And its to the point of this thread.
Both are unreleased, yet both companies keep "showing" its capabilities.
If they keep waiting, ATI could slip in with something here, and more later, which from what Im reading wouldnt be a huge diversion from their current HW, which is superior to both actually, sans the ECC requirements, but thats only a portion of this market requiring the ECC, tho a lucrative part of it.
The numbers Ive seen "leaked" by both companies, going by this, the other info we talked about earlier Elmo, and what nVidia is claiming, is that nVidia has a slight lead at this point.
Now, LRB Im sure has some polishing to do, but not alot, as we all agree, Intels process is tried and true, and not alot more there to do, beides some drivers etc
meanwhile, at 5,8 x that of their old HW, nVidia has also clock problems, which is rumored at 20%.
I know this talk is as phoney and speculative as these "showings", but using what weve been allowed to "see", or "leaked". it does appear Fermi is ahead at this point
"For instance, if only a certain number of cores are needed for a job, they could run while the other cores are idle. When the cores being used start to heat up, they could be shut down and cool idle cores could take over running the job. "
http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9140949/Intel_to_unveil_energy_efficient_many_core_research_chip?taxonomyId=1&pageNumber=2
To me this sounds much like SMT in ways, and LRB has been said to do anything its required to do, as its totally non fixed function, which has its drawbacks in certain scenarios, same for SMT, when the app is asking too much, it just wont work, or in LRBs case, either will downclock, or just be slower.
Thats the design, not approach, excluding the non FF part.
The approach is being touted as user/dev friendly, but again, theyve writted several new languages for it, so at this point, its another CUDA to me.