angry_ducky
Distinguished
- Mar 3, 2006
- 3,030
- 0
- 20,790
chuckshissle
Splendid
- Feb 2, 2006
- 4,579
- 0
- 22,780
I don't know man, but it might be a good thing. Think about it Intel cpu, intel board and intel graphics cards. That would be a very stable gaming system and highly overclockable. I love Nvidia but I wanna see what Intel can offer with their plans of making gpus.
jaguarskx
Titan
- Apr 19, 2006
- 27,976
- 4
- 84,965
Just about everyone knows that Intel's IGP is not for gaming. They exists mainly for the business clients who do not need to add in a discreet GPU just to do officework. Unless of course your "officework" is GPU intensive like game development, CAD, 3D rendering, etc.
Sure you can use them to play games, but 2D, not 3D games. Get with the program dude (and your neighbor too).
djkrypplephite
Distinguished
- May 15, 2006
- 302
- 0
- 18,780
At first they released 64-bit chips when AMD64 hadn't even been invented yet.
If Intel wants to make a GPU, it will be good, no doubt. I'd be glad to have another player come into this game. As far as GPU's are concerned, I'm completely impartial. I hate AMD, but if they made GPU's, I'd be all for it.
If Intel wants to make a GPU, it will be good, no doubt. I'd be glad to have another player come into this game. As far as GPU's are concerned, I'm completely impartial. I hate AMD, but if they made GPU's, I'd be all for it.
Why wouldn't Intel do dedicated graphics, they've done it in the past with the i740 starfighter AGP which was at the time not a bad product let down by poor OpenGL drivers.
In developing the X3000 they have already had to design a DX9 SM3 card which would still be a worthwhile upgrade to the majority of people with current IGP products, why not offer it as a standalone card which will allow IGP people to run Vista Aero at a low cost? I can't see them going after the out and out performance crown, the money is to be made in the mass market anyway especially with Intels FABs meaning they have the ability to make these parts cheaper than ATI or Nvidia can having to rely on the likes of TMSC.
In developing the X3000 they have already had to design a DX9 SM3 card which would still be a worthwhile upgrade to the majority of people with current IGP products, why not offer it as a standalone card which will allow IGP people to run Vista Aero at a low cost? I can't see them going after the out and out performance crown, the money is to be made in the mass market anyway especially with Intels FABs meaning they have the ability to make these parts cheaper than ATI or Nvidia can having to rely on the likes of TMSC.
how do bear with me not sure how these discustions go, sorry new to these. But not to computers..
Look at the big picture, in no way is intel trying to compete with nvidia or ati.......... its a mater of sheer size. If intel made a gpu and it worked and say in a year was as good or even better...........lets not forget if they wanted to make a gpu better than nvidia ect... they would but its not there core market. But if they make a gpu that worked really awsome with there chipsets and cpu's that could hurt AMD in the long run.
Reason AMD has hurt there core market............ Just a thought
Look at the big picture, in no way is intel trying to compete with nvidia or ati.......... its a mater of sheer size. If intel made a gpu and it worked and say in a year was as good or even better...........lets not forget if they wanted to make a gpu better than nvidia ect... they would but its not there core market. But if they make a gpu that worked really awsome with there chipsets and cpu's that could hurt AMD in the long run.
Reason AMD has hurt there core market............ Just a thought
The i740 sucked ass until companies started shipping them with enough video memory that it didn't have to keep transferring data over the AGP bus all the time. As far as I can see Intel intended it as a means to push the AGP bus, not as a graphics card... and that showed.
For the three people with integrated graphics who are going to upgrade to Vista, you mean?
The point I was trying to make is that there is a market for upgraders
(and I suspect it will be more than 3 users!) who want a cheap add in card which will let them run Aero Glass and a selection of games, and that is the market Intel is most likely to go after. Glass itself demands a level of GPU sufficiently high that it would be an upgrade for quite a few people. If something is released with performance about on a par with say an x800 but at reduced cost I would think there would be a market for it.
(and I suspect it will be more than 3 users!) who want a cheap add in card which will let them run Aero Glass and a selection of games, and that is the market Intel is most likely to go after. Glass itself demands a level of GPU sufficiently high that it would be an upgrade for quite a few people. If something is released with performance about on a par with say an x800 but at reduced cost I would think there would be a market for it.
While I can agree with most of what you said here, Intel could do some serious damage if they move to their latest techonology & produce a chip/card better or even equivalent to ATI or Nvidia.
That combined with the promose of Conroe's performance could be a very good thing for intel & their gaming crowd in the very near future.
Sadly I dont see them catering for such a small market & I dont they can pull it off in time.... BUT!!!!! who really knows?
That combined with the promose of Conroe's performance could be a very good thing for intel & their gaming crowd in the very near future.
Sadly I dont see them catering for such a small market & I dont they can pull it off in time.... BUT!!!!! who really knows?
gman01
Distinguished
- Jun 25, 2006
- 272
- 0
- 18,780
If you think INTEL would not love AMD to go out of business, you are not thinking like a cut throat business man.... The govenrment never broke up Microsoft did they? I am sure INTEL would take the risk of being in Microsofts position and dealing with congress.... 😀 Besides the IBM/sony/toshibs 'cell cpus' will be in the server/desktop/notebook market in the next 2 years.... So there will be competition....
I can think of alot of senarious where the FTC would allow it, and alot where they might stop it....
When system on a chip ever becomes a reality makeing graphics cards obsolete(I don't know if that is 2 years or 20 years) maybe ATI will get absorbed in INTEL / and nvidia obsorbed in AMD or visa-versa....
mesarectifier
Distinguished
- Mar 26, 2006
- 2,257
- 0
- 19,780
So far Cell has only made it into home entertainment products.
I wouldn't open that can of worms though, there are die hard believers that it's going to come along and destroy AMD/Intel and there are sensible people who think that it's not going to do anything of note (other than PS3)
gman01
Distinguished
- Jun 25, 2006
- 272
- 0
- 18,780
So far Cell has only made it into home entertainment products.
I wouldn't open that can of worms though, there are die hard believers that it's going to come along and destroy AMD/Intel and there are sensible people who think that it's not going to do anything of note (other than PS3)
I forgot IBM has already sold some high end 'cell cpu' server blades... So It is not just the PS3.... Will it hit the Desktop/notebook market with any force is the question?
I personally hope they do hit the desktop/notebook market, and are as fast as IBM/sony/toshiba claims.... I also hope that the die hards that think it will devistate INTEL/AMD are also wrong.... I would hope that INTEL/AMD have proceesors designed a few generations ahead that they could rush to the market.... I am sick of this slow doubling in speed every 18 months thing.... I want a phototronic PC!
mesarectifier
Distinguished
- Mar 26, 2006
- 2,257
- 0
- 19,780
gman01
Distinguished
- Jun 25, 2006
- 272
- 0
- 18,780
It reeks of Itanium to me, but you could be right.
The reason I think it could be different that Itanium, Is becasue of Linux/apache web servers.... If the 'cell cpu' comes with a straight linux operating system, then the guys running apache web servers could want them bad.... If IBM/sony/toshiba try to control the software it runs, and doesn't let it run open source linux, then it is done.... But ofcourse if the cell isn't as fast as claimed, then it is done....
I think people would buy a 'cell cpu' desktop/notebook if it satisfys all these IFS:
(1)If it as fast as they claim
(2)If it as cheap as they claim
(3)If it runs all open source linux software(for the office people)
(4)If it runs playstation3 games(for the gamers)
So it has to be fast,cheap, and have ALL the software....
MrCommunistGen
Distinguished
- Jun 7, 2005
- 1,042
- 0
- 19,310
Why does everyone care so much? If they suck (and maybe even if they don't) none of us will be buying one. If they're at least half way decent they might generate a bit of competition with ATI and Nvidia (probably in the entry level segment), helping drive prices down and sparking more development which is a GOOD THING.
-mcg
-mcg
gman01
Distinguished
- Jun 25, 2006
- 272
- 0
- 18,780
I think there is alot more YOU should know before making these posts.
yeah, the closer you get the graphics chips integrated to the CPU the faster it can be.... He has that backwards.... the intel915 IGPU isnt't slower becasue it is integrated, it is slow because it not a speedy design....
TheGreatGrapeApe
Champion
- Feb 18, 2003
- 20,040
- 0
- 50,960
Simple facts to consider.
Intel is at the cutting edge of features alongside ATi and nV (everyone else either lags or drops out) so there's market to divide and conquer. Heck Intel's GMA965/3000 will be a unified design whereas nV's will not be.
So one has to think that they see an opportunity to exploit their ability to use their FAB capacity (be it ne 45nm or old 90nm).
Before the compeitition was strong, but now with essentially a duopoly they have the size to push in there and take some of the market, and likely a large chunk.
And what you guys seem to forget is that the most profitable segment of add-in is still the low end, and Intel could very easily dominate that market with their capable 2D/3D performance for that segment, and their much improved multi-media applications.
Also Intel may also wish to work in the VPU segment because of the rate of technology growth their, which may be more applicable to their server and mainstream CPU market.
From a business perspective this make alot of sens, it's actually more of a 'I'm surprised they haven't done it soone' thing. Seriously what other industry do you know of where the market leader doesn't have a hand involved in at least a single mid range product let alone high end?
I don't expect them to beat the R600/G80 cards, but I wouldn't be surprised if they plan on taking a big chunk of the X1300/GF7300 market and their replacement cards. Heck it would almost be necessary for the ViiV strategy IMO.
It's likely to hurt ATi an nV where they make the most profits, and unfortunately Intel isn't going to push the high end, so you may in turn see a slow down in development of top end cards if the margins and volumes of the most profitable segments are attacked.
Intel is at the cutting edge of features alongside ATi and nV (everyone else either lags or drops out) so there's market to divide and conquer. Heck Intel's GMA965/3000 will be a unified design whereas nV's will not be.
So one has to think that they see an opportunity to exploit their ability to use their FAB capacity (be it ne 45nm or old 90nm).
Before the compeitition was strong, but now with essentially a duopoly they have the size to push in there and take some of the market, and likely a large chunk.
And what you guys seem to forget is that the most profitable segment of add-in is still the low end, and Intel could very easily dominate that market with their capable 2D/3D performance for that segment, and their much improved multi-media applications.
Also Intel may also wish to work in the VPU segment because of the rate of technology growth their, which may be more applicable to their server and mainstream CPU market.
From a business perspective this make alot of sens, it's actually more of a 'I'm surprised they haven't done it soone' thing. Seriously what other industry do you know of where the market leader doesn't have a hand involved in at least a single mid range product let alone high end?
I don't expect them to beat the R600/G80 cards, but I wouldn't be surprised if they plan on taking a big chunk of the X1300/GF7300 market and their replacement cards. Heck it would almost be necessary for the ViiV strategy IMO.
It's likely to hurt ATi an nV where they make the most profits, and unfortunately Intel isn't going to push the high end, so you may in turn see a slow down in development of top end cards if the margins and volumes of the most profitable segments are attacked.
apache_lives
Splendid
- Dec 10, 2002
- 6,873
- 1
- 26,160
heh has everyone forgotten the Intel 740 agp video card - they came stock with like 8mb and were OK in its day.
chuckshissle
Splendid
- Feb 2, 2006
- 4,579
- 0
- 22,780
Yeah they used to make graphics card back in the day but Voodoo was the one dominanting it and then Nvidia pushed Voodoo out of the GPU market then ATI came and all other GPU manufacturers for industrial application. Now that only Nvidia and ATI are the main source for GPU's, I guess Intel want a cut of the market share as if they're not doing well in the CPU chip market. I don't know if they could pull out something new with there plan to compete against Nvidia and ATI but I sure wanna see it.
Like I said before it would nice to see an Intel chip, board and graphics card working together.
Like I said before it would nice to see an Intel chip, board and graphics card working together.
nick_000000
Distinguished
- Mar 5, 2006
- 243
- 0
- 18,680
I have intel graphics in my laptop, pretty crappy. The best game it can play is dawn of war but thats hardly the most intesive graphics. To be fair though it gets the job done and doesn't create that much heat.
Maybe nvidia and ati should start making processors :lol:.
Maybe nvidia and ati should start making processors :lol:.
joefriday
Distinguished
- Feb 24, 2006
- 2,105
- 0
- 19,810
That was before Intel made integrated graphics. Ironically it became the basis for intel's first intgrated graphics chip, the GMCH 810/815 series featuring Intel's Extreme Graphics. These IGPs were close to stand-alone units, as they had up to 4 MB of memory (the DC100 models) built on the mobo (much like the ATI Rage turbo on my K6 system).
http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/chipsets/display/intel810.html
SoupRKnowva
Distinguished
- Apr 8, 2006
- 9
- 0
- 18,510
all of you guys who actualy believe this "rumor" are totally correct. I personally know that intel is planning on making a high end discrett graphics solution, because i know the manager of the low level driver suport group of the whole project.....did anyone wonder why intel purchased 3D labs?....didnt think of that did ya?...but yeah, they arent just planning on winning in the low end market, they are planning on taking the topspot....and with intels resources im almost positive that if they want to they will
TRENDING THREADS
-
-
Discussion What's your favourite video game you've been playing?- Started by amdfangirl
- Replies: 4K
-
AMD Ryzen 9 9950X vs Intel Core Ultra 9 285K Faceoff — it isn't even close- Started by Admin
- Replies: 54
-
-
Question I have an old system in the basement that has really basic specs, but am planning to give it just a little uplift with an RTX 5060 ti 16gb- Started by Guy_who_thinks_hes_cool
- Replies: 8
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram