Purported Intel Xe-HPG graphics card pictured and detailed

[HEXUS]

Said to come with 512EUs, clock up to 2.2GHz, have 16GB GDDR6, and 275W TDP.

Read more.

[Spud1]

Encouraging numbers - if they really do have a unit that can match a 3070...and can price it accordingly, we could finally have a 3rd competitor in the consumer GPU market again for the first time since 3DFX went under.

All good news there imo

[Aemelius]

Encouraging numbers - if they really do have a unit that can match a 3070...and can price it accordingly, we could finally have a 3rd competitor in the consumer GPU market again for the first time since 3DFX went under.

All good news there imo

Hopefully this will be a card that we can actually buy.... if the numbers are good (and yields are decent) Intel have a real chance to shift a lot of cards.

I wonder if we’ll start seeing rigs with AMD CPU and Intel GPUs?

[Corky34]

It's ideal market conditions to launch a new GPU, it would be hard not to succeed so if Intel mess this up they've only got themselves to blame.

[Jonj1611]

A quick glance at the logo and I thought it was a new "X" game being introduced.

Players of X space games will know what I mean

[LSG501]

IF, and I say IF, that information is accurate and the price is right (not to mention stock and supply) it might be interesting to see how AMD/Nvidia react with pricing etc, especially if Intel take a more aggressive approach with a lower price to gain marketshare.

Sadly unless Intel has something comparable to cuda and the software I use makes use of it then I'm stuck with Nvidia....

[QuorTek]

With card in general not being able to be bought easy...and hard to get, we would most like see people making games hitting more on the open source coding, due to the GPU industry is not providing their customers what they need, then it would better and probably also cheaper to built on a platform, that would just force each GFX manufacturer, to have well working setups with.

It would make sense to me if so.

[Xlucine]

What are the odds of the shortages still being a thing in the 2021 holiday season? Missing the current boom would be a shame - they'd sell any GPU hand over fist in the current climate, if they leave it too long they'll have to compete on merits (a much harder proposition, especially as the next holiday season is around the right time for a super refresh from nvidia).

I know that the wafer supply is unlikely to greatly increase for a while, but AMD CPUs are showing up at retail now so TSMC is meeting demand in some areas.

[Tabbykatze]

We also have to remember, these are being built on TSMC n7 (iirc, quick google shows this to be the case still) so Intel will be just as supply constrained as AMD and Nvidia.

Edit: Hmm, seems to be some hooplah of it being either TSMC n7 or n6...

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

If Intel had any sense,at least for some of the more mainstream SKUs,they should try and competitively price it to get some marketshare. Both AMD and Nvidia have gotten into a little cartel of sorts,and don't want to poke each other too hard as it makes them more money. Thereby they can quietly pretend their RRPs are real,blame AIB partners and retailers for price increases,and then see another record year of net margins.

MLID said they Intel is probably going to try and price it a bit competitively - apparently the GPU is arriving late this year or Q1 2021 apparently.

We also have to remember, these are being built on TSMC n7 (iirc, quick google shows this to be the case still) so Intel will be just as supply constrained as AMD and Nvidia.

Edit: Hmm, seems to be some hooplah of it being either TSMC n7 or n6...

Maybe but if contrarevenue has thought us anything Intel is willing to eat margins if they can try and get a foothold. It makes me wonder whether they will do bundle deals with their CPUs and GPUs to OEMs??

[Tabbykatze]

Maybe but if contrarevenue has thought us anything Intel is willing to eat margins if they can try and get a foothold. It makes me wonder whether they will do bundle deals with their CPUs and GPUs to OEMs??

Contrarevenue won't matter if you're just as stock constrained as you competition, all you'll be doing is wasting money.

If the GPU is capable and functions like its competition then it doesn't matter what the price is, it'll sell.

Now if there wasn't a global shortage and everyone fighting for scraps, they would likely be applying their "financial horsepower" to push away competition from being in the viewpoint.

[ik9000]

any windows 7/8 support? If not I'm not buying.

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

Contrarevenue won't matter if you're just as stock constrained as you competition, all you'll be doing is wasting money.

If the GPU is capable and functions like its competition then it doesn't matter what the price is, it'll sell.

Now if there wasn't a global shortage and everyone fighting for scraps, they would likely be applying their "financial horsepower" to push away competition from being in the viewpoint.

The problem is the current Intel CEO was working at Intel when they did all the crap during the Athlon 64 era. You should see what section he headed at his last stint at Intel....the Digital Enterprise Group. Yes,the group which handled desktop and server CPUs,and who used their financial clout to get what they wanted. Intel threw billions of USD at PC companies to stop the Athlon 64,and then when the world didn't even want Atom CPUs,they spent billions on that. The issue is Intel can and will offer to pay more if it especially means if AMD gets screwed too. Its why I think them trying to get TSMC capacity might also be partly to deny AMD capacity too and if they do decide to sell their GPUs at a lower margin,by extension it means both Nvidia and AMD have to also which causes them more problems. Maybe Nvidia going to Samsung wasn't as bad a longterm idea as people though it was.

[DanceswithUnix]

Maybe Nvidia going to Samsung wasn't as bad a longterm idea as people though it was.

It may have worked out rather well, partly because Intel are way more likely to go for Nvidia's throat than AMDs. AMD are just too nice, Intel will want their market share but won't feel all that threatened by them. But Intel savaged Nvidia, and Nvidia have not forgotten. Nvidia will take Intel down if given the chance, without a moment's hesitation.

As for contra-revenue, I think that is irrelevant here (not that it in any way worked last time). Margins are pretty big, so Intel can make a low price splash if they want to and still make plenty of money. The thing is, Intel are not a budget firm and won't want to start out in that posture. They started as a DRAM manufacturer, quit that business because of the low margins and even after all these years seem to have a revulsion for anything low margin.

[Iota]

I know that the wafer supply is unlikely to greatly increase for a while, but AMD CPUs are showing up at retail now so TSMC is meeting demand in some areas.

We also have to remember, these are being built on TSMC n7 (iirc, quick google shows this to be the case still) so Intel will be just as supply constrained as AMD and Nvidia.

Its why I think them trying to get TSMC capacity might also be partly to deny AMD capacity too and if they do decide to sell their GPUs at a lower margin,by extension it means both Nvidia and AMD have to also which causes them more problems. Maybe Nvidia going to Samsung wasn't as bad a longterm idea as people though it was.

Interesting that Intel are using TSMC for the GPU, considering they have the capability to produce their own chips at a similar density with their 10nm node. I can't help wondering how much money they're going to throw at TSMC to try to nudge out capacity for both AMD and to a lesser extent Nvidia and whether that's a deliberate move.

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

The problem is longterm Intel wants better margins,but their history has shown repeatedly that they are quite willing to tank short term margins,if it screws over the competition and causes them problems. This is the company who spent bilions of USD on software companies and other things which lost them money,and still made a lot of profits.

Another issue with AMD is buying Xilinx,means AMD is under even more pressure to push up stock prices,by concentrating on margins. $35 billion is a lot to pay,especially since a lot of it is in AMD shares and all those new "investors" will want a return on it. In the short term it's going to be the rest of the company products which bare the brunt of having to do this(Xilinx only had a total revenue of $3 billion and will not even double the profits AMD made last year).

Anything that can constrain margin growth is not great for AMD,especially if it causes issues with its stock prices with all those new "investors" onboard.

Also in the same vein,I can see AMD slowly trying its best, because of the acquisition, to copy Nvidia and try sell you less and less for more and more.

So AMD is definitely on the path to not being the "budget brand" so I don't expect them to be aggressive on pricing unless Intel or Nvidia forces them to. If the latter are quite happy not to,expect things to just go up and up in price,at an increasing rate. Also looking at Apple,who everyone is copying,they might have no problems even getting less sales overall,if it means they can up street prices to give them what the investors want.

Its why mainstream gaming is probably go to end up being pushed to the price-points of enthusiast gaming at this rate over the next 5 years. I suspect mainstream gaming will then shift to consoles,game streaming services,phones and tablets.