News Intel Arc GPU Guide Suggests 10th Gen CPU or Newer Required

[Admin]

Intel's system requirements documentation is rather vague. It implies that ReBAR "must" be enabled, and you should own a 10th Gen Intel Core processor based system or newer for Intel Arc GPU support. No AMD system requirements are outlined.

Intel Arc GPU Guide Suggests 10th Gen CPU or Newer Required : Read more

 

[InvalidError]

I can easily imagine ReBAR becoming a requirement for future GPUs to eliminate the need to develop, maintain and optimize both ReBAR and a windowed BAR code paths in drivers and abstractions to accommodate either at higher levels.

 

[gg83]

I can easily imagine ReBAR becoming a requirement for future GPUs to eliminate the need to develop, maintain and optimize both ReBAR and a windowed BAR code paths in drivers and abstractions to accommodate either at higher levels.

Would Nvidia be able to compete? Unless they develop a cpu maybe?

 

[helper800]

I can see this becoming a thing as far as; Intel systems require Intel or Nvidia graphics cards, or AMD systems require AMD graphics cards and the like. It will be a dark day in PC hardware if the aforementioned becomes a thing.

 

[hotaru.hino]

Intel probably just wants to push people onto newer platforms sooner.

 

[digitalgriffin]

I can easily imagine ReBAR becoming a requirement for future GPUs to eliminate the need to develop, maintain and optimize both ReBAR and a windowed BAR code paths in drivers and abstractions to accommodate either at higher levels.

No. It's not that much more work. They use dynamic dependency injectable templates when compiling code and data to send to the GPU. So there's high level function calls that change to all map to the same functions. But the execution of each function varies based on capabilities.

 

[InvalidError]

Would Nvidia be able to compete? Unless they develop a cpu maybe?

Why? ReBAR is a standard PCI thing. The only things required to support it is PCI hardware that has the extra address bits, firmware updated to support it and drivers written accordingly. It doesn't have anything to do with GPUs or CPUs specifically.

Intel probably just wants to push people onto newer platforms sooner.

There are three obvious reasons for dropping support for legacy/non-ReBAR systems:
1- simplified hardware development
2- simplified driver development
3- if you look at AMD/s ReBAR/SAM, ditching the 256MB BAR limit can get you 5-10% extra performance

It wouldn't make much sense for Intel to waste driver development effort on supporting legacy/non-ReBAR which yields substantially worse performance on products that will mostly ship through OEM as part of complete new systems.

 

[digitalgriffin]

Intel probably just wants to push people onto newer platforms sooner.

That's like pushing people into a Ferrari frame and putting a Prius engine in it. It doesn't make sense.

Intel has prided itself on turnkey stability and integration. While initial releases look poor performance and stability wise, I would place dollars to donuts they are going hard core corporate customers who want that simple turnkey support/installation. Because these are not going to appeal to most gamers. And how many corporate users really care about gaming GPU updates? Answer: None. So if you get basic functionality down, then the rest is irrelevant.* Provided as it's better than built in graphics.

 

[Giroro]

It seems clear to me that the hardware requirements listed here are the requirements for enabling the ReBAR feature, not the requirements for the GPU itself.

So yes, it follows that a guide for enabling ReBAR would state that ReBAR compatible platform is required to turn on ReBAR.

But, I'm not seeing anything that implies ReBAR is required to use or install the GPU, in general. Because the linked quick start guide isn't about that topic

 

[rluker5]

"Resizable BAR must be enabled for optimal performance in all applications using Intel® Arc™ A-Series Graphics. Initial support includes the following Intel®-based systems. Support for more platforms will be added at a later time. "
Looks like "for optimal performance in all applications" to me which is then the same as AMD or Nvidia.

Also in reference to the newer cpu gens, maybe it is for Deep Link? I thought AMD's requirement for their igpu/dgpu link was much more stringent back in the Athlon days where it would only work with a couple apus and a couple low end dgpus.

 

[AgentBirdnest]

It seems clear to me that the hardware requirements listed here are the requirements for enabling the ReBAR feature, not the requirements for the GPU itself.

Yeah, this seemed totally obvious to me...

And also, what the hell is wrong with this article? A lot. Typos everywhere (including the subtitle), most egregious of which is this monstrosity: "A better description of the system requirements and tests with and without ReBAR across various platforms ciykd b egekofykm tii, "

Article: "Guide Suggests 10th Gen CPU or Newer Required." Picture: "Support for more platforms will be added later in time."
Article: "There is no mention of AMD processor based system support at all." ... Huh ??? What about this bit that was apparently overlooked in the picture: "Additional platforms with Resizable BAR / Smart Access Memory enabled may also support Intel© Arc™ A-series graphics."

This article seems clickbaity and poorly written.

I'd like a bit of clarification on the last bit in the article, that Toms will "test them for considerations for our list of the best graphics cards" once they get their hands on them. Will you be trying to get a card from China? Or are you waiting for a global release to review it?

 

[osfanbuff63]

I can see this becoming a thing as far as; Intel systems require Intel or Nvidia graphics cards, or AMD systems require AMD graphics cards and the like. It will be a dark day in PC hardware if the aforementioned becomes a thing.

I don't think that would pass anti-trust honestly, but I could see it.

 

[helper800]

I don't think that would pass anti-trust honestly, but I could see it.

I don't know where you live but in the USA there is nothing that companies cannot get away with by stuffing the pockets of the right people.

 

[TerryLaze]

And also, what the hell is wrong with this article? A lot. Typos everywhere (including the subtitle), most egregious of which is this monstrosity: "A better description of the system requirements and tests with and without ReBAR across various platforms ciykd b egekofykm tii, "

Please stop dissing our future AI overlords.

 

[garygech]

Apple demonstrated the absolute importance of hardware integration along with software integration. There is a reasonable market expectation that when you upgrade, you move upwards, not across standards. Intel needs to set a clear standard with the introduction of their graphic platforms, integration. They have to demonstrate commitment to the platform, scaling, and objective performance in real world business productivity. Perhaps you are a company hoping to upgrade 70 work stations for professionals and those work stations will need improved video conference capabilities. Then those work stations need to have all the codecs integrated, tested, and then delivered on time with the expectation of future software improvement of a period of 5 years with a limited lifespan, a depreciation cycle, then move onto the next standard that increases productivity in the work groups.

 

[garygech]

"Intel has prided itself on turnkey stability and integration. While initial releases look poor performance and stability wise, I would place dollars to donuts they are going hard core corporate customers who want that simple turnkey support/installation. Because these are not going to appeal to most gamers. And how many corporate users really care about gaming GPU updates? Answer: None. So if you get basic functionality down, then the rest is irrelevant.* Provided as it's better than built in graphics."

The pandemic demonstrated the importance of video conferencing. This is a sustained area of growth and need for superior turn key integration. Intel is the major supplier for both HP Enterprise Workstations and Dell Corporate Desktops. The laptops solutions have progressed. As workers move back to the office, there will be more in office video conferencing, and less corporate travel due to costs and convenience. The desktop workstations are a way to leverage hardware to increase productivity. Intel was delayed on both the server side and the desktop side. New desktops are no different than new tablets or new laptops or new I-phones, the codecs have to be baked into the Silicon for high efficiency performance. Personally, I prefer remote meetings when the meetings are informational. I tend to listen attentively, and also get other work done. Having a platform that can blur out backgrounds, etc, that has proven profitable for Apple on their Mac Platform. Intel is foremost a supplier of corporate and business consumer solutions, similar to IBM. That is where their dollar is taken off their money tree. They would be smart to introduce low cost high quality professional business solutions that are fully integrated in work stations, and focus on the low end for gaming, and let NVIDIA and AMD duke it out, along with Innosilicon in the Chinese market.