Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

The AMD/ATI "why?" emerges

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    3 guesses and the first 2 don't count
    Dr. Mordrid
    ----------------------------
    An elephant is a mouse built to government specifications.

    I carry a gun because I can't throw a rock 1,250 fps

    Comment


    • #17
      If it were that obvious, I'd know.
      Gigabyte P35-DS3L with a Q6600, 2GB Kingston HyperX (after *3* bad pairs of Crucial Ballistix 1066), Galaxy 8800GT 512MB, SB X-Fi, some drives, and a Dell 2005fpw. Running WinXP.

      Comment


      • #18
        Hehe, while everyone is buying graphic companies, my prediction is that Intel will buy Matrox

        Comment


        • #19
          That could actually make sense. The P-cards have 4 programmable shaders & Matrox would be cheaper to buy than NVIDIA. Never say never these days
          Dr. Mordrid
          ----------------------------
          An elephant is a mouse built to government specifications.

          I carry a gun because I can't throw a rock 1,250 fps

          Comment


          • #20
            But Intel's already done integrated graphics. They're probably more up-to-date on the technology than Matrox is.
            Gigabyte P35-DS3L with a Q6600, 2GB Kingston HyperX (after *3* bad pairs of Crucial Ballistix 1066), Galaxy 8800GT 512MB, SB X-Fi, some drives, and a Dell 2005fpw. Running WinXP.

            Comment


            • #21
              Intel doesn't have a strong 3D chip!

              Their graphics chip leaves much to be desired, I would prefer Matrox over anything Intel

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by Elie
                Intel doesn't have a strong 3D chip!

                Their graphics chip leaves much to be desired, I would prefer Matrox over anything Intel
                Intel's next IGP is supposed to be pretty good. At least on par with the ATi and nVidia IGP offerings if the hype can be believed.

                “Inside every sane person there’s a madman struggling to get out”
                –The Light Fantastic, Terry Pratchett

                Comment


                • #23
                  But the question is are they actively pursuing GPGPU? I would imagine at some level, but akin to what AMD/ATI are planning? Hmm.....

                  Dr. Mordrid
                  Dr. Mordrid
                  ----------------------------
                  An elephant is a mouse built to government specifications.

                  I carry a gun because I can't throw a rock 1,250 fps

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Personally, I can't even stomach the term "GPGPU." It's not at all general purpose. That's what CPUs are.

                    But I think this sort of thing comes pretty naturally now that PCI-E is about. AGP offered almost no return bandwidth, with high latency, and that's why the effort was so crippled until recently.
                    Gigabyte P35-DS3L with a Q6600, 2GB Kingston HyperX (after *3* bad pairs of Crucial Ballistix 1066), Galaxy 8800GT 512MB, SB X-Fi, some drives, and a Dell 2005fpw. Running WinXP.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Originally posted by Wombat
                      But it wouldn't be a very good idea to do so. CPUs are mostly general-purpose machines. Video cards are very specialized. It just so happens that video card architecture is highly compatible with certain software problems, such as massive parallel calculations. Their functional units and memory systems are pretty favorable for these things.
                      Well, inside a CPU are different, specialized units (floating point, integer, ...) to increase performance. Adding additional specialized units would increase perfomance, as long as there is sufficiant work for them.

                      However, putting that functionality on a CPU would be a negative, overall. You can't put something on a CPU without taking something away.
                      I'm actually thinking along the lines of a dual-core, with 1 traditional CPU and 1 GPU-like thing. Or a quadcore for that matter...


                      Jörg
                      pixar
                      Dream as if you'll live forever. Live as if you'll die tomorrow. (James Dean)

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        I wonder how open the AMD/ATI platform will be in regard to Linux though (remembering how great are ATI drivers there)

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          N/P with Linux DD's here so far, and the software is what'll be using the GPGPU. As long as the DD's are set up right it should work, and you can bet AMD will be overseeing something so important. No more ATI-guys winging it.
                          Dr. Mordrid
                          ----------------------------
                          An elephant is a mouse built to government specifications.

                          I carry a gun because I can't throw a rock 1,250 fps

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Originally posted by VJ
                            Well, inside a CPU are different, specialized units (floating point, integer, ...) to increase performance. Adding additional specialized units would increase perfomance, as long as there is sufficiant work for them.
                            No, not really. There are many reasons for this, but one of the clearest is that for video display, data in << data out. CPUs have other things to spend their bandwidth on, and aren't well suited for the large pipes out that video processors have to their memory.
                            Gigabyte P35-DS3L with a Q6600, 2GB Kingston HyperX (after *3* bad pairs of Crucial Ballistix 1066), Galaxy 8800GT 512MB, SB X-Fi, some drives, and a Dell 2005fpw. Running WinXP.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Via Epia's in Mini PC's are selling pretty good, and Via seem to be long before they get anything new out the door.
                              WHy not use Geode/AthlonXP and a small ati GPU together to compete against the Via Luke setup?
                              This would mean small, embedded devices, with Athlon XP Power and ATi Graphics power. In one chip.
                              On a 17cm² or 12cm² board?
                              Sweet or what ?

                              edit: They have all they need to release a fully fledged mini or micro ITX board.
                              Last edited by Evildead666; 31 July 2006, 10:39.
                              PC-1 Fractal Design Arc Mini R2, 3800X, Asus B450M-PRO mATX, 2x8GB B-die@3800C16, AMD Vega64, Seasonic 850W Gold, Black Ice Nemesis/Laing DDC/EKWB 240 Loop (VRM>CPU>GPU), Noctua Fans.
                              Nas : i3/itx/2x4GB/8x4TB BTRFS/Raid6 (7 + Hotspare) Xpenology
                              +++ : FSP Nano 800VA (Pi's+switch) + 1600VA (PC-1+Nas)

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X