Nvidia: Tegra 3+ ''Wayne'' Arrives Later This Year

Status
Not open for further replies.

dragonsqrrl

Distinguished
Nov 19, 2009
1,280
0
19,290
3
"Also thrown into the mix will be 24 GPU cores with support for DirectX 11.x, OpenGL 4.x and PhysX."

Wow, that's pretty big. The GPU in Wayne is supposed to be based on a new architecture. Some have even speculated it's a Kepler derivative. This should bring the GPU performance bump many have been waiting for in Tegra SOC's.
 

Parsian

Distinguished
Apr 28, 2007
774
0
18,980
0
[citation][nom]frozonic[/nom]system on ship??[/citation]


I am not kidding you, i did read it as "SoC" and then I read your "system on ship" as "system on chip". Brain's interpolation is bad sometimes :p

In regard to the post, I wish AMD had also entered this arena.
 

gilgamex

Distinguished
Sep 28, 2010
106
0
18,690
2
[citation][nom]alfaalex101[/nom]Buy the 1.2ghz version - get a custom kernal + rom - OC to 2.0 ghz no problemo. Thou mad?[/citation]

It may be lazer cut to reduce performance, like all your 680 GTX compute dreams.
 

joytech22

Distinguished
Jun 4, 2008
1,686
0
19,810
10
[citation][nom]gilgamex[/nom]It may be lazer cut to reduce performance, like all your 680 GTX compute dreams.[/citation]

My dreams live on.. With my GTX580 ;)
 

tipoo

Distinguished
May 4, 2006
1,183
0
19,280
0
The current Tegra 3 has an 8 "core" (if people insist on calling them that) GPU, 24 is a massive step up. They would need enough memory bandwidth to feed it though, the current one is already starved on that single channel controller. But assuming they get memory bandwidth to match core speed, 8 to 24 on an improved architecture would put it well past even the A5X graphics.
 

tipoo

Distinguished
May 4, 2006
1,183
0
19,280
0
I'd love to see Tomshardware at least try to compare the performance of chips like these to x86, I know its hard given different operating systems but there must be at least some ways to do it. 1.8GHz quad sounds impressive but the IPC is no doubt lower, I want to know how much lower than say a single core desktop Atom at the same speed.
 

dragonsqrrl

Distinguished
Nov 19, 2009
1,280
0
19,290
3
[citation][nom]tipoo[/nom]The current Tegra 3 has an 8 "core" (if people insist on calling them that) GPU, 24 is a massive step up.[/citation]
The GPU in Tegra 3 has 12 SIMDs, Tegra 2 had 8.
 

dragonsqrrl

Distinguished
Nov 19, 2009
1,280
0
19,290
3
[citation][nom]tipoo[/nom]I'd love to see Tomshardware at least try to compare the performance of chips like these to x86, I know its hard given different operating systems but there must be at least some ways to do it. 1.8GHz quad sounds impressive but the IPC is no doubt lower, I want to know how much lower than say a single core desktop Atom at the same speed.[/citation]
We should get a better idea of how the Cortex A9 performs in comparison to Atom once the first Medfield based phone launches. Further down the road, Windows 8 should give us an opportunity to do more direct comparisons between ARM and Intel mobile SOC performance.
 

zanny

Distinguished
Jul 18, 2008
214
0
18,680
0
[citation][nom]tipoo[/nom]I'd love to see Tomshardware at least try to compare the performance of chips like these to x86, I know its hard given different operating systems but there must be at least some ways to do it. 1.8GHz quad sounds impressive but the IPC is no doubt lower, I want to know how much lower than say a single core desktop Atom at the same speed.[/citation]

It is actually painfully easy to do it. GCC works on ARM, so you can cross compile anything open source that doesn't depend on OS or Instruction Set quirks of x86 and benchmark thusly. Problem is none of the benchmark tools are open source to do that with.
 

olaf

Distinguished
Oct 23, 2011
427
0
18,790
1
I wish they'd make better batterys and stop with these insane powerhog of a chips..... I still can't get more the 12 of use out of my phone if I actualy use it and not just keep it in my pocket with data turned off....
 

vision33r

Distinguished
Apr 5, 2011
6
0
18,510
0
You people think this is like designing for a desktop PC, nobody has thought about power efficiency.

Device OEMs do not want a powerful SOC if it drains power too quickly. That's why the Tegra 3 really runs on a single core until it needs the other 4.
 

vilenjan

Distinguished
Aug 22, 2010
514
0
19,060
35
If the new gpu is indeed based on Kepler, and we assume that the 8 core version in the initial terga 3 is based on fermi, than it will not be anywhere near 3 times as powerful, maybe a 30-40% boost. Why? Because the GTX 580 has around 500 cores (fermi), while the GTX 680 has around 1500 cores (kepler).

24/3=8 Sure Kepler is a little better core for core than fermi, but thats about it. It will be more power efficient though, which is good.
 

fseonart

Honorable
Apr 22, 2012
1
0
10,510
0
@vilenjan,
The current Tegra 3 GPU is not based on Fermi but on G90. Tegra 3 graphics is about 5 generations behind. Kepler was built from ground up with power efficiency in mind so it was decided that it would be integrated into Tegra.
 

jonnyboyC

Distinguished
May 11, 2009
769
0
19,060
31
Wow pretty huge updgrade higher clock and A15 core. Also the gpu was meh at 24 cores until i read that it'll do dx11 and all the other goodies. So this means it's essentially like a scaled down kepler that was speculated eariler. That will have some serious power. Probably some serious power drain too lol
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS