Intel Unveils Xe DG1 Mobile Graphics in Discrete Graphics Card for Developers

Intel revealed its first details of the DG1 discrete graphics here at CES 2020, but chose to peel the covers back slowly on its fledgling project with a few details sprinkled in a pre-brief, and then an onstage demo of a discrete laptop graphics chip inside of a Tiger Lake-powered notebook. Today the company pulled the covers back further as it revealed the new DG1 development kit and its DG1 mobile graphics in a standard graphics card form factor that the company seeds to independent software vendors (ISV) to help them optimize for its new graphics architecture. It also demoed the card running Warframe at 1080p.

(Image credit: Tom's Hardware)
Paul Alcorn
Editor-in-Chief

Paul Alcorn is the Editor-in-Chief for Tom's Hardware US. He also writes news and reviews on CPUs, storage, and enterprise hardware.

  • bigdragon
    Warframe is a 7 year old game. If Xe DG1 struggles with Warframe, then I don't want to see how it handles something modern like Monster Hunter World or Forza Horizon 4. I'd like to see more competition in the GPU space, but I'm not seeing any reason to take Intel seriously yet. Too much marketing; not enough performance.

    Get it together, Intel!
    Reply
  • Giroro
    "An executive told us to put integrated graphics into a dedicated GPU, and nobody knows why"
    -A lead engineer at intel, probably

    Really, though, What do you think the chances are that DG1 die is just a faulty CPU?
    Reply
  • jimmysmitty
    bigdragon said:
    Warframe is a 7 year old game. If Xe DG1 struggles with Warframe, then I don't want to see how it handles something modern like Monster Hunter World or Forza Horizon 4. I'd like to see more competition in the GPU space, but I'm not seeing any reason to take Intel seriously yet. Too much marketing; not enough performance.

    Get it together, Intel!

    Considering its a mobile GPU being shown off and the information TH put in here its too early to judge it for the desktop market. But if its as powerful as they claim it to be we could see a decent iGPU form Intel to compete with AMD.

    Giroro said:
    "An executive told us to put integrated graphics into a dedicated GPU, and nobody knows why"
    -A lead engineer at intel, probably

    Really, though, What do you think the chances are that DG1 die is just a faulty CPU?

    I doubt it.

    Considering that Intel is planning a discrete GPU for the desktop market and a HPC variant they are probably already developing stand alone GPU dies for testing.
    Reply
  • grimfox
    We've already seen dual-GPU systems die out over time, so transparently implementing a multi-chip architecture is going to be key.

    I disagree with this comparison. I think there are some pretty stark differences between what Intel is doing today compared to what nV and ATI were doing back in the day. From the ground up Intel is designing this thing to be multichiplette based device. I half expect the same driver that runs a meager 24EU device to work the 96EU or even a 384EU device. I think that since the first place they are deploying this design is a super computer lends further evidence that the quantity of chiplettes has little effect on the firmware. In a super computer they could have 1000s of these devices networked together operating as a single massive processing unit.

    There are certainly going to be limitations but I doubt they will be as painful as they were strapping two full chips together.
    Reply
  • Pat Flynn
    bigdragon said:
    Warframe is a 7 year old game. If Xe DG1 struggles with Warframe, then I don't want to see how it handles something modern like Monster Hunter World or Forza Horizon 4. I'd like to see more competition in the GPU space, but I'm not seeing any reason to take Intel seriously yet. Too much marketing; not enough performance.

    Get it together, Intel!

    As was stated in the article, this is early silicon. This means the drivers have an enormous amount of optimizations and bug fixes to be done, and the silicon likely needs to be tweaked once it's ready for the market. The developers of the games/game engines also need to optimize for this hardware, so again, more software work to be done. Also, being that this is a sub 75W card, don't expect screaming performance.
    Reply
  • jimmysmitty
    grimfox said:
    I disagree with this comparison. I think there are some pretty stark differences between what Intel is doing today compared to what nV and ATI were doing back in the day. From the ground up Intel is designing this thing to be multichiplette based device. I half expect the same driver that runs a meager 24EU device to work the 96EU or even a 384EU device. I think that since the first place they are deploying this design is a super computer lends further evidence that the quantity of chiplettes has little effect on the firmware. In a super computer they could have 1000s of these devices networked together operating as a single massive processing unit.

    There are certainly going to be limitations but I doubt they will be as painful as they were strapping two full chips together.

    Honest truth is we should be screaming for Intel to have a competitive GPU. We have had a duopoly for so long that AMD and Nvidia have been guilty of working together to price fix.

    Having a third option to put pressure on the other two is a great thing. AMD alone has been unable to really get prices down. Maybe Intel will be able to.
    Reply
  • mcgge1360
    Giroro said:
    "An executive told us to put integrated graphics into a dedicated GPU, and nobody knows why"
    -A lead engineer at intel, probably

    Really, though, What do you think the chances are that DG1 die is just a faulty CPU?
    That's actually not a bad idea. Could be making graphics cards for dirt-cheap for builds that need an iGPU but don't need anything for gaming (cough cough Ryzen). Dead CPUs would be scrap anyways, so no cost there, strap on a $10 heat sink and $3 PCB and boop, you got a GPU capable of DX12 and 3/4 monitors for the price of a few coffees.
    Reply
  • bit_user
    Giroro said:
    "An executive told us to put integrated graphics into a dedicated GPU, and nobody knows why"
    -A lead engineer at intel, probably
    AMD's RX 550 has only 8 CUs, whereas their APUs have up to 11. So, it's not unprecedented to have a dGPU that's the same size or smaller than an iGPU.

    Giroro said:
    Really, though, What do you think the chances are that DG1 die is just a faulty CPU?
    No, that would be silly. Not least, because the dGPU will want GDDR5 or better, which the CPU doesn't support. The RX 550 I mentioned supports GDDR5, giving it 112 GB/sec of memory bandwidth, which about 3x as fast as the DDR4 that 1st gen Ryzen APUs of the day could support. On bandwidth-bound workloads, that would give it an edge over a comparable iGPU.

    Also, for security reasons, some of the iGPUs registers & memory might not be accessible from an external PCIe entity.
    Reply
  • bit_user
    mcgge1360 said:
    Dead CPUs would be scrap anyways, so no cost there,
    Defects that would kill the entire CPU would probably be in places like the ring bus, memory controller, PCIe interface, or other common areas that would also compromise the iGPU's functionality.

    It would be very unlikely to have defects in so many cores, especially if the iGPU is then somehow unaffected (or minimally so).
    Reply
  • bit_user
    jimmysmitty said:
    We have had a duopoly for so long that AMD and Nvidia have been guilty of working together to price fix.
    Source?
    Reply