Nvidia CEO Jen-Hsun Huang Opens A Can of Words on Intel
NV55
I've never heard Jen-Hsun go on about Intel like that in a conference
call before.
He must truly be worried about Intel's upcoming Larrabee
architecture.
I think Larrabee scares the living shit out of him.
pg
Larrabee is nothing. Huang was right to say that Larabee, which will
come out to the market in 2010, is inferior to current crop of low-end
GPU, such as Radeon HD 2600, which has a whooping 120 stream
processors !
If you take account of the top GPUs that is available today, all
equipped with 512 stream processors (and more!), Larrabee, with its
puny 16-core, is nothing.
By 2010, top-of-the-line GPU would have 1K or more processors embedded
inside. How long would it take Intel to come up with 1K-core
Larrabee??
Stop and think. Don't buy into Intel's FUD.
Miles Bader
> Intel hasn't made a decent integrated graphics chip to date
Eh? My work pc has some kind of old intel integrated graphics (i845?)
and it's just fine, does a very decent job of running opengl apps etc.
Newer chips are supposedly much faster (and the upcoming generation even
better of course). Intel knows their market.
I suppose gamers want something much studlier, but what intel makes is
fine for normal use.
Intel's also made a lot of friends because of their very open attitude
-- while nvidia is _still_ pulling the "no you can't have the specs that
allow you to support our hardware" bullshit. [They'll come around
eventually, but in the meantime it sure as hell isn't making them look
any better.]
In any case, the Nvidia guy's rant seemed pretty pathetic... If he wants
to project confidence, that was exactly the way _not_ to do it.
-Miles
--
((lambda (x) (list x x)) (lambda (x) (list x x)))
Shawn
"Ed" <Ye...@power-post.org> wrote in message news:tick045c9n06n8kkb...@4ax.com...
> On Sat, 19 Apr 2008 12:06:39 +0900, Miles Bader <mi...@gnu.org> wrote:
>
>>Ed <Ye...@power-post.org> writes:
>>> Intel hasn't made a decent integrated graphics chip to date
>>
>>Eh? My work pc has some kind of old intel integrated graphics (i845?)
>
>
Onboard video GPUs almost always suck at high end games. Good for the office
but bad for the battlefield.
chrisv
>Intel integrated GPUs aren't even good for most 2D office apps,
How do you figure that? Seems to work fine for me.
Ed Medlin
"chrisv" <chr...@nospam.invalid> wrote in message
news:v64p04d4vufu0v84h...@4ax.com...
> Ed wrote:
>
>>Intel integrated GPUs aren't even good for most 2D office apps,
>
> How do you figure that? Seems to work fine for me.
>
rendering. The more complex the video needs, the worse the performance.
Nvidia will be around a long time in their market. These are two completely
different markets.
Ed
Mike Smith
> On Sat, 19 Apr 2008 18:03:17 -0500, "Shawn" <disk...@floppy.drv> wrote:
>
>> Onboard video GPUs almost always suck at high end games. Good for the office
>> but bad for the battlefield.
>>
>
> 3D!
Like what? The X3100 in my machine does just fine with Autodesk
Inventor; it certainly doesn't have any trouble with Word or Excel or
Visual Studio, etc. So, um, are you just trolling, perhaps?
--
Mike Smith
Miles Bader
>>> Intel hasn't made a decent integrated graphics chip to date
>>
>>Eh? My work pc has some kind of old intel integrated graphics (i845?)
>
Do you have anything to back up such a broad claim?
As I said in the text you omitted in your quoting, Intel's embedded
chips -- even the low-end ones -- seem to work absolutely fine for many
tasks that that need some 3d/opengl support to work sanely (blender,
compiz, etc). Not the best for gaming certainly, but many, many, uses
of 3d have nothing to do with gaming.
Of course the (low-end!) intel cards in question also work great for 2d.
(something which you, bizarrely denied in a subsequent post).
[Note that the reason I know those apps "need" 3d support to work sanely
is because I've tried them on systems with a 2d-only card... not fun... :-]
-Miles
--
Scriptures, n. The sacred books of our holy religion, as distinguished from
the false and profane writings on which all other faiths are based.
pg
<smithREMOVETHI...@michaelREMOVETHISsmith.org> wrote:
> Ed wrote:
> > On Sat, 19 Apr 2008 18:03:17 -0500, "Shawn" <diske...@floppy.drv> wrote:
>
> >> Onboard video GPUs almost always suck at high end games. Good for the office
> >> but bad for the battlefield.
>
> > Intel integrated GPUs aren't even good for most 2D office apps, forget
> > 3D!
>
> Like what? The X3100 in my machine does just fine with Autodesk
> Inventor; it certainly doesn't have any trouble with Word or Excel or
> Visual Studio, etc. So, um, are you just trolling, perhaps?
>
> --
> Mike Smith
For me, office apps means visual simulation and virtual conferences.
On board video chips just can't hack that.