Intel's Larrabee Delayed Indefinitely

[cybrcatter]

AAAAHH HAHA!

 

[DjEaZy]

... FAIL!!! ... nicely done AMD, they bout the hock with sinker... AMD first x64, intel follows, AMD first dualcore, intel follows, AMD fantasize about FUSION, intel follows... and what about the agreement with Dreamwork's studios?
http://www.tomshardware.com/news/IDF-Dreamworks-Intel,6211.html
http://www.tomshardware.com/news/intel-larrabee-graphics,5847.html
... would gladly see reaction from ATi and nVidia camp...

 

[RADIO_ACTIVE]

WOW!
I hope they try again
The industry needs another competitor.

 

[ph3412b07]

its cause it can't play crysis.

 

[witcherx]

DreamWorks switches to Intel, creates 3D movies with Larrabee

http://www.tgdaily.com/hardware-features/38293-dreamworks-switches-to-intel-creates-3d-movies-with-larrabee

What about all these false claims by dream works another of those dirty triks by Intel to maul AMD.
Support AMD!

 

[doomtomb]

Intel fail

 

[rooket]

[citation][nom]sstym[/nom]To be fair, Intel also knows how to make Solid State Drives, not just X86 processors.But they have always been useless at dishing out near-decent graphic cards.[/citation]

That's not true. They had a video card out that competed with the Riva 128 which was pretty good and was a difficult choice for me but I ended up buying the nvidia card. After that well, their 2D onboard graphics chips work very well and typically better than purchasing a cheap ATI card in its place. I haven't benchmarked nvidia cards versus that though so I can't say for nvidia on the 2D side.

 

[ravewulf]

Didn't see this coming. Intel, failing at graphics? Never. /sarcasm

 

[WheelsOfConfusion]

[citation][nom]Jane[/nom]We've been hearing about Larrabee for almost three years so hearing the whole thing has been shelved is a bit of a shock.[/citation]
The fact that you've been hearing about an upcoming graphics card, from Intel, for three years means you really shouldn't be shocked when it's shelved indefinitely. Or at least, I can't say I'm surprised or disappointed.

 

[Ehsan w]

[citation][nom]back_by_demand[/nom]Epic, epic FAILIntel, why dont you stick to your corner making CPU's and leave the graphics business to the grown ups.[/citation]

whahaha, i'm not sure if you know, but intel is currently raping amd at the processor race

 

[redgarl]

In short, 5800 serie stronger and cheaper... and there... already.

 

[DjEaZy]

... nVidia CUDA and ATi stream... GPGPU... with DirectCompute and OpenCL... the might of CPU is fading...

 

[nebun]

intel can't compete with that AMD and nVidia has to offer

 

[nebun]

intel can't compete with what AMD and nVidia has to offer

 

[grieve]

[citation][nom]DjEaZy[/nom]... FAIL!!! ... nicely done AMD, they bout the hock with sinker...AMD first x64, intel follows, AMD first dualcore, intel follows, AMD fantasize about FUSION, intel follows ...[/citation]
My Version...
AMD first x64, intel delivers faster, AMD first dualcore, intel delivers faster, AMD fantasize about FUSION, intel fails.

 

[DjEaZy]

...intel waz trying to put a new standard as well with Larrabee... an this is FAILlike behavior... it is like RDRAM... big fail... first ITANIUM... fail as well... they want to push own standards... ok... nVidia is halfFAILed with Physx... and AMD with the TLB bug...

 

[hannibal]

The previous news was that they only don't come to market with their unmature product. It has been said that they will wait the next production node and hone their drivers that most propably are very much the biggest reason for delay. It's not easy task to make multi core support to any DX model. It may be allso that DX9 and before is the hardest part. DX11 is more GPUCPU like Larrabee was suposed to be, so Larrabee may rice it head again a couple of years later, but even then it's not easy task.
If AMD Nvidia can keep up with their leaps in GPU department, Intel may have very hard time, but if they stall for any reason Intel may have a change, but even then the drívers are the hardest part to get working. The CPU department have chown that their production technogy is the best in the world at this moment, but GPU is more that just productin nodes and current leakage (even as we remember from ATI 2900 it can be a big part of succes or failure.)
Summasummarum. I am sure that the hardware works, but the drivers does not deliver the speed that is needed. And it may be so that software newer will work as it was planned to do (in economical sence I mean...)

 

[DjEaZy]

[citation][nom]grieve[/nom]My Version...AMD first x64, intel delivers faster, AMD first dualcore, intel delivers faster, AMD fantasize about FUSION, intel fails.[/citation]
... but by emulating, not innovating...

 

[Computer_Lots]

I don't know why everyone loves to bash Intel. They do currently make the best CPUs. Nothing can touch the i7 right now. They've made some errors along the way. Everyone likes to make fun of the hot-running P4 but it was at least financially successful for Intel. I'm still using a P4 3GHZ for one of my PCs and it works just fine. Intel graphics are weak for 3D but they work and most importantly, they're really cheap.

I don't want to see a situation where Intel puts both AMD and Nvidia out of business, but having a 3rd competitor in the GPU market would be good for the consumer. They would force AMD and Nvidia to either best their technology or beat their prices.

 

[FloKid]

I was hoping to see Larabee in action, but if Intel doesn't think it's competitive with Nvidia and AMD, then I wouldn't want them to waiste their time on developing it. It's just that AMD and ATI was merged and that is why aka now AMD is producing video cards. Intel is still a processor manufacturer and that is why, I think, they are not doing good with video. Video cards are now much faster than CPUs, as the talk about Fermi said, so no surprise there. Maybe Intel might make a video card someday, but they will need more experience with it. GL Intel!!!

 

[Guest]

larrabee replaced by http://news.cnet.com/2300-1001_3-10001951.html?tag=rtcol ?

Not GPU but as a CPU perhaps!
As a GPU larrabee probably wouldn't be able to compete with AMD.

 

[u_hsen]

i think intel should partner with nVidia in response to AMD acquiring ATI

 

[nebun]

[citation][nom]u_hsen[/nom]i think intel should partner with nVidia in response to AMD acquiring ATI[/citation]

it would be a wonderful idea, if they do it AMD is dead, lol

 

[4ILY45]

Intel has always created sub-par GPUs. Not a surprise that the fail @ larrabee.

larrabee replaced by http://news.cnet.com/2300-1001_3-1 [...] ?tag=rtcol ?

Not GPU but as a CPU perhaps!
As a GPU larrabee probably wouldn't be able to compete with AMD.

ProDigit80: isn't that the 48 core processor that was shown here:
http://www.tomshardware.com/news/Intel-Cloud-Cores-Processor-CPU,9193.html

 

[hundredislandsboy]

i think intel should partner with nVidia in response to AMD acquiring ATI

Thanks for your thoughts. I would not want to see that happen. The less the number of chip makers there are, the less competitive they become, and the less options we have.