Intel's Future Chips: News, Rumours & Reviews

Page 122 - Seeking answers? Join the Tom's Hardware community: where nearly two million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Status
Not open for further replies.
The last place I worked was department of defense, and all the dell computers were using iGPUs. 10s of 1000s of computers. Every so often all computers would be upgraded to new models, and they all had iGPUs. i5/i7
 
Ok, fair enough. Looks like not all PC providers are as idiotic in their offerings. Maybe it's a "managers talking to tech people" problem on my Company.

In any case, I still stand by my point that Intel does not need to keep improving the iGPU and can actually step back a lot to give more transistors to the CPU logic.

Cheers!
 


I agree with that statement for the most part, but what if AMD's next APUs can be used as entry level graphics for flawless 1080p gaming? They are not too far away from it now. The ~90% of the resolutions used on steam are 1080p or less. That sounds like a pretty key point to attack. I'd give up the AVX 512 crap etc to improve the CPU.
 


Hence why I mentioned the Iris parts. I have no problem with iGPUs if they actually make sense and can pull their own weight. APUs do make sense in that regard, because they're marketed towards light gaming and other compute tasks and AMD has not, so far, marketed any APU as a "high end" part (pro parts are something different).

Intel has had... How many years now? 10? To make something to make their iGPUs make sense and they're just starting now when AMD is actually pushing. I don't know... Bad timing on Intel's part, maybe? Trying to justify Raja's hiring? Haha.

For me the iGPUs in the Intel camp are a divisive topic (as you can read 😛), but I don't think that iGPUs in general have no purpose. Intel has just been "half-donkeying" it until now and I'm not sure consumers (even corporate ones) really see any added benefit from it. Hell, their drivers can't even handle more than 2 screens in some old iGPU models. That is just shameful.

Cheers!
 

I agree with you. Intel has dropped the ball on a great many things! With the looming 10nm disaster we can only hope they pull it out of the fire!
 


Intels problem with their iGPUs is they are trying to make a GPU by putting a few cores that are good at serial processing and wiring them together. They're basically making a wider CPU with reduced clocks to keep power draw under control This has limitations; power draw becomes a massive problem as you add cores, and you won't see as much performance within the same power/space envelope as you would if you wired many more weaker cores together, like GPUs do.

Intels architecture is "good enough' for desktop and light media apps, but won't ever be good enough for gaming.
 


Haha, ouch. Maybe an investor actually tried a wearable device for some time and sense kicked in (yo).



I thought they were still using the licencing from... What was it... PowerVR or ImaginationTechnologies? Did they go Larafail for their iGPUs of late? I thought they would license some stuff from AMD this time around at least...

But in any case, I agree with you on it being "good enough". I just don't really see how it makes sense to keep adding transistors to what is essentially a worse concept than GCN, lol.

Cheers!
 
Intel Makes Questionable Claim in Annual Filing
There is significant evidence to contradict a claim Intel made in its most recent annual filing.
Ashraf Eassa (TMFChipFool) Apr 20, 2018 at 11:13PM
In chip giant Intel's (NASDAQ:INTC) most recent annual filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission, the company includes a section in which it goes over what it believes are its key competitive advantages over its peers in the industry.

Among the listed competitive advantages is the following:

We have a market lead in transitioning to the next-generation process technology and bringing products to market using such technology. In Q4 2017, we began to ship products utilizing our 10nm process technology and we are continuing to work on the development of our next-generation 7nm process technology. We believe these advancements will offer significant improvements in one or more of the following areas: performance, new features, energy efficiency, and cost.

Process technology refers to the manufacturing processes the company uses to manufacture its processors.
The claim from Intel seems questionable at best. To illustrate, let's dive deep into when Intel has brought products to market on new technologies and when its competition -- Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company (NYSE:TSM) and Samsung (NASDAQOTH:SSNLF) -- have.
Click to expand...
https://www.fool.com/investing/2018/04/20/intel-makes-questionable-claim-in-sec-filing.aspx
 


Last time you posted that I already requested for a link or a source.
I (and I guess everybody in the forum) will be very interested in canon lake reviews. But so far I've seen none, despite being launched late 2017 (in theory).



 
Every Intel tick since at least the first generation brought IPC increases. This is nothing new.

 


CanonLake is a die shrink of Kabylake and it includes AVX512 support

 
Die shrink of Skylake, and yeah. However, every tick Intel produced since at least the first generation brought IPC improvements. Which means, some architectural changes.
 


Since CNL includes AVX512, and Skylake doesn't. CNL is not just Skylake on 10nm. Or is him confounding Skylake with Skylake-X?
 


Click on the twitter link and ask him.
 


I just confirmed CNL includes AVX512 support.
 
Yes, and it has IPC improvements over Skylake.

 
Status
Not open for further replies.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom