Upcoming Nvidia CPU (aka Denver)

[ratclifff4]

Hows it going everyone? Has anyone heared of Nvidias' Project Denver? Supposedly Windows8 will support this cpu. I think it's cool that Intel might finally have some competition in the high end market again. I'm currently running a watercooled QX9650 @ 4ghz for gaming and it seems to be handling everything so far. The only upgrade I think I might be needing is an Nvidia Kepler 28nm when they roll out and then it's all about waiting for the "Denver" cpus to launch and get reviewed. I'm thinking by the time that happens Intels "Ivy Bridge" will be in its second generation, or the tock cycle of Intel and I'm wondering if Nvidia is going to blow their ship out of the water or will it just be somewhat competetive. What do you guys think?

 

[jimmysmitty]

It takes nVidia 6 months to a year to beat AMD's gpu's, and only then because they are much larger chips with higher power draw. In technology terms they cannot compete with AMD's graphic division which has less than half of nVidia's budget.

What makes you think this would suddenly change with a cpu? The best Nvidia would be able to do is match intel's gpu performance, ie not good enough by far.

Yea but when they beat them, they beat them. And the 6990 was barley out a few weeks when the GTX590 hit.

In terms of technology, considering that nVidia normally has a lower clock speed but higher shader clock speed and still can beat ATI with half the shaders, I think nVidia might not be as bad as you think they are.

And I am saying this with a HD5870, technically the last true ATI GPU (ATI had up to the R800 planned when AMD bought them). The HD6K is after AMD bought them and considering the performance jump wasn't that great, I can understand it. AMD doesn't always take large jumps. Maybe the HD7K series will.

 

[ghnader hsmithot]

I dont agree their GPU are bad but I do agree their Mobo design is really bad.
To me they have a very strong postion in the GPU share.Why not go for it?
We need more competition!

 

[Guest]

I think it is a long long way off before ARM is competetive in x86 market! Windows 8 is still far far away as well!

 

[Wisecracker]

Okay, I am really not sure what to expect from this now. Will the Nvidia CPU probably be better than AMD CPUs? What is an ARM CPU? Since Nvidia has been doing GPU stuff for a long time, and still has a lot of issues, why would they try to be competitive in the CPU market? Where should there CPU place in between Intel and AMD too?

What nVidia is doing: Combining ARM with a graphics engine.

To promote their next generation they 'canned' some benchmarks (in a measurement that actually made no sense) and compared it to a T7200.

They used the current compiler for their chip, claiming it was faster than the T7200. The problem is, they used a compiler from 2004-2005 for the T7200.

Enterprising enthusiasts ran the T7200 under the current compiler and, "Surprise! Surprise!" -- The T7200 was 50% faster than the nVidia chip.

That's pretty much the definition of ...

 

[HostileDonut]

What nVidia is doing: Combining ARM with a graphics engine.

To promote their next generation they 'canned' some benchmarks (in a measurement that actually made no sense) and compared it to a T7200.

They used the current compiler for their chip, claiming it was faster than the T7200. The problem is, they used a compiler from 2004-2005 for the T7200.

Enterprising enthusiasts ran the T7200 under the current compiler and, "Surprise! Surprise!" -- The T7200 was 50% faster than the nVidia chip.

That's pretty much the definition of ...
http://i716.photobucket.com/albums/ww165/Back_at_the_Ranch/AMD Overlords/Smack/puffery_0.jpg

So, the Nvidia chip will suck?

 

[HostileDonut]

^
not necessarily..
just matter of pre-release public opinions.

Yeah, I know. It's not out yet, so nothing is a fact. If it can't keep up with a chip from 2004 - 2005, what makes them think it will compete with AMD or Intel?

 

[HostileDonut]

that's why I keep saying on every thread I post on:
I want to see the performance benches..

Yeah, I know. Nothing is certain, but I am not expecting much at all from this CPU. Nvidia fails. Just kidding. :lol:

 

[megamanx00]

Project Denver is an ARM architecture CPU and I like the ARM architecture. It is superior to current X86 based CPUs in some respects, but of course all our current PC programs are for x86 32/64 bit CPUs ^_^. ARM may or may not become the dominant architecture in the long run, but I can't see it happening anytime soon unless both Intel and AMD drop the ball big time.

 

[HostileDonut]

What is ARM?

 

[megamanx00]

It's a type of RISC architecture. It stands for Advanced RISC Machine or something. It was originally used for Acorn desktop computers, which never caught on, and then was spun off to basically license out the ARM architecture. Look at the wikipedia page if you want to know more.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ARM_architecture

 

[ares1214]

ARM is definitely more flexible than x86 (google RISC vs CISC). However, scalability is a factor, which i think ARM also has in its favor. Problem is, it will take probably to around the year 2015 for ARM to really compete with x86 on a full market basis, if ever.

 

[Wisecracker]

Yeah, I know. It's not out yet, so nothing is a fact. If it can't keep up with a chip from 2004 - 2005, what makes them think it will compete with AMD or Intel?

They are not really competing with AMD/Intel ...

yet.

They have a product which looks quite promising, and is only really exceeded today by a product AMD sold off in 2008 :lol:

Intel sold off their ARM technology (XScale) in 2006.

ARM and "x86" (AMD & Intel) are colliding with SoC, or System-on-a-Chip. I predict x86 will win.

(Throw that back in my face in 5 years [:jaydeejohn:5] )

Two reasons: 1) AMD & Intel have greater knowledge and expertise in process technology; and 2) Advances in battery technology.

 

[jimmysmitty]

They are not really competing with AMD/Intel ...

yet.

They have a product which looks quite promising, and is only really exceeded today by a product AMD sold off in 2008 :lol:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/0/01/Imageon_chip.png

Intel sold off their ARM technology (XScale) in 2006.

ARM and "x86" (AMD & Intel) are colliding with SoC, or System-on-a-Chip. I predict x86 will win.

(Throw that back in my face in 5 years [:jaydeejohn:5] )

Two reasons: 1) AMD & Intel have greater knowledge and expertise in process technology; and 2) Advances in battery technology.

This.

Intel is expecting to not only show off Ivy Bridge in May but also a new Atom. My guess would be a 22nm refresh or the smart phone version.

Intels 22nm was shown pushing 3.8GHz on less than a volt (0.95 if I remember) which means that at the same voltage as a ARM CPU, it can be clocked higher or they can add more cores.

AMD has the same advantage since they have a cross license with Intel so they can see Intels process tech.

 

[HostileDonut]

This.

Intel is expecting to not only show off Ivy Bridge in May but also a new Atom. My guess would be a 22nm refresh or the smart phone version.

Intels 22nm was shown pushing 3.8GHz on less than a volt (0.95 if I remember) which means that at the same voltage as a ARM CPU, it can be clocked higher or they can add more cores.

AMD has the same advantage since they have a cross license with Intel so they can see Intels process tech.

Wow. I though Ivy Bridge would be 28nm, not 22.

 

[ares1214]

This.

Intel is expecting to not only show off Ivy Bridge in May but also a new Atom. My guess would be a 22nm refresh or the smart phone version.

Intels 22nm was shown pushing 3.8GHz on less than a volt (0.95 if I remember) which means that at the same voltage as a ARM CPU, it can be clocked higher or they can add more cores.

AMD has the same advantage since they have a cross license with Intel so they can see Intels process tech.

Problem is, with power efficiency in mind "Any thing x86 can do, ARM can do better, anything x86 can do, ARM can do too". ARM SoC's at 22nm could probably draw half of what they do today...or be 2-3x faster. x86 will probably not get into the SoC market for another 3-5 years, and ARM probably wont hit full power devices for another 3-5 years. Thats where the real competition starts. But ARM is the one i think wins. Reason isnt an argument of RISC vs CISC, its an argument of what consumers want. Nobody has a Mac anymore, they have an iPhone, iPad, or iMac. Linux is good an all, but how many people use it as their regular OS? Very few...like between 0 and 1% id imagine. But how many people use an Android smarthphone (Android being based off and coded from Linux), yeh thats more than iOS and Blackberry combined last time i checked. How many kids ask their parents for a new desktop? How many ask for a new phone, laptop, or tablet? Fact is, things are migrating to the mobile market. Mobile market is where battery life counts. Battery life is dependent on primarily power consumption. Power consumption is based primarily on how much power CPU, GPU and whatever else that would be found on a SoC that uses power. For that reason, and the fact ARM is more efficient than x86, im going to pick ARM in this fight.

 

[HostileDonut]

Problem is, with power efficiency in mind "Any thing x86 can do, ARM can do better, anything x86 can do, ARM can do too". ARM SoC's at 22nm could probably draw half of what they do today...or be 2-3x faster. x86 will probably not get into the SoC market for another 3-5 years, and ARM probably wont hit full power devices for another 3-5 years. Thats where the real competition starts. But ARM is the one i think wins. Reason isnt an argument of RISC vs CISC, its an argument of what consumers want. Nobody has a Mac anymore, they have an iPhone, iPad, or iMac. Linux is good an all, but how many people use it as their regular OS? Very few...like between 0 and 1% id imagine. But how many people use an Android smarthphone (Android being based off and coded from Linux), yeh thats more than iOS and Blackberry combined last time i checked. How many kids ask their parents for a new desktop? How many ask for a new phone, laptop, or tablet? Fact is, things are migrating to the mobile market. Mobile market is where battery life counts. Battery life is dependent on primarily power consumption. Power consumption is based primarily on how much power CPU, GPU and whatever else that would be found on a SoC that uses power. For that reason, and the fact ARM is more efficient than x86, im going to pick ARM in this fight.

Well, I am not going to play games on a mobile device. I will play games on my desktop. I don't think ARM will rule the desktop field because it is not fast enough. By the time it is fast, x86 will be better anyway. Even if Nvidia gets an ARM CPU out before AMD or Intel, they will still be beaten down by AMD and Intel. Nvidia will NEVER win the CPU battle.

 

[werxen]

Lolz... I love how everyone says Nvidia is trying to compete with Intel when it was the other way around. Intel has been trying to step on Nvidias shoes with the built in GPUs for some time now. It was only a matter of time before both companies started to make a combination CPU and GPU combo.

What I can gather is this:

1) Nvidia will not be able to compete with Intel/AMD in the server market at all - ever. They will most likely make a cheap low-power low-ability netbook type APU. It will probably sell well and create a new genre of chips that will be mainstream.

2) Intel will continue their current scheme of tick-tock rape everything and not change anything in their plans.

3) Nvidia will make most of their profits from selling high brand GPUs.

4) AMD will still be screwed in the long run unless bulldozer can surprise us all - which I doubt it will.

 

[HostileDonut]

Lolz... I love how everyone says Nvidia is trying to compete with Intel when it was the other way around. Intel has been trying to step on Nvidias shoes with the built in GPUs for some time now. It was only a matter of time before both companies started to make a combination CPU and GPU combo.

What I can gather is this:

1) Nvidia will not be able to compete with Intel/AMD in the server market at all - ever. They will most likely make a cheap low-power low-ability netbook type APU. It will probably sell well and create a new genre of chips that will be mainstream.

2) Intel will continue their current scheme of tick-tock rape everything and not change anything in their plans.

3) Nvidia will make most of their profits from selling high brand GPUs.

4) AMD will still be screwed in the long run unless bulldozer can surprise us all - which I doubt it will.

How will AMD be screwed? AMD offers great price/performance ratio, and has a cross-license agreement. If AMD goes out of business, so does Intel. AMD may not be the best CPU maker of raw power, but offers a great deal of cheap, good CPUs. AMD isn't going out anytime soon.

 

[ares1214]

Well, I am not going to play games on a mobile device. I will play games on my desktop. I don't think ARM will rule the desktop field because it is not fast enough. By the time it is fast, x86 will be better anyway. Even if Nvidia gets an ARM CPU out before AMD or Intel, they will still be beaten down by AMD and Intel. Nvidia will NEVER win the CPU battle.

Dont forget ARM CPU's are built at a massively smaller die size and performance envelope. Thats the whole point of this, Nvidia making an ARM CPU that isnt 1/6 the size of x86 CPU's. Maybe now its only 1/2 as big, or 1/3 as big.

 

[HostileDonut]

Dont forget ARM CPU's are built at a massively smaller die size and performance envelope. Thats the whole point of this, Nvidia making an ARM CPU that isnt 1/6 the size of x86 CPU's. Maybe now its only 1/2 as big, or 1/3 as big.

When will AMD and Intel make ARM CPUs? If ARM is going to be better, why don't they jump on it?

 

[ares1214]

When will AMD and Intel make ARM CPUs? If ARM is going to be better, why don't they jump on it?

They both had their chance, a few years back. They build desktop and laptop CPU's. Until now, ARM hasnt really interfered with those sectors, and they therefore feel no pressure.

 

[HostileDonut]

They both had their chance, a few years back. They build desktop and laptop CPU's. Until now, ARM hasnt really interfered with those sectors, and they therefore feel no pressure.

So, what will ARM be used on? Just phones and ipads, etc? If so, why are you exited. I mean, I do understand wanted a faster phone, but most people won't really care.

 

[ares1214]

So, what will ARM be used on? Just phones and ipads, etc? If so, why are you exited. I mean, I do understand wanted a faster phone, but most people won't really care.

Important 2 words in that were "Until now". Until now ARM has only been used in phones and tablets. 5 years from now, say 5 generations past Project Denver, ARM will very likely creep up into all netbooks, the majority of laptops, more servers (depends), and id say even your average desktop. Thats most of the market right there. You and this forum might not care because we are the small percent of people who care about powerful desktop computers. Most people want their devices to have longer battery life more than anything. Few people will care about how fast their CPU is.

 

[ares1214]

http://www.inquisitr.com/76157/tablets-to-overtake-desktop-sales-by-2015-laptops-will-still-reign/

Looky there. 2015 and desktops will have lowest market share based on predictions. Thats the market x86 will probably still dominate. But thats a pretty small market by then...

 

[HostileDonut]

Important 2 words in that were "Until now". Until now ARM has only been used in phones and tablets. 5 years from now, say 5 generations past Project Denver, ARM will very likely creep up into all netbooks, the majority of laptops, more servers (depends), and id say even your average desktop. Thats most of the market right there. You and this forum might not care because we are the small percent of people who care about powerful desktop computers. Most people want their devices to have longer battery life more than anything. Few people will care about how fast their CPU is.

So basically, ARM will be slower, but have more battery life? Me, you and speed freaks will stick with the x86?