Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in

GE Announces Kepler Graphics Card for Military and Aviation

By - Source: GE | B 37 comments

GE builds graphics cards? Apparently so!

Yes, they may not be mainstream graphics cards, but they pack current GPU technology and offer it for special markets such as military applications and airplanes. GE said it just updated the Nvidia Fermi-based GRA111 and is now shipping the Kepler-based GRA112 with Nvidia's EXK107 graphics core.

“Program managers are under continuous pressure to reduce development costs and time-to-market while delivering maximum performance in the most demanding applications,” said Rod Rice, GM for military and aerospace products at GE, in a prepared statement. “The GRA112 provides a level of performance that, in many applications, is substantially superior to what is possible with traditional programming techniques – allowing developers to implement more sophisticated, more performance-hungry algorithms.”

The card carries 2 GB of GDDR5 memory and uses the standard 384 processing cores and 64 GBps internal memory bandwidth, as well as 16 GBps external PCI Express bandwidth. The floating point performance is promised at 622 double-precision GFlops. The big deal is, of course, the possibility to develop GPGPU applications based on CUDA for the card.

GE did not release pricing and availability data for the GRA112.

Discuss
Ask a Category Expert

Create a new thread in the News comments forum about this subject

Example: Notebook, Android, SSD hard drive

This thread is closed for comments
Top Comments
  • 16 Hide
    rozz , May 17, 2012 2:14 PM
    For this article, I can legitimately ask the question, "will it play crisis?"
  • 13 Hide
    freggo , May 17, 2012 3:03 PM
    rozzFor this article, I can legitimately ask the question, "will it play crisis?"


    Yeah, because the next time you fly on the airlines you want to be assured that the pilots can play video games in the cockpit :-)
  • 10 Hide
    NightLight , May 17, 2012 2:13 PM
    that's big business for the green team!
Other Comments
    Display all 37 comments.
  • 10 Hide
    NightLight , May 17, 2012 2:13 PM
    that's big business for the green team!
  • 16 Hide
    rozz , May 17, 2012 2:14 PM
    For this article, I can legitimately ask the question, "will it play crisis?"
  • 3 Hide
    leo2kp , May 17, 2012 2:49 PM
    I can honestly say that if I saw that thing in an airplane or something else, I would never have thought "yep, that's a graphics card."
  • 4 Hide
    Chainzsaw , May 17, 2012 2:49 PM
    Kind of odd to go with kepler when the 7XXX has much better GPGPU abilities.

    Anyone care to explain why they chose kepler?
  • 4 Hide
    blazorthon , May 17, 2012 2:56 PM
    ChainzsawKind of odd to go with kepler when the 7XXX has much better GPGPU abilities.Anyone care to explain why they chose kepler?


    GCN is only so much better when consumer graphics GPUs are used. Kepler's professional GPUs have far greater DP performance than their consumer GPUs. GCN might still be better, but with 384 cores supplying over 600GFLOPS of DP performance, the professional Kepler GPUs are at the least, very good competition. I think that this card has almost as much DP performance as the GTX 590.
  • 4 Hide
    teaser , May 17, 2012 2:58 PM
    I don't think these are the standard kepler based chips........
  • 13 Hide
    freggo , May 17, 2012 3:03 PM
    rozzFor this article, I can legitimately ask the question, "will it play crisis?"


    Yeah, because the next time you fly on the airlines you want to be assured that the pilots can play video games in the cockpit :-)
  • -1 Hide
    blazorthon , May 17, 2012 3:05 PM
    Quote:
    Yeah, because the next time you fly on the airlines you want to be assured that the pilots can play video games in the cockpit :-)


    It would probably do a crap job of playing Crysis. The GTX 550 TI would probably beat it. This card is built for DP compute, not gaming performance, and 384 Kepler cores is a very small number for Kepler cores when it comes to gaming.
  • -3 Hide
    atikkur , May 17, 2012 3:27 PM
    ChainzsawKind of odd to go with kepler when the 7XXX has much better GPGPU abilities.Anyone care to explain why they chose kepler?


    because of the communities my friend,, i believe nvidia is still the most famous amongst the scientist in concern of paralel-computing, their support and effort to promote this gpgpu thing are the toppest. and now, is the time for them to harvest their big work. imo.
  • 4 Hide
    blazorthon , May 17, 2012 3:29 PM
    Quote:
    because of the communities my friend,, i believe nvidia is still the most famous amongst the scientist in concern of paralel-computing, their support and effort to promote this gpgpu thing are the toppest. and now, is the time for them to harvest their big work. imo.


    Did you not read the article? It clearly states that this little card has over 600GFLOPS of DP compute performance. That makes it the fastest low end GPGPU board that I'v ever heard of. It's right up with the GTX 590 in DP compute performance.
  • 0 Hide
    Chainzsaw , May 17, 2012 3:40 PM
    Quote:
    GCN is only so much better when consumer graphics GPUs are used. Kepler's professional GPUs have far greater DP performance than their consumer GPUs. GCN might still be better, but with 384 cores supplying over 600GFLOPS of DP performance, the professional Kepler GPUs are at the least, very good competition. I think that this card has almost as much DP performance as the GTX 590.


    AFAIK the highest 7xxx series supports ■947 GFLOPS Double Precision compute power which is still much more powerful than NVIDIAs offering.
  • 3 Hide
    blazorthon , May 17, 2012 3:42 PM
    ChainzsawAFAIK the highest 7xxx series supports ■947 GFLOPS Double Precision compute power which is still much more powerful than NVIDIAs offering.


    This is a low end card. It's TDP is probably below 60w. This does not compete with the 7950 (7970 has more than 1100GFLOPS of DP compute performance according to Tom's tests, so I assume that you meant the 7950 when you said 947GFLOPS). I only used the GTX 590 as an example to say where it's DP performance lies. In fact, I earlier said that the gaming performance of this card is closer to the GTX 550 TI, possibly below it, just to show how it is not a consumer card like the 79xx cards are. Of course, the article should have been enough evidence for that. It has 384 Kepler FP64 cores. Of course it doesn't beat a high end card like the 7970 that is semi-compute oriented and the same generation.
  • -5 Hide
    Chainzsaw , May 17, 2012 3:55 PM
    Quote:
    This is a low end card. It's TDP is probably below 50w. This does not compete with the 7950 (7970 has more than 1100GFLOPS of DP compute performance according to Tom's tests, so I assume that you meant the 7950 when you said 947GFLOPS). I only used the GTX 590 as an example to say where it's DP performance lies. n fact, I earlier said that the gaming performance of this card is closer to the GTX 550 TI, possibly below it, jsut to show how it is not a consumer oriented card. Of course, the article should have been enough evidence for THAT. It has 384 Kepler cores. Of course it doesn't beat a high end card like the 7970 that is semi-compute oriented and the same generation.



    I know what you said. However the 7xxx series has a better architecture for exactly what GE is looking for.

    What if they made the card out of AMD's architecture instead of NVIDIAs - it would probably still have higher compute performance than this card they mentioned (same form factor, TDP, etc).


    Oh well GE should have consulted us here at TOMSHARDWARE first for best bang for the buck compute performance :p 
  • 2 Hide
    ashesofempires04 , May 17, 2012 3:58 PM
    It won't matter how good of a card it is; if it's not hardened against vibration, physical shock, and EM interference, the military isn't going to use it.

    That goes double for any consumer level card; they aren't built to handle the abuse that military applications put on electronics.
  • 2 Hide
    blazorthon , May 17, 2012 3:58 PM
    ChainzsawI know what you said. However the 7xxx series has a better architecture for exactly what GE is looking for. What if they made the card out of AMD's architecture instead of NVIDIAs - it would probably still have higher compute performance than this card they mentioned (same form factor, TDP, etc).Oh well GE should have consulted us here at TOMSHARDWARE first for best bang for the buck compute performance


    You don't know that. This 40-60 watt card is about half as fast as the 250w 7970. We don't know how fast a professional GCN GPU would be for the power usage and we don't know very well how much power usage the FP64 Kepler based cards use either (my numbers are speculation based on some math and comparing other cards to where this one is said perform). You have no idea whether or not GCN would make this better or not.
  • 4 Hide
    blazorthon , May 17, 2012 4:00 PM
    blazorthonYou don't know that. This 40-60 watt card is about half as fast as the 250w 7970. We don't know how fast a professional GCN GPU would be for the power usage and we don't know very well how much power usage the FP64 Kepler based cards use either (my numbers are speculation based on some math and comparing other cards to where this one is said perform). You have no idea whether or not GCN would make this better or not.


    Also, using GCN would have meant no CUDA.
  • 2 Hide
    kristoffe , May 17, 2012 4:08 PM
    I have yet to see an ati card that isn't buggy and actually has more real world fps than a competing nvidia card. OpenCL is great but cuda took off. bye bye betamax
  • -5 Hide
    Chainzsaw , May 17, 2012 4:12 PM
    Quote:
    You have no idea whether or not GCN would make this better or not.


    Neither do you. However the proof is in the architecture. Heck the old fermi architecture was better at compute abilities than kepler.

    Quote:
    Also, using GCN would have meant no CUDA.


    IMO OpenCL is a better way of doing things than CUDA. I'm sure both have their strengths and weaknesses though.
  • -1 Hide
    blazorthon , May 17, 2012 4:12 PM
    kristoffeI have yet to see an ati card that isn't buggy and actually has more real world fps than a competing nvidia card. OpenCL is great but cuda took off. bye bye betamax


    I have yet to see an AMD card that is any more buggy than a Nvidia card and AMD competes with Nvidia in performance extremely well. Nvidia's top card, the GTX 680, is only a hair above the 7970, in most games and even when it's not, it's still not a huge difference. The 7970 has similar leads over the 680 in some games. AMD and Nvidia are closer with this graphics card generation than they were with the previous generation (GTX 500 versus Radeon 6000).

    Nvidia has had just as many driver/bug problems as AMD. In fact, Nvidia has had worse problems. Nvidia, not AMD/Ati, was the one who released a driver that actually kills the graphics card. I think it was Nvidia's 196.75 or something like that. AMD never screwed up that badly. Both companies have their problems, but you're just a fanboy.
  • -1 Hide
    kristoffe , May 17, 2012 4:20 PM
    I haven't really experienced half as many as with ati, and this is a full range of legacy to current pci-e 3.0 cards. real world results, not numbers as well.

    not really, I am a forensic artist that uses consumer and prosumer cards alike and I write in both cuda and opencl.

    ;)  good luck on your derpathon champ
Display more comments