• 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.

PowerVR demonstrate x2 to x16 core GPU chip for mobile devices!

drunkenmaster said "As for what happens when a new feature comes out, again you utterly utterly utterly fail to comprehend the very simple argument here.

When you make something small, dedicated hardware acceleration you can speed up ANYTHING and not that but VERY EASILY. Hardware acceleration is incredibly easy."
No I do no fail comprehend. You skipped over what I wrote again. PowerVR's plan is not dedicated hardware acceleration for one thing only. It's a full 3D chip that does full DX10/11 and ray tracing. It does everything current Nvidia and ATi cards do plus ray tracing.

When a new feature comes out the same thing happens to it as would happen to ATI or Nvidia. I don't see your point.



drunkenmaster said " So, name a game this fantastic 75Mhz card can raytrace, please, go on. The card takes no shortcuts and does full raytracing, thats fine, can it run DX11 game?"
What a stupid question. You know full well the first card was not a gaming card. It was developer card. The final product was sold for a different market to gaming so of course it doesn't run games. We are not going to have games years before the chip is due in a gaming market. The point is its being added to a PowerVR gaming chip for use in games and other software in a few generations. As for DX11 it doesn't exist into the market the PowerVR are in. But still the older chip supported DX10 the new chip has not been announced yet if it's supporting DX10 or beyond. It should run games just fine when it arrives.



drunkenmaster said " What you seem to be suggesting is this one card runs ONE piece of software, and herein lies the problem, said company doesn't make games, nor does anyone own one of these cards for gaming, so penetrating the gaming market will be almost impossible."
What? Where did get this one bit of software from? I already said it runs lots of software from lots of companies. Market penetration for gaming will be easy for the reasons posted before Where Anyway for many of the platforms PowerVR are 100% market penetration so all the apps and software are made for PowerVR. Within the generation this chip arrives 100% of that generation for the most popular platforms will support it.

Its not like the desktop card market where only half or less of people will have the feature so few will use it. We are talking between 80 to 100% market penetration hardware wise depending on platform and assuming the numbers don't change.

Like I said if 100% of Ipads 3/4 and Iphones 5/6 support it you can bet there will be lots of devs using it for games. This is the point when we might end up with better graphics on mobiles then desktops if desktops don't get ray tracing. Its not a fantasy it's a possibility. It might not happen but it could well happen.



You said " You're using the idea that a company can create a 75Mhz card, that you've provided next to no info on, but can supposedly do raytracing really really well, as a reason why a different chip will eventually surpass desktop cards performance."
I provide lots of info in this thread and the other one. Anyone can look it up with ease as well. As for speed that's not what I am saying. I said if the mobile market increase by 200 to 400% in speed per year. The PC market increases in speed by 10 to 20% per year. If this happens year in year out then logically if the trend doesn't change mobiles will overtake desktops. The speed increase between generations on mobiles is and has been for years bigger then the speed increase in desktops. It might not keep up but so far it is. I also gave a good reason for more R&D being spent on mobiles then desktops.

On top of the speed difference I argued that perhaps if mobiles get ray tracing they can produce graphics beyond what the desktop without ray tracing can produce. That is a reasonable assumption.



metalmackey " If this chip was that amazing, why dont they produce say a 50 watt version for desktops and blow the compition out of the water? "
I already explained that at least twice in this thread. They have designed high powered desktop cards.



EDIT: What I am trying to say is that platform A with DX11 3D and full hardware reytracing with 100% of the platform in that generation having the hardware might/could/possibly end up with better graphics then platform B without full hardware retracing and mixed hardware.

Is that really unreasonable?
 
Last edited:
Pottsey said:
I said if the mobile market increase by 200 to 400% in speed per year. The PC market increases in speed by 10 to 20% per year. If this happens year in year out then logically if the trend doesn't change mobiles will overtake desktops.
Click to expand...

Bit naive to make that conclusion.

It would be akin to saying something like "Kids toy electric cars went from 2.5mph to 5mph average speeds last year. Ferraris increased their average speed by 5%. Soon, kids cars will be faster than Ferraris!"
 
rafster said “It would be akin to saying something like "Kids toy electric cars went from 2.5mph to 5mph average speeds last year. Ferraris increased their average speed by 5%. Soon, kids cars will be faster than Ferraris!"”
I don’t think its akin to that at all. I am not looking a one years’ worth of numbers and its predicted mobiles will overtake desktops which means more R&D spent on them. So it’s more akin to a normal road Electric cars went from 2.5mph to 5mph one year. Then next year 5 mph to 15 mph. Then next year 15 mph to 60 mph then next year 60 mph to 100 mph. Then the year after more money is put into electric cars then Ferraris as the electric cars market is bigger and new technology are implanted in Electric cars that Ferraris didn’t invest in (ray Traceing). So going by past history speed increase’s, market size and more R&D being spent on electric cars you might get to stage where the electric cars goes faster. Might.

I am not basing my data on a single years’ worth of info. I am looking at past history and known upcoming advancements. This is just like the people years ago who said we would never see 3dchips in phones. Or the people who said we never get up to DX10 features in phones anytime soon and look how wrong those people turned out to be.
 
Ok say you develop some wonder chip.

What stops me taking 4 of those chips and puttng them in a desktop?

What stops me raising the voltage, cooling it with a massive heatsink and overclocking it to levels far beyond what it runs at on a mobile device?

Then we have issues with bandwidth, PC GPUs have access to hundreds of GB/sec of bandwidth, something phones have no chance of copying.

I'm sorry but:

300W TDP > 500mW TDP

You will always be able to do more with the 300W TDP limit.
 
Meaker Said “Ok say you develop some wonder chip.

What stops me taking 4 of those chips and puttng them in a desktop?”
Nvidia and ATI don’t have the technology I am talking about and PowerVR are not currently in the desktop market. In theory you are right PowerVR could take those 4 chip and even scale them up to x16 chips for the desktop. But if PowerVR are focused on the mobile with no desktop clients those chips will never get moved up.

That’s part of my argument. If PowerVR’s architecture keeps advancing like it is and they don’t move to the desktop market. It’s only going to take a few generations before they can pull off graphics that desktop cards cannot. It’s not a sure bet but it’s not as far-fetched as some people on here seem to think. It’s a very real possibility now due to Caustic's tech

I don’t mean to say PowerVR will run the latest desktop game better then ATI or NV. But we might end up with mobile games pulling off graphics ATI and NV cannot do at useable speeds. Those videos I posted of caustic tech are all beyound what ATI and NV can do.




Meaker Said “Then we have issues with bandwidth, PC GPUs have access to hundreds of GB/sec of bandwidth, something phones have no chance of copying.”
That’s part of the advantage of PowerVR’s architecture. It needs vastly less bandwidth, less raw speed, less power to run to match the same performance of ATI and NVidia’s chip. Those are all still problems but much less with PowerVR’s architecture.

It’s like the days when PowerVR where in the desktop market. Some people said the Kyro was rubbish as it didn’t have DDR ram and only had SDR and it had a low clock speed of 175mhz. But it didn’t need the extra bandwidth of DDR ram as the architecture is so different. DDR would have just increased the cost with zero benefit. As for 175Mhz that performed as well as Nvidias 800Mhz cards.

Yes I agree if PowerVR’s chips got moved up to desktop they could do more. The question is what happens when they don’t get moved up? What happens when the caustic tech gets added to the mobile space but not desktop space. Thats when things get interesting. That’s when mobiles might be able to do graphics desktops cannot.
 
Last edited:
why do you believe all this stuff with so much passion?

if your not already employed there maybe its time you went for a job in the marketing department :) you could use these threads as your reference lol!
 
So PowerVR have made a "wonder chip" that canbeat a desktop GPU but uses a few watts in power, and they dont want to make a desktop card, why? If this chip does what you say, they could dominate the PC graphics market and earn billions.

Another thing I just thought of, if this chip is so powerful wouldnt it need a high end CPU to provide data for it? Putting such a powerful card with current mobile CPU's would be like putting my 5970 in a 8 year old PC.
 
Last edited:
God it would be great if they did make a high end pc card again, a 3 nag race would be good for us consumers who don't really care about brand loyalty.
 
MichaelM said:
I'm amazed its still going with only one argument being recycled!
How is this thread not considered flamebait?
Click to expand...

The original post was about powerVR linking 16 SGX543 units with no performance loss or change in driver/program software (and how the iPad 2/PSP2 will utilise this advance)

...then about how far low power GPUs are advancing due to popularity of the platform (eg. nVidias ULP Geforce getting a few new features before Fermi etc)


It only descended into madness once raytracing/matching desktop GPUs was mentioned (and Crysis being compared to Minecraft :D)
 
metalmackey said “So PowerVR have made a "wonder chip" that canbeat a desktop GPU but uses a few watts in power, and they dont want to make a desktop card, why? If this chip does what you say, they could dominate the PC graphics market and earn billions.”
For the last time they are an IP company and do not produce cards. PowerVR licence the technology out to other companies to use. High end desktop cards are low volume and not really worth it from a profit point of view. It’s unlikely we will see a desktop card any time soon. There are rumours but I cannot think of any companies that would want to enter the desktop market. Not when its predicted to be the smaller of the GPU markets in coming years.

Its strongly rumoured PowerVR are in the PSP2 which has the power of a PS3. Hopefully we will find out if this is true on January 27th. See for a little more info

http://www.computerandvideogames.com/article.php?id=283339
 
Pottsey said:
metalmackey said “So PowerVR have made a "wonder chip" that canbeat a desktop GPU but uses a few watts in power, and they dont want to make a desktop card, why? If this chip does what you say, they could dominate the PC graphics market and earn billions.”
For the last time they are an IP company and do not produce cards. PowerVR licence the technology out to other companies to use. High end desktop cards are low volume and not really worth it from a profit point of view. It’s unlikely we will see a desktop card any time soon. There are rumours but I cannot think of any companies that would want to enter the desktop market. Not when its predicted to be the smaller of the GPU markets in coming years.

Its strongly rumoured PowerVR are in the PSP2 which has the power of a PS3. Hopefully we will find out if this is true on January 27th. See for a little more info

http://www.computerandvideogames.com/article.php?id=283339
Click to expand...

I assume it'll be pushing 2-5 times less pixels than PS3, so it can be 2-5 times less powerful but still have 'similar performance', Hence the silly "same power as the PS3" quote.

Don't forget Intel already licence the SGX architecture for many Atom chips, I can see powerVR IPs being used in cpus like Sandybridge in the distant future.
 
Pottsey said:
metalmackey said “So PowerVR have made a "wonder chip" that canbeat a desktop GPU but uses a few watts in power, and they dont want to make a desktop card, why? If this chip does what you say, they could dominate the PC graphics market and earn billions.”
For the last time they are an IP company and do not produce cards. PowerVR licence the technology out to other companies to use. High end desktop cards are low volume and not really worth it from a profit point of view. It’s unlikely we will see a desktop card any time soon. There are rumours but I cannot think of any companies that would want to enter the desktop market. Not when its predicted to be the smaller of the GPU markets in coming years.

Its strongly rumoured PowerVR are in the PSP2 which has the power of a PS3. Hopefully we will find out if this is true on January 27th. See for a little more info

http://www.computerandvideogames.com/article.php?id=283339
Click to expand...

But hold on, they wouldnt be high end as they could put 1 of these chips on every motherboard sold and according to you still match the performance of a AMD/Nvidia high end card.
 
Pottsey said:
.....Snore.... This year’s dual core PowerVR chip should have around 4 times the capability over last year’s chip and if the rumors are true that’s at a resolution of 2048x1536 with free FSAA.

....snore...
Click to expand...

Whats free FSAA ? Does that mean mobile users used to be able to pay to get FSAA on their tariff but Ofcom stepped in and its now free ? ;)

Just done a quick search and one of the results at the top was ATI talking about free FSAA on a HD2900xt, at low res. ;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom