• 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 Arc series unveiled with the Alchemist dGPU to arrive in Q1 2022

Grim5 said:
wccftech.com

AMD's President Talks GPU Efficiency, Power Targets, Chiplets, Cache & How NVIDIA & Intel Stack Up To Them, Says Raja Koduri Is A Visonary

AMD's SVP has talked about GPU efficiency, power numbers, chiplets, cache, and how their competitors stack up to them in a new interview.
wccftech.com wccftech.com
Click to expand...

The full quote:

Raja is a visionary. He paints a great and compelling picture of the gaming future and features that are required to drive the gaming experience to the next level. He’s great at that. As far as hands-on silicon execution, his background is in software. He definitely helped AMD to improve our software game and feature sets. I worked closely with Raja, but I didn’t join the graphics group until after he had left. He had a sabbatical there and went to Intel. So as far as the performance-per-watt, that was not really Raja’s footprint. But some of the software dimensions and such.
Click to expand...

So in context that's not an endorsement, its a polite way of saying they didn't think he was much good as designing GPU's.
 
why do people always act like 1 guy makes some massive difference.
its just 1 person getting all the credit for others peoples work mostly
 
arknor said:
why do people always act like 1 guy makes some massive difference.
its just 1 person getting all the credit for others peoples work mostly
Click to expand...
Or, as his expertise is meant to be software rather than hardware, if the software (drivers) are the problem he gives credit for the failure too sometimes else as it couldn't be his fault!

So maybe great at corporate BS, covering his behind, hyping himself and his product, but poor in executing?
 
Grim5 said:
Ironically yesterday AMD had this to say in an interview "Raja is a visionary"
Click to expand...

That's quite funny, I actually know some ex Intel software engineers and the problem appears to be deeply rooted in Intel. They have always been a fantastic hardware company but stories I hear from a software standpoint are absolutely comical. They could still dig this one out but I wouldn't expect anything polished for a few years. There is a reason they rebranded an AMD design and rebranded the AMD software for hades canyon / akaby Lake G... Frankly it's because they haven't a clue how to successfully write decent software for GPUs at that performance level.

They have like 10 thousand software engineers but no clue how to combine that resource to something useful. Too many cooks and all that. Combine that with being years behind on interconnect tech and, well, you end up with Alchemist.

I haven't checked for a while but haven't heard any updates on interconnect tech so assume emib is still about the best they have. I did forget Foveros but we can't really comment on vapour ware at this point, also if you believe the hype Intel believe that EMIB is better tech than Infinity Fabric but actual all Intel use of the tech on tiled CPUs is yet to be seen so again can't comment. While Intel stagnate here the competition iterates on that secret sauce interconnect gluing all kinds of tech together seamlessly. C'mon Intel surprise us with something awesome...
 
Last edited:
Vince said:
That's quite funny, I actually know some ex Intel software engineers and the problem appears to be deeply rooted in Intel. They have always been a fantastic hardware company but stories I hear from a software standpoint are absolutely comical. They could still dig this one out but I wouldn't expect anything polished for a few years. There is a reason they rebranded an AMD design and rebranded the AMD software for hades canyon / akaby Lake G... Frankly it's because they haven't a clue how to successfully write decent software for GPUs at that performance level.

They have like 10 thousand software engineers but no clue how to combine that resource to something useful. Too many cooks and all that. Combine that with being years behind on interconnect tech and, well, you end up with Alchemist.

I haven't checked for a while but haven't heard any updates on interconnect tech so assume emib is still about the best they have. I did forget Foveros but we can't really comment on vapour ware at this point, also if you believe the hype Intel believe that EMIB is better tech than Infinity Fabric but actual all Intel use of the tech on tiled CPUs is yet to be seen so again can't comment. While Intel stagnate here the competition iterates on that secret sauce interconnect gluing all kinds of tech together seamlessly. C'mon Intel surprise us with something awesome...
Click to expand...

We think of Intel as this great innovator at the highest level but is that actually true?

Intel gave us X86 which is the technology IBM needed to give us the "Personal Computer", i'm not knocking it Intel played a very important role.

Beyond that what else?

AMD gave us X86_64, Intel tried to make a competitor in Itanium and it was hopeless, they ended up adopting X86_64 and that's what they use to this day
Then AMD gave us multicore X86 CPU's, again Intel tried to make their own version but it was nothing more than two CPU's glued to the same PCB, again hopeless, they adopted AMD's multicore designs.
AMD created the Heterogeneous Unified Memory Access for the Heterogeneous System Architecture, Intel have adopted that and talk about it like they invented it.
Its actually the predecessor to Infinity Fabric.
In partnership with SK-Hynix AMD created HBM memory, its 3D Stacked Memory.
AMD are first to split the X86 CPU in to chiplets
AMD are the first to use a unified cache in GPU's (RDNA2)
AMD are first to 3D stack on an X86 CPU.
They will be first make GPU chiplets
They will probably be first to 3D stack GPU's
 
humbug said:
Intel gave us X86 which is the technology IBM needed to give us the "Personal Computer", i'm not knocking it Intel played a very important role.

Beyond that what else?
Click to expand...
Needed is definitely the wrong word.
At the time also in the running was there Motorola 68000, which was 16 bit processor with 32 bit data registers, 32 address registers etc.:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motorola_68000
Whereas the 8086 was 16 bit processor with crazy addressing modes and all kinds of other quirks:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intel_8086
Pity all the poor programmers who has suffer x86 with its 64KB memory segments all the other weird stuff.

The IBM PC market was huge though, and with that revenue Intel were able to invest so that by around the early 90s with the 486 they were finally ahead of Motorola despite i286 and i386 having been nothing spectacular and the move to 32 bits with 386 mode causing further segmentation at least until Windows NT.

Imagine if the IBM PC had used the Motorola 68008. No 16 bit mode, no 64KB memory segments, 32 bit registers from the get go, etc. All those x86 issues probably held back computers by 5-8 years.
 
KompuKare said:
Needed is definitely the wrong word.
At the time also in the running was there Motorola 68000, which was 16 bit processor with 32 bit data registers, 32 address registers etc.:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motorola_68000
Whereas the 8086 was 16 bit processor with crazy addressing modes and all kinds of other quirks:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intel_8086
Pity all the poor programmers who has suffer x86 with its 64KB memory segments all the other weird stuff.

The IBM PC market was huge though, and with that revenue Intel were able to invest so that by around the early 90s with the 486 they were finally ahead of Motorola despite i286 and i386 having been nothing spectacular and the move to 32 bits with 386 mode causing further segmentation at least until Windows NT.

Imagine if the IBM PC had used the Motorola 68008. No 16 bit mode, no 64KB memory segments, 32 bit registers from the get go, etc. All those x86 issues probably held back computers by 5-8 years.
Click to expand...

Was not aware of that, thanks :)

And yeah, what if.
 
Purgatory said:

Intel Arc A380 Gaming GPU Review & Benchmarks vs. AMD RX 6400, GTX 1650, & More​

Click to expand...
Well, no surprise there. Wonder will any proper (print not video megastars) reviewers get their hands on one too?

A nice and heavy card. Think that was the only plus but we sort of knew that from Shroud's twit. Hm, a used 290 or 780 Ti is way faster and some of those were over-engineered too.

No, there was one other plus: for those who love to tinker :cry:
 
Purgatory said:

Intel Arc A380 Gaming GPU Review & Benchmarks vs. AMD RX 6400, GTX 1650, & More​

Click to expand...

Good Grief he worked hard to give Intel the benefits of doubt here.

You have to use REBAR or anything is unplayable, so it wont work in older systems.
Older games that aren't DX12 or Vulkan are unplayable.
Is slower than an RX 6400
Uses more power than an RX 6400

Clearly he hates the RX 6400 a lot, clearly it must be a shockingly bad card, the A380 is much much much worse. 002 / 100
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom