My i7 clocks from 3.00Ghz to 4.4Ghz.
The joys of no iGPU and a soldered heatspreader.
-
Competitor rules
Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.
Intel in talks to license AMD GPU patents??
- Thread starter CAT-THE-FIFTH
- Start date
My i7 clocks from 3.00Ghz to 4.4Ghz.
The joys of no iGPU and a soldered heatspreader.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 33,188
False, as far as Intel are concerned. The VAST majority of the chips they sell end up powering the video systems too, and in laptops they switch between dGPU and iGPU dynamically to increase battery life. Expect more software using GPU compute to utilise iGPU cores even with a dGPU present. And when in low power state/gated, iGPUs most likely help spread/dissipate heat on the GPU die*
Intel are more likely to can "enthusiast" chips like the K series...*
*I have no idea if true, but were all just stating stuff with impunity here, right?
Intel have a very large GPU on their die, igpu being required/useful and the igpu they actually have are extremely different things. For one thing the video decode and basic desktop output can be handled by extremely small IP blocks that would take up maybe, pushing it 5% of the size of the GPU they provide. 99% of their users have no need for more than 5% of the gpu power they require currently. It's a complete waste even in laptops for the vast majority of users. For those laptops that have discrete gpus also and switch between them again having a gpu taking up 10-15% of the space they currently do would save even more power at idle/desktop/playing video.
Since Intel went iGPU they've provided pretty much one gpu accelerated application in quicksync, which always had horrible quality, few options and honestly no one even mentions it any more. Not sure if it's supported in any better encoding software and if quality has improved or not. Intel have spent a monumental amount developing their GPUs, allowing them to take up around 50% of the die space but put in nearly zero effort trying to create an ecosystem in which devs are actually encouraged to utilise gpu accelerated code making the growing size of their GPUs completely ridiculous.
Ignoring Lucid, just their basic driver quality is awful, same game run on Intel or AMD/Nvidia, even with similar level power and similar framerate Intel provides horrible quality, horrible IQ and driver bugs galore. They have the hardware but put zero effort into their software. Make the drivers work in a few games like WoW(I assume) and ignore everything else.
As above, for the size of Intel's gpus their performance is horrific. Don't forget that their absolutely best igpu still frequently fails to beat what is effectively a 5 year old cpu, 2 year old gpu on a significantly larger process AMD APU. They have a huge number of transistors and their actual performance for the given transistor budget spent on the GPU is horrendous, as is IQ, driver quality, basically everything about it.
If AMD could have at the same time been putting out 22nm gpus with a huge chunk of cache on package it would be basically at least twice as fast as what Intel are providing.
Looks like it might have happened:
https://hardforum.com/threads/from-...in-futility-h.1900681/page-61#post-1042685022
AMD shares have just gone up nearly a dollar!!
https://hardforum.com/threads/from-...in-futility-h.1900681/page-61#post-1042685022
AMD shares have just gone up nearly a dollar!!
Permabanned
Good news then..
Soldato
Most probably nothing whatsoever that affects us much at all.
.......
It obviously means more money for AMD. More money for R&D, driver improvement, etc etc.
It means AMD can provide more competition to NVIDIA, which is nothing but good news.
I notice several people playing this news (if true) down, these posters are usually fanatic NVIDIA supports, so best to take their pessimistic attitude with a pinch of salt.
/Playing with my 1070FE until Vega.
Soldato
Haha! Yes, obviously It will provide some money to AMD, but what they do with that cash we don't know and as for providing competition to nVidia, I'll believe it when I see it! But I doubt this will be a game changer for AMD at all.
Well it would certainly help a lot. They'd have GCN based gpu's in the console market, AMD gpu's, AMD CPUs and Intel CPUs.
That's a lot of exposure to the average gamer, as long as they market this well it could be one part of the game changer.
That's a lot of exposure to the average gamer, as long as they market this well it could be one part of the game changer.
Associate
AMD share price just broke $10 - lol:
https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=a...SypFJLgYoOy-KR4uLj0c_UNzKuy4ytzeQDFw-_nOgAAAA
The first time since 2007.
Last edited:
I'm surprised Intel aren't making their own. After all modern GPUs are just a CPU mounted on a PCI card. Who wouldn't want a graphics card with an i5 on it
Its not really about the hardware - and while less relevant to integrated GPUs, etc. on low end stuff the factor that doesn't work so well with Intel is the software side - they tend to have an approach to software development that is more kind of get it right first time then leave it alone (i.e. develop a product/solution then move all focus onto the next one) which doesn't really work for GPUs.
TBF,Intel has actually worked with some game devs to introduce new tech like CMAA in GRID2. They are certainly far better than they used to be like 5 or even 10 years ago.
I was thinking about buying their shares when they were ~$2.6, but got put off when they jumped to $4 on speculation of them getting the contracts of the next gen consoles (which they did, but it jumped before confirmation)
Caporegime
Soldato
I'm surprised Intel aren't making their own. After all modern GPUs are just a CPU mounted on a PCI card. Who wouldn't want a graphics card with an i5 on it
I'm not surprised at all, have you seen how large Intel's best GPU is? Given what AMD have produced with Bristol Ridge which being made on 28nm vs Intel's 14nm process it makes perfect business sense for Intel to licence AMD' tech which will enable them to produce smaller die's and increase their margins when selling to the likes of HP and Dell.