Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 17 to 30 of 30

Thread: Intel talks up its discrete GPU plans and aspirations

  1. #17
    Not a good person scaryjim's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Manchester
    Posts
    15,043
    Thanks
    1,194
    Thanked
    2,246 times in 1,847 posts
    • scaryjim's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Dell Inspiron
      • CPU:
      • Core i5 8250U
      • Memory:
      • 1x 8GB DDR4 2400
      • Storage:
      • 128GB M.2 SSD + 1TB HDD
      • Graphics card(s):
      • Radeon R5 230
      • PSU:
      • Battery/Dell brick
      • Case:
      • Dell Inspiron 5570
      • Operating System:
      • Windows 10
      • Monitor(s):
      • 15" 1080p laptop panel

    Re: Intel talks up its discrete GPU plans and aspirations

    Quote Originally Posted by Tabbykatze View Post
    It's always fun reading a verbal diarrhoea from nobodyspecial. ...
    The real problem is, it's impossible to decide which of these threads to make the obvious point they're missing ... you can't set market leading prices unless you're a market leader.

    I mean, I've said it here, but do I go back and post it in the AMD quarterly results thread as well, just in case? Or does that end up with me just spamming the forum repeatedly with the same message, as infinitum....

  2. #18
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Nov 2018
    Posts
    14
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked
    0 times in 0 posts

    Re: Intel talks up its discrete GPU plans and aspirations

    Message to Intel: If you want to "starting from zero" the first thing you have to do is to replace Raja Koduri and Bob Swann.

  3. #19
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    1,456
    Thanks
    89
    Thanked
    196 times in 140 posts

    Re: Intel talks up its discrete GPU plans and aspirations

    Quote Originally Posted by scaryjim View Post
    The real problem is, it's impossible to decide which of these threads to make the obvious point they're missing ... you can't set market leading prices unless you're a market leader.

    I mean, I've said it here, but do I go back and post it in the AMD quarterly results thread as well, just in case? Or does that end up with me just spamming the forum repeatedly with the same message, as infinitum....
    How does it go, the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again?

    The difficulty with making a point is how it is presented, as a nice straight line or as a tangled ball of wool

  4. #20
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2016
    Location
    Merseyside
    Posts
    470
    Thanks
    17
    Thanked
    33 times in 27 posts
    • EvilCycle's system
      • Motherboard:
      • ASUS ROG MAXIMUS IX HERO
      • CPU:
      • Intel I7 7700K (OC to 4.8GHz on Corsair H100i V2)
      • Memory:
      • 16GB Corsair Vengeance DDR4 @ 3000MHz
      • Storage:
      • Samsung 840 evo 120GB SSD + 3 x 500GB 72000rpm HDD's
      • Graphics card(s):
      • Gigabyte AORUS GeForce RTX 2080 XTREME
      • PSU:
      • DEEPCOOL DQ 750st
      • Case:
      • Corsair Obsidian Series 750D Airflow Edition
      • Operating System:
      • Windows 10
      • Internet:
      • Virgin Media 380Mb (Fibre Optic)

    Re: Intel talks up its discrete GPU plans and aspirations

    I for one have optimism that people can learn from past mistakes! Raj isn't a name that excites, but, I don't see AMD suddenly bringing out amazing GPU's now he is gone either, plus he is far more knowledgeable and talented than most and still deserves respect (Intel seem to agree too), so let's see what time tells us.

  5. #21
    Anti-Viral Pleiades's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Amongst barbarians
    Posts
    936
    Thanks
    1,562
    Thanked
    56 times in 45 posts
    • Pleiades's system
      • Motherboard:
      • MSI Z-97 Gaming 5
      • CPU:
      • 4690K @ 4GHz / Phanteks TC-12DX
      • Memory:
      • 16 GiB HyperX
      • Storage:
      • Sandisk 480GiB; Transcend M.2 256GiB; Velociraptor 300GB
      • Graphics card(s):
      • Sapphire Pulse RX580 8GiB
      • PSU:
      • BeQuiet Straight Power 800w
      • Case:
      • CoolerMaster HAF932
      • Operating System:
      • Win 10
      • Monitor(s):
      • Dell 2005 20"; Qnix 27" 2560x1440 120hz IPS; Samsung 49" 9500 HDR UHD TV
      • Internet:
      • Virgin 70 Mibs

    Cool Re: Intel talks up its discrete GPU plans and aspirations

    Quote Originally Posted by Tabbykatze View Post
    It's always fun reading a verbal diarrhoea from nobodyspecial. He has so many convoluted points and anti points in one post...
    But he is a happy chappy you must admit, what with all that LOL-ling about
    ------------------

    Valar Morghulis

  6. #22
    root Member DanceswithUnix's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    In the middle of a core dump
    Posts
    10,100
    Thanks
    501
    Thanked
    1,039 times in 883 posts
    • DanceswithUnix's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Asus X470-PRO
      • CPU:
      • 3700X
      • Memory:
      • 16GB 3200MHz
      • Storage:
      • 1TB Linux, 1TB Games (Win 10)
      • Graphics card(s):
      • Asus Strix RX Vega 56
      • PSU:
      • 650W Corsair TX
      • Case:
      • Antec 300
      • Operating System:
      • Fedora 30 + Win 10 Pro 64 (yuk)
      • Monitor(s):
      • Benq XL2730Z 1440p + Samsung 2343BW 2048x1152
      • Internet:
      • Zen 80Mb/20Mb VDSL

    Re: Intel talks up its discrete GPU plans and aspirations

    Quote Originally Posted by scaryjim View Post
    Hmmmm, nvidia to buy up Via for the x86 license?!
    It didn't work out well for VIA when Intel went after them did it. VIA used to be pretty much everywhere, in the P4 era when Intel were contracted to only make RDRAM chipsets that no-one wanted it could be argued that the DDR chipsets from VIA saved Intel's bacon but made them big enough to become a target.

  7. #23
    Registered+
    Join Date
    Jan 2019
    Posts
    34
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked
    3 times in 2 posts

    Re: Intel talks up its discrete GPU plans and aspirations

    Hopefully they can hit it out the park at the very start, inject some realism into GPU prices.

  8. #24
    root Member DanceswithUnix's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    In the middle of a core dump
    Posts
    10,100
    Thanks
    501
    Thanked
    1,039 times in 883 posts
    • DanceswithUnix's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Asus X470-PRO
      • CPU:
      • 3700X
      • Memory:
      • 16GB 3200MHz
      • Storage:
      • 1TB Linux, 1TB Games (Win 10)
      • Graphics card(s):
      • Asus Strix RX Vega 56
      • PSU:
      • 650W Corsair TX
      • Case:
      • Antec 300
      • Operating System:
      • Fedora 30 + Win 10 Pro 64 (yuk)
      • Monitor(s):
      • Benq XL2730Z 1440p + Samsung 2343BW 2048x1152
      • Internet:
      • Zen 80Mb/20Mb VDSL

    Re: Intel talks up its discrete GPU plans and aspirations

    Quote Originally Posted by the_weegie View Post
    Hopefully they can hit it out the park at the very start, inject some realism into GPU prices.
    Intel are not exactly known for reasonable pricing!

  9. #25
    Registered+
    Join Date
    Jan 2019
    Posts
    34
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked
    3 times in 2 posts

    Re: Intel talks up its discrete GPU plans and aspirations

    That is very true, but historically that's maybe because they didn't really have any competition from AMD and they were the kingpins of CPUs. Now they're going into a space with 1 very dominant company at the high end and another company who're starting to make great bang for buck cards from the low end up to upper midrange.

    Intel aren't going to be able to build something ok and then charge a premium price for it, they've got to incentivize people leaving AMD/NVIDIA (brand loyalty being a thing). So I reckon their best bet would be to build something towards the upper midrange (GTX 1080/Vega 64 levels) but price it about £320-350. That'd be a big statement but I've no idea if that's possible. Certainly with the size of company, experience of making chips and boards and their own fabrication plants, they're in a better position to drive costs down as much as possible than AMD/NVIDIA who are subject to TSMC/Global Foundrys/Samsung's fab plants.

  10. #26
    Banned - repeated insults to other members
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Posts
    146
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked
    4 times in 3 posts

    Re: Intel talks up its discrete GPU plans and aspirations

    Its not as simple as throwing money & people at it. The GPU field is a veritable IP minefield where Intel has to tread carefully not to get sued to kingdom come. It will have to develop a lot of its own IP or license it to deliver what it claims it wants to.

  11. #27
    root Member DanceswithUnix's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    In the middle of a core dump
    Posts
    10,100
    Thanks
    501
    Thanked
    1,039 times in 883 posts
    • DanceswithUnix's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Asus X470-PRO
      • CPU:
      • 3700X
      • Memory:
      • 16GB 3200MHz
      • Storage:
      • 1TB Linux, 1TB Games (Win 10)
      • Graphics card(s):
      • Asus Strix RX Vega 56
      • PSU:
      • 650W Corsair TX
      • Case:
      • Antec 300
      • Operating System:
      • Fedora 30 + Win 10 Pro 64 (yuk)
      • Monitor(s):
      • Benq XL2730Z 1440p + Samsung 2343BW 2048x1152
      • Internet:
      • Zen 80Mb/20Mb VDSL

    Re: Intel talks up its discrete GPU plans and aspirations

    Quote Originally Posted by the_weegie View Post
    That is very true, but historically that's maybe because they didn't really have any competition from AMD and they were the kingpins of CPUs. Now they're going into a space with 1 very dominant company at the high end and another company who're starting to make great bang for buck cards from the low end up to upper midrange.

    Intel aren't going to be able to build something ok and then charge a premium price for it, they've got to incentivize people leaving AMD/NVIDIA (brand loyalty being a thing). So I reckon their best bet would be to build something towards the upper midrange (GTX 1080/Vega 64 levels) but price it about £320-350. That'd be a big statement but I've no idea if that's possible. Certainly with the size of company, experience of making chips and boards and their own fabrication plants, they're in a better position to drive costs down as much as possible than AMD/NVIDIA who are subject to TSMC/Global Foundrys/Samsung's fab plants.
    OK, let me put it another way...

    Intel were traditionally a DRAM company. Many years ago they pulled out of a perfectly profitable DRAM market because the level of profit wasn't high enough for them. The statement at the time was that they only wanted to make silicon with a high profit margin. That has been their way ever since.

    The only way that Intel will produce graphics cards at a consumer friendly price will be as part of a strategy to get enough market penetration to then crank the price right up and milk us for every penny they can. If they can hurt Nvidia along the way, then they will consider that a big bonus.

    Intel have held back the CPU market for decades with the worst instruction set available in mediocre chips. Take a good look outside the PC market, Intel are only successful in the PC form factor. Their masterstroke was getting companies to decide that the PC was good enough for server use. If you want a stagnant GPU market as well, then they should get your support.

  12. #28
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    West Sussex
    Posts
    1,075
    Thanks
    73
    Thanked
    132 times in 124 posts
    • kompukare's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Asus P8Z77-V LX
      • CPU:
      • Intel i5-3570K
      • Memory:
      • 2 x 8GB Crucial Ballistix Elite PC3-14900
      • Storage:
      • Crucial MX200 | Sandisk Extreme 120GB SSD | WDC 1TB Green | Samsung 1Tb Spinpoint
      • Graphics card(s):
      • Sapphire R9 290 VaporX 7950
      • PSU:
      • Antec 650 Gold TruePower (Seasonic) or Seasonic SII-330
      • Case:
      • Aerocool DS 200 (silenced, 53.6 litres)l)
      • Operating System:
      • Windows 10-64
      • Monitor(s):
      • 2 x Dell P2414H

    Re: Intel talks up its discrete GPU plans and aspirations

    Quote Originally Posted by DanceswithUnix View Post
    Intel have held back the CPU market for decades with the worst instruction set available in mediocre chips. Take a good look outside the PC market, Intel are only successful in the PC form factor. Their masterstroke was getting companies to decide that the PC was good enough for server use. If you want a stagnant GPU market as well, then they should get your support.
    Yes, far too many people seem to have forgotten or never knew how truly awful x86 really was. Especially that the original i8086 was chosen by IBM for the original IBM PC versus for example the Motorola 68000K held back computing for years. 64KB segmented, far to few registers, 1MB max address space, etc. What a truly awful architecture Intel came up with.

  13. #29
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    4,591
    Thanks
    145
    Thanked
    311 times in 249 posts
    • badass's system
      • Motherboard:
      • ASUS P8Z77-m pro
      • CPU:
      • Core i5 3570K
      • Memory:
      • 32GB
      • Storage:
      • 1TB Samsung 850 EVO, 2TB WD Green
      • Graphics card(s):
      • Radeon RX 580
      • PSU:
      • Corsair HX520W
      • Case:
      • Silverstone SG02-F
      • Operating System:
      • Windows 10 X64
      • Monitor(s):
      • Del U2311, LG226WTQ
      • Internet:
      • 80/20 FTTC

    Re: Intel talks up its discrete GPU plans and aspirations

    Quote Originally Posted by DanceswithUnix View Post
    Intel have held back the CPU market for decades with the worst instruction set available in mediocre chips. Take a good look outside the PC market, Intel are only successful in the PC form factor. Their masterstroke was getting companies to decide that the PC was good enough for server use. If you want a stagnant GPU market as well, then they should get your support.
    You mean AMD's masterstroke that ended up helping Intel Cough AMD64 cough. Their Itanium didn't exactly do well
    "In a perfect world... spammers would get caught, go to jail, and share a cell with many men who have enlarged their penises, taken Viagra and are looking for a new relationship."

  14. #30
    root Member DanceswithUnix's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    In the middle of a core dump
    Posts
    10,100
    Thanks
    501
    Thanked
    1,039 times in 883 posts
    • DanceswithUnix's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Asus X470-PRO
      • CPU:
      • 3700X
      • Memory:
      • 16GB 3200MHz
      • Storage:
      • 1TB Linux, 1TB Games (Win 10)
      • Graphics card(s):
      • Asus Strix RX Vega 56
      • PSU:
      • 650W Corsair TX
      • Case:
      • Antec 300
      • Operating System:
      • Fedora 30 + Win 10 Pro 64 (yuk)
      • Monitor(s):
      • Benq XL2730Z 1440p + Samsung 2343BW 2048x1152
      • Internet:
      • Zen 80Mb/20Mb VDSL

    Re: Intel talks up its discrete GPU plans and aspirations

    Quote Originally Posted by kompukare View Post
    Yes, far too many people seem to have forgotten or never knew how truly awful x86 really was. Especially that the original i8086 was chosen by IBM for the original IBM PC versus for example the Motorola 68000K held back computing for years. 64KB segmented, far to few registers, 1MB max address space, etc. What a truly awful architecture Intel came up with.
    You sound like someone who had to deal with the likes of EMS memory and himem.sys

    It wasn't just that though, Intel's mastery of politics and a bullying business style in the 486 era where they promised the Pentium would be the fastest thing ever and other companies should give up on processor design was sadly successful enough to kill off the Clipper CPU and give Silicon Graphics a few laps around the drain hole.

    Quote Originally Posted by badass View Post
    You mean AMD's masterstroke that ended up helping Intel Cough AMD64 cough. Their Itanium didn't exactly do well
    Oh it started well before then, I remember people wondering if they should get a SPARC server which they actually wanted but ended up with a 486 or Pentium because it could scrape by for half the money.

    Itanium is an oddity, seeing how AIUI it was basically a Hewlett Packard designed chip that Intel managed to get the rights to and try to stuff down our throats regardless of how much we might be gagging on it. If Intel were going to push a non x86 chip for the 64 bit transition, they could have at least made it the DEC Alpha which I believe they still have the rights to.

    But basically I am struggling to think of anything Intel has produced that was both genuinely new and good. Pentium was a static dual issue design where most of the "innovation" like register scoreboarding had been done by Seymour Cray decades before. Compare that to the AMD K5 which although it was a more modern OoO design sadly flopped because it had a low latency FPU optimised for spreadsheets etc and not a pipelined FPU that was used in Quake. But a MIPS chip could wipe the floor with either of them.

    Itanium concept was new, as was the i432 and the concept of an FPU stack rather than registers. The double clocked P4 core was original as well. But those all sucked. Oh, and MMX. Who the heck wanted integer only vector.
    Last edited by DanceswithUnix; 07-02-2019 at 08:56 AM.

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •