA because VIA wouldn't care :lol: :lol:

 

[jonyb222]

So it's pretty safe to say that intel is the one with the most to lose coming into this thing?

 

[runswindows95]

I voted VIA because VIA wouldn't care :lol: :lol:

:lol: I voted the same as well. VIA won't get covered in "it" when the Nvidia/Intel name calling hits the fan.

 

[Gravemind123]

Intel has enough R&D power and money to make it out of anything at this point though. If they need to make a performance GPU, they can afford to throw money at it, something AMD can't afford to do right now. Although Intel still has the weakest graphics performance, they are supposed to improve in the next generation, specifically HD Video playback. I'd assume that if they are serious about making CPU/GPU combos then they will come up with a decently performing solution.

AMD's position is ok at the moment. Although they don't have cash to throw at the issue, they have a full processor development division with experience and with ATI they have a graphics division that can make decent cards. They have perhaps the best balance of current CPU and GPU abilities, especially on the budget end. AMD still has decent value CPUs and the best IGP performance.

nVidia is perhaps in the worst position as they make no CPUs, and it would be tough to break in to the X86 market at this point in time, especially with no fabs and having to start from scratch on design. They have the graphics part down, but they are the only company who does not already have a stake in both markets. Perhaps they can make chipsets for the new CPU/GPU combos that are decent or make deals with another company to get their stake in the CPU/GPU combination market.

VIA is currently the ultra-low-end and low-power use leader with their many mini-ITX solutions and their low power draw CPUs and IGPs. Their market is probably safe, because it does not demand performance, only form factor and value. Their next gen CPUs are supposed to be a large improvement on their current C7 line, but their IGP will still likely be weak. I'd bet they stay the same.

Although this is all speculation anyway, I will probably never own a CPU/GPU combo until they can get the performance of them up good enough to play games on, which I don't think will happen for a while. This means that even though nVidia may have no luck in this market, it can hold out using dedicated card sales.

 

[Just_An_Engineer]

^ then again Nvirda might eat VIA..............

I remember reading that there would be an issue with the transfer of VIA's x86 license if they were acquired. Anyone have some additional info on this? Even if that's the case though I wouldn't be surprised to see Nvidia enter into an alliance agreement with VIA and develop a competing product as a joint venture if they can't acquire them outright.

 

[Gravemind123]

Could always be a merger rather then nVidia making a buyout of VIA, that could potentially allow the company to keep using its X86 license.

 

[jimmysmitty]

Which company do you think will the least affected/benefit the most from the CPU-GPU confratation that coming up in a few months?

This could also be interpreted as which company will take the lead in the next 1-2 years (in the CPU-GPU segmentthat is)

My vote is on AMD/ATI just cuz they've already good pretty good products on both sides, all they need is to integrate the two technologies together


*Edit* remember this is for CPU-GPU segment and not just CPU alone

Well considering this market does not currently exist yet it is hard to say. But Intels plans of Nehalem release would put them ahead of the pack in this market. Claiming that AMD/ATI would be better is impossible as is saying Intel would be. AMD's current chips are ok and their GPUs are near what they should be and hopefully they will get better with the next generation.

nVidia will not be effected that much since they play a very little role in the IGP market compared to AMD and Intel. Their biggest area for IGP is probably Laptops.

I say whoever gets their CPU/GPU chips out first will have the advantage of time and experience and will fare much better than the competition.

I'd say Intel and Nvirda are gonna kill each other with marketing and etc whilst AMD creates a new superchip and awesome graphics. Via's gonna be under threat by Atom whilst SIS is plain dead

Thats funny. AMD and the word super chip. Just kidding. I doubt AMD's will be a super chip but hopefully it will compete with Intels on a good level to help spur innovation in that market. I just want to see PC's of the low end able to play all games that way PC gaming can go where it belongs, the top that is.

And who is this SIS you speak of?