Soldato
- Joined
- 2 Jan 2012
- Posts
- 12,438
- Location
- UK.
-
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’s 14nm Broadwell GPU takes shape, indicates major improvements over Haswell
- Thread starter Boomstick777
- Start date
- Joined
- 2 Jan 2012
- Posts
- 12,438
- Location
- UK.
I think this is good tbh, CPU is powerful enough for most tasks, but igpu are still seriously lacking. If Intel can level the gap between them and AMD in the GPU area I think it'll be a good thing. Fusion of CPU/GPU is def the future. Look forward to be able to build a smaller all in one PC that uses less power.. So competition in that area will make it happen sooner rather than later.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 9 Nov 2009
- Posts
- 25,769
- Location
- Planet Earth
Even if Intel were to level the gap,their drivers are still worse than Nvidia or AMD anyway.
Plus,looking at how massive the 22NM HD5000 IGP is(as big as the 28NM Bonaire XT GPU in the HD7790),the top models will be expensive especially with the need for a large L4 cache die,and the fact they will be using a new and expensive process node. Its the low power consumption of Intel CPUs(and the platforms themselves),and their process node tech,which have somewhat hidden the fact that Intel IGPs,are well not that great.
The fact that Intel is opening up limited 14NM volume for other companies underlies the fact that it probably costs more than Intel expected.
Once you go down to the cheaper pricing tiers where the A10 APUs exist,its going to be more of the same as now,ie,faster CPU and worse IGP against slower CPU and faster IGP. At those pricing levels,Intel is only really increasing GPU performance since AMD is,but for the vast majority of their customer base,the Core i3 is not really used for gaming anyway,and is artificially gimped compared to the Core i5. Why?? Because whether the Core i3 was 20% faster or slower it would not matter for all the businesses,schools,etc which buy them. Its their volume which is the main key. Plus Intel maximises their profit margins by selling as small a chip as they can at that price.
They are kings of making product tiers.
Moreover,with the low ASP for the BT chips and the $1 billion subsidies they are doing next year for them,expect them to maximise on the margins of more expensive chips. If anything,BT and the ULV versions of Broadwell are their most important chips,followed by the special server chips. The rest are just a secondary concern to them if you look at what they are doing as a company.
If you want a performance CPU,they want you to buy Core i5 CPUs. If you want to buy a better IGP,spend more on the Core i5 and ULV Core i3 models which have with a large price premium.
Even the HD5000 was developed due to a need by Apple for a thinner premium laptops. In fact we need to thank them for Intel actually putting in the effort TBH!
Moreover,as a general purpose computer architecture,GCN and Kepler are far above what Intel has to offer,and by the time Broadwell ships any massive volume we will start to see revisions of both of these. Even in the compute card area,Intel is offering X86 based cores,not compute based GPUs.
Plus,looking at how massive the 22NM HD5000 IGP is(as big as the 28NM Bonaire XT GPU in the HD7790),the top models will be expensive especially with the need for a large L4 cache die,and the fact they will be using a new and expensive process node. Its the low power consumption of Intel CPUs(and the platforms themselves),and their process node tech,which have somewhat hidden the fact that Intel IGPs,are well not that great.
The fact that Intel is opening up limited 14NM volume for other companies underlies the fact that it probably costs more than Intel expected.
Once you go down to the cheaper pricing tiers where the A10 APUs exist,its going to be more of the same as now,ie,faster CPU and worse IGP against slower CPU and faster IGP. At those pricing levels,Intel is only really increasing GPU performance since AMD is,but for the vast majority of their customer base,the Core i3 is not really used for gaming anyway,and is artificially gimped compared to the Core i5. Why?? Because whether the Core i3 was 20% faster or slower it would not matter for all the businesses,schools,etc which buy them. Its their volume which is the main key. Plus Intel maximises their profit margins by selling as small a chip as they can at that price.
They are kings of making product tiers.
Moreover,with the low ASP for the BT chips and the $1 billion subsidies they are doing next year for them,expect them to maximise on the margins of more expensive chips. If anything,BT and the ULV versions of Broadwell are their most important chips,followed by the special server chips. The rest are just a secondary concern to them if you look at what they are doing as a company.
If you want a performance CPU,they want you to buy Core i5 CPUs. If you want to buy a better IGP,spend more on the Core i5 and ULV Core i3 models which have with a large price premium.
Even the HD5000 was developed due to a need by Apple for a thinner premium laptops. In fact we need to thank them for Intel actually putting in the effort TBH!
Moreover,as a general purpose computer architecture,GCN and Kepler are far above what Intel has to offer,and by the time Broadwell ships any massive volume we will start to see revisions of both of these. Even in the compute card area,Intel is offering X86 based cores,not compute based GPUs.
Last edited:
- Joined
- 2 Jan 2012
- Posts
- 12,438
- Location
- UK.
Progress is a good thing, regardless of Intel's drivers lol. I'm glad competition is heating up in the 'APU' space, as I want an all in one PC in the future. Will likely be building a few Kaveri setups, be nice for Intel to have an alternative as well. Competition is good.
Soldato
- Joined
- 27 Feb 2012
- Posts
- 6,586
Dunno what you're waiting for Boom. My APU rig plays all games @1440, maxed settings and at a constant 60FPS!!! 
- Joined
- 2 Jan 2012
- Posts
- 12,438
- Location
- UK.
Dunno what you're waiting for Boom. My APU rig plays all games @1440, maxed settings and at a constant 60FPS!!!
Haha
- Joined
- 2 Jan 2012
- Posts
- 12,438
- Location
- UK.
Intel on Track with “Broadwell” Production in Q1 – Company.
http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/cpu/di..._with_Broadwell_Production_in_Q1_Company.html
http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/cpu/di..._with_Broadwell_Production_in_Q1_Company.html
- Joined
- 2 Jan 2012
- Posts
- 12,438
- Location
- UK.
Intel’s 5th Generation Desktop Broadwell Processors To Feature Iris Pro Graphics and Unlocked Design
Haswell refresh and Broadwell for desktop 2014?
Haswell refresh and Broadwell for desktop 2014?
Soldato
- Joined
- 25 Sep 2009
- Posts
- 10,237
- Location
- Billericay, UK
The other problem is the only Intel onboard graphics worth having can only be found in their top tier CPU's.
- Joined
- 2 Jan 2012
- Posts
- 12,438
- Location
- UK.
Yeah tis a strange thing as most who want a top tier CPU will pair with a top tier dedicated GPU as well. I'm not sure why Intel do this. Hopefully with Broadwell they will introduce some budget all in one chips like AMD's APU line.
Soldato
- Joined
- 20 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 12,058
- Location
- Derby
I have to say I have never been impressed with Intel iGPUs but after seeing the performance of the Iris Pro I have high hopes for Intel's future iGPUs. But as said before its no good only just fitting them in the top end cpus as people spending a decent amount on a cpu generally can afford a reasonable GPU. I3/I5 with Iris pro would make a good contender against the AMD APUs.