Intel's Radeon Vega-Powered 8th-Gen Processors, Detailed

Status
Not open for further replies.

FunAndGames

Reputable
Aug 10, 2015
5
0
4,510
0
"which tipped us off that the new overclockable processors would , as we suspected."
from this articel. "would , as we suspected." ???
 

FunAndGames

Reputable
Aug 10, 2015
5
0
4,510
0
1st paragraph, last sentence...quote
"The new processors will even make their way into the ."
???
WTF? The new processors will even make their way into the period?
2nd paragraph, 1st sentence...quote
"We first learned of Intel's plans in November 2017 when the company disclosed that it was developing a new ."
WTF? so Intel is developing a new period?
 

FunAndGames

Reputable
Aug 10, 2015
5
0
4,510
0
2nd paragraph, 2nd sentence...quote
"Surprisingly, that means Intel is now an AMD customer. Early this week, Intel accidentally posted one of the new processors to its India site, which tipped us off that the new overclockable processors would , as we suspected."
WTF? these overclockable processors would comma as we suspected?
 

PaulAlcorn

Senior Editor
Editor
Feb 24, 2015
771
137
11,160
0


Hello, thank you for commenting. The missing text is in fact there, but they are hyperlinked words. I see the words in three different browsers, so perhaps you have an ad blocker or virus protection that is scrubbing links? if you still cannot see the text I can report it to management.
 

alextheblue

Distinguished
Apr 3, 2001
3,078
106
20,970
2
You know, if someone had asked me six months ago who would be the first to integrate HBM (HBC?) on-package with an APU... my answer would not have been Intel. Strange world.

I'm also a little surprised Vega was able to go toe to toe (even if only on certain titles) with a 1060, with only 24 CUs and a single stack of HBM2.
 

PaulAlcorn

Senior Editor
Editor
Feb 24, 2015
771
137
11,160
0


You're telling me :pt1cable:
 

Dosflores

Reputable
Jul 8, 2014
147
0
4,710
6
There's a typo in the fourth paragraph: "According to Intel, now it can beat an Nvidia 1080 Max-Q in gaming". I guess you meant 1060.
 

AgentLozen

Distinguished
May 2, 2011
520
5
19,015
22
This is really neat. The Radeon GH chips are compared to the Nvidia GTX 1060 Max Q. How much different is the Max Q compared to the normal 1060? It seems strange that a 100w CPU + GPU can beat a GTX 1060. I think something is being misrepresented in those benchmarks.
 

Mark RM

Admirable
Jul 16, 2014
2,658
1
7,960
589
As far as I'm concerned I see the ultimate home theater chip to be combined with several low noise thermal solutions. Amazing little family room gaming rig with native and emulated game sets and something actually capable of keeping up.
 

KidHorn

Distinguished
Oct 8, 2009
269
0
18,790
2
I know these are meant for the mobile market, but I would love to see something similar for the desktop. Video cards can be a real PITA to install and some are way too loud.
 

milchuck_1

Reputable
Aug 27, 2015
2
0
4,510
0
I confused why AMD and Intel would be in business with each other when they are each other's biggest competitors.
 

bloodroses

Distinguished
Jan 27, 2013
670
14
19,165
56


It's still revenue for AMD; especially since they haven't been able to compete in the high end laptop market. And as for competition, they're more like co-opetition since the disappearance of one would drastically affect the other due to becoming a monopoly.
 
The integrated Intel graphics can power up to three displays, but the Radeon Graphics engine supports up to six 4K displays simultaneously. Unfortunately, the discrete Vega graphics will stay powered constantly during that somewhat extreme use case. The processors also support Radeon FreeSync Technology. Intel's HD Graphics 630 doesn't support FreeSync, so it's likely that using the feature would also prevent shutting down the Vega graphics engine, making it a power-sapping feature.
This does not sound like an issue at all. If someone has their laptop connected to multiple displays, they will almost certainly be running on AC power as well, so the slightly higher power draw wouldn't be a concern. The same goes for FreeSync. If you're playing a game with FreeSync active, you will almost certainly be running it on the Vega Graphics chip anyway, so of course it's going to be powered. When the Intel integrated graphics is being utilized for light desktop tasks, there will be no need for FreeSync to be active.


The problem with an all-in-one solution like this is that it would greatly limit your options for performing upgrades on a system. The way it is implemented here, neither the CPU or GPU are upgradable, as they are permanently attached to the motherboard, which is typical for laptops. Even if they utilized a socketed design for a desktop system, it would still mean that you would need to replace both the CPU and GPU together at the same time. Typically, graphics cards get upgraded more often than CPUs, since CPU performance usually doesn't improve all that much from one year to the next, but if they are on the same package, you would need to replace them both together, which would likely be more expensive.

Additionally, CPU upgrades tend to not be as easy as graphics card upgrades, so you wouldn't really be gaining anything there in terms of ease of installation. That wouldn't likely improve noise levels either, and in a desktop you would just needlessly be moving two heat sources together, creating one hotter heat source that might be harder to cool. That could be okay for these relatively low wattage parts, but more powerful hardware might best be left separated. Now if what you were looking for were a largely non-upgradable computing device with this kind of equipment, I'm sure those will exist. There are already all-in-one PCs built into monitors, and mini PCs in small packages that contain hardware similar to laptops. Or, of course, you could just get a laptop.
 

MCMunroe

Distinguished
Jun 15, 2006
283
1
18,865
38
I have been hoping to see a R3 Alienware Alpha. I use an R1 Alpha for my HTPC and it's been great.
Perhaps this will be Dell's "NUC" mentioned.
 

mihen

Reputable
Oct 11, 2017
362
39
4,820
3
It's good for Intel and probably good for AMD. Since Intel has such poor graphics support, and AMD could use market share. You can't really rely on making that one killer product that will steal all the market share away from your competitors.
Take for instance AMDs dominance in GPUs from the HD4k to the R9 290x. Despite having the better GPUs and having better driver support, they still sold less than their direct competitors by a staggering margin.
Since the announcement of the XBox Scorpio, this was bound to happen. AMD is capable of getting a SoC with 6 tflops of single precision graphics calculations. You would have to be dense not to see the application in portables.
 

vider

Distinguished
Jul 10, 2008
151
1
18,685
0
Woooho. Wait a minute, am I seeing this right? Did intel just did what I think they did? Teamed up with AMD and is about to release this to the public? How long before we see another scandal where AMD realizes that Intel has X-ray-ed the chips, reverse engineered them and then created their "ground breaking New tech"?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS