What Nvidia Had to Say About Larrabee's Delay

I think they also said "That'll teach you to shut us off the chipset market, d*cks".

i expected more showmanship for the green team. its early though..

Well well... seriously who didn't knew that Nvidia was going to say something too... >

Would have been nice to see Intel compete in GPUs for all our sake since it should have driven prices down and innovation and performance up. Boo

i'm surprised that Jen-Hsun Huang hasn't issued a statement, totally verbally raping Intel on this one..., wasn't it he who crowned it "Laughabee"?

LOL

Since when have Intel and Nvidia respected eachother?! Are you aware of the chipset war between them right now?!

This failure in part of Intel might give AMD its chance to shine if it actually attempts to exploit it.. Nvidia can also go with its "x86" processor and make a combined core as well..

"BWWAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!"

Wouldn't it be funny if Intel tomorrow actually released Larrabee, and it was awesome?

... x86 is all, that intel haz...

Such a small comment...the article has more references to what AMD said then Nvidia, and all of it was already in yesterday's piece.
Dig more, journalists!

"Making a parallel computing chip is hard, says Nvidia."

Apparently so is making their current-gen GPU.

SSD?

I even typed it slow for better comprehension and of course somebody didn't get it. What you are saying makes my point. I expected some fur to fly and their response was relatively tame. Nvidia usually makes very harsh comments towards Intel and this was weak going by their previous banterings.

Intel would have becomed to powerfull. All the oem's would be forced to use their chip, killing Nvidia and AMD in one blow. Intel can underprice both away if they ever succeed.

And we know what happens next.

Intel would have becomed to powerfull. All the oem's would be forced to use their chip, killing Nvidia and AMD in one blow. Intel can underprice both away if they ever succeed.

And we know what happens next.

This would be the only thing related to the title of this article. The rest is taken from earlier article about what AMD had to say.. C'mon guys, you get paid by article or what?

Agreed, its been 18-months since NVIDIA realeased a new GPU chipset. They couldn't even scale-down their GTS-200 for over a year (turn-off does not equal scale-down i.e. 280 -> 260).

Nvidia, who single-handedly shut-down 3DFx (before buying them), has run into a wall trying to introduce a new architecture, what made Intel think it could duct-tape a bunch of Pentium Pros together and call it a GPU? Sorry Intel, you missed the train when you let AMD buy ATI. You've now pissed off Nvidia with your ridiculous chipset licensing, so who does that leave? Matrox? SGI? I doubt Intel will ever be a player in the commercial GPU after-market.

i still get the feeling 45nm and 32nm wernt enough for first gen larrabee designs, pushing the card beyond the limits of the pcie slot + power connectors (perhaps from inefficency too)

LOL! So nVidia where is the GT3xx cards?

From the way he double spaced nearly every sentence, maybe he gets paid by the page. All this for one lame quote...

He said shownmanship, not sportsmanship. That means he expected them to create a bolder statement or maybe another cartoon or soemthing.

ha ha ha anyone else a redman? AMD KNYUKKA's!!!!!

seriuosly though amd has been the only one innovating now a days i mean in both graphics AND cpu arenas. i7 = better use of phenom architecture, multicore, 64bit, the list goes on but needless to say they are the only ones that can laugh at intel now nvidia cant even complete their gpu on time.

I always check my work for grammar and spelling errors before I post it, Yammie!

Intel has great ideas. But they might just get too far ahead for everybody else. I don't see what future is there for two separate processing unit CPU and GPU in a computer. Wouldn't it be nice and unified to have one processing unit to do everything (computing and graphics)? With the discrete card configuration, half the resources are wasted if it's idling. For example, if you are doing heavy computing, most of the graphic pipes is not used = wasted silicon. On the other hand, if the apps/game is graphic intense but not CPU intense, then most cores of the CPU would be idling or wasted.

But what if the CPU is designed to perform both heavy computing as well as graphic? In the near future, we might see 256+ cores in a CPU that rivals our current supercomputer. Now, the CPU could shift its resources/cores based on the apps/games. If you're doing heavy computation, most cores would be dedicated to computing and less to the display graphics. During intense gaming, the CPU would allocate most cores to rendering graphics. In both cases, the entire CPU is utilized; very little wasted. This method of dynamic resource allocation, might be the future. But of course would require changes to both our hardware and software.

you say Intel inside .... i say .. definitely not Larrabee

where is the new nvidia gpu at?

Surely, they can't and shouldn't make an extravagant comment with Larabee because they're in no position at all to talk about GPUs right now. Nvidia is currently the underdog and their only response we get right now is the rebadged GT 310.

[citation]Yesterday, AMD predictably told us that it was proud of having established both a CPU and GPU business.[/citation]

Wait a second.... when did AMD establish a GPU business? Last time I checked, they just took over ATI and claimed any glory ATI had already planned out (up to R900 in fact is pre-AMD take over).

If you look at one side. Look at the other:

nVidia wasn't allowing any support for SLI outside of their chipsets that were actually inferior to Intels chipsets and even AMDs chipsets. They were trying to create a SLI monopoly so to speak. They knew that if they didn't do it this way they would be lose a lot of sales to Intel and AMD.

I know plenty of people who only went with nVidia because at the time their GPUs were better and wanted SLI. If they could have a Intel/AMD chipset with SLI they would have. It makes you wounder why AMD was willing to let Intel have a CFX license. Maybe because they knew they could make more money off of Intel chipsets.....




It would be.

but my guess to the delay is because there was a point where Intel revamped the program. They basically started from scratch. That wont stop them from continuing to find ways to make it better. Now they will focus on the software development and have it ready to go.

Next will be the process. Probably work it into 32nm that way they can get better performance and lower the TDP.

Maybe, one day, after Intel has spunked a few more billions, they may produce a graphics solution that actually is good. Problem is nVidia and ATI have already established brand recognition and a history of producing fine products.

Intel have a history of producing integrated graphics that are, frankly, shit.

Intel dont have the money to actually produce a good product AND the advertising budget to convince us that it isnt more of the same old crap.

For an article title offering nVidia's position, I expected more than a one-sentence quote buffeted by the last three articles worth of Larrabee news.