What is Digg?Sponsored by Dragon Age: Origins
Can't get enough Dragon Age: Origins? Play the flash game. view!
DragonAgeJourneys.com - Play the free companion flash game to Dragon Age: Origins.
125 Comments
- DifferentAngle, on 02/19/2009, -2/+42The comments above are missing the point... Intel is trying to stop NVIDIA from competing with them in the chipset and possibly GPU arenas. Intel's new 80-core graphics chip might be able to compete with NVIDIA's high-end, but not with their SLI. So Intel wants to lock gamers into buying Intel chipset and Intel GPU by using their dominate CPU position.
Anti-trust... - Topher06, on 02/19/2009, -26/+64What technology is dying, the GPU? While I agree that the PC industry is stagnant at the moment, I think its more the nVidia has more to fear over being shut out of supporting upcoming Intel technology then the other way around. When a CPU is adding more and more cores to a single die, and the gross processing power of a CPU can eventually outperform a GPU, then what need will there be of a GPU in the next 5 - 10 years?
nVidia can run a few programs off the GPU sure, but they are mostly math intensive and require speciallized programming to make them work, the core of software written for a CPU does not require specific knowledge of how the CPU works and definitely doesn't require hand compiling of code to make run on the GPU model of the month. nVidia has to make significant strides to create an API that allows the average programmer the ability to make use of the GPU, and this isn't going to happen anytime soon. Until I can fire up Visual Studio and make a C++ or C# application that just runs on a GPU, then the CPU isn't going anywhere anytime soon. Put it succintly, no OS is going to shift over to run off a GPU anytime soon (well, Linux will of course, but I mean real OS'es).
The GPU is too specific to certain instruction sets and tasks while the CPU is intentionally made to be more generic in its architecture, but Intel keeps adding more transistors adding lots of specialized instructions and its only a matter of time before Intel adds all the same instructions that a GPU offers. All Intel has to do is make dedicated instructions to support Direct X or Open GL, and its game over for nVidia.
Ultimately, it will be best in the long run for nVidia to either kiss and make up with Intel, or let Intel buy them out and integrate CPU/GPU technology on the same core. The days of a dedicated GPU slap in add-on card are numbered, long live the Central Processing Unit. - jonathanseely, on 02/18/2009, -4/+41The article seems a little pro-Nvidia, but I can definitely see their point about it seeming like a tactic to save a dying technology.
- BarryChuckle, on 02/19/2009, -8/+44DEY TURK URR JURBSSSS
- doctor49152, on 02/19/2009, -2/+32**NOTE TO INTEL:
IT WILL BE A COLD DAY IN HELL BEFORE I USE AN INTEGRATED GRAPHICS CONTROLLER! - inactive, on 02/19/2009, -3/+26Intel vs. Nvidia
That reminds me of 'Nam. - Shootfast, on 02/19/2009, -0/+23http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CUDA
- xexx, on 02/19/2009, -0/+21Uh, last I checked GPUs could massively outperform CPUs in certain things, there just wasn't the architecture (yet) for it to replace the CPU completely, and with things like CUDA this is what nvidia is hoping to change, also with Intel hoping to integrate graphics into the CPU... seems like they both want to absorb each other.
- richgustavson, on 02/19/2009, -3/+24The CPU business is anything but decaying.
- EMFK, on 02/18/2009, -7/+21From the article, it seems there is a breakdown in communication somewhere. As a consumer, I love my Intel Core i7 and my nVidia graphics card. I hope this is resolved soon.
- Khast, on 02/19/2009, -2/+16What I don't get, if it is a suit about making chipsets which are compatible with the CPU architecture..Isn't that the ***** point of building a computer?
- AngelBunny, on 02/19/2009, -1/+13i don't know much but it has to do with the memory controller. basically, every time something is done in a CPU today the cpu takes care of itself. It monitors the input, computes, and pushes the output. Todays GPUs only deal with processing horsepower not the control of the input and output of the data and how that data is organized to be processed. nvidia wants to make GPUs in the future that can take care of its self. Today if you productively run a gpu accelerated program a 2ghz core 2 duo will use about 40% of one core to aid the gfx card. i guess nvidia wants to grow up and be a big boy and live on its own but intel is complaining about this because of contract agreements.
- shredswithpiks, on 02/19/2009, -0/+11The suit is about chipsets, not video cards... Intel wants to end, or at least re-license, Nvidia's nForce based motherboards for the i7 processors.
Sounds like intel is trying to push nvidia out of the motherboard market or milk some more licensing money from the nforce chipset. - robmilmel, on 02/19/2009, -0/+10The horror...the horror...
- fallingdamage, on 02/19/2009, -1/+10so intel doesnt want nVidia to make chipsets for their processors anymore? Thats going to kindof kill the market for high end intel-processor based gaming rigs.
If nVidia is forbidden to develop for intel, im sure AMD will be there smiling with arma wide open. ATi acquisition or not, one more company making chipsets to power their products = more CPU/GPU sales. AMD lost a lot of money recently and will probably take all the revenue boost they can get.
money is money and if Intel doesnt want any of nVidia's, im sure AMD would love to soak it up. - Paulish, on 02/19/2009, -1/+10I'll just buy AMD if that happens.
- 4321234, on 02/19/2009, -0/+8PU Fight !!!
- mypetridish, on 02/19/2009, -0/+8@angel: so in short Intel is suing Nvidia because the latter is trying to innovate?
- AngelBunny, on 02/19/2009, -1/+8actually, i believe it is more about the portable market. gpus are extremely energy efficient. they would be perfect in cell phones on their own.
- ChileanGoD, on 02/19/2009, -0/+7"When a CPU is adding more and more cores to a single die, and the gross processing power of a CPU can eventually outperform a GPU"
Real Time Ray-Tracing FTW!
http://www.gamasutra.com/view/feature/3928/sponsor ... - jmnormand, on 02/19/2009, -0/+7you obviously have know real knowledge of real programing. python, java and c# are the proverbial golden eggs, c is the goose. a c compiler already exists for the nvidia processors.
- stix213, on 02/19/2009, -0/+7FTA: "First the simple one: Why does Intel think nVidia should pay them anything? Did Intel provide nVidia with new chipset blueprints or something else (that they're now claiming nVidia isn't licensed to have)? Or do they simply think that producing any device that uses an Intel processor entitles them to profits from the device beyond the cost of the processor?"
I don't think the author has any clue what it takes to create a chipset for a processor. It is going to require significant documentation from Intel on exactly how every single contact on that processor operates, to say the least. nVidia won't be able to just create a chipset without the technical help from Intel. "Simply" reverse engineering the processor really isn't going to be an option, as if that would be a simple task. - failtrain, on 02/19/2009, -0/+7No, sorry. What made you think that?
- failtrain, on 02/19/2009, -0/+6pew pew pew?
- AngelBunny, on 02/19/2009, -0/+6not really. because they are breaking contracts they agreed to.
- inactive, on 02/19/2009, -0/+5On my Q6600 (oc'd to 3.2) encoding 1080p material never goes beyond 40 percent on all cores. The real bottleneck is the HD.
- wissler, on 02/19/2009, -6/+11Intel is afraid. There's far more computational power in the GPU's, and no reason in principle why the whole OS can't run on it.
- crunchdigg, on 02/19/2009, -0/+5there is a race on in that space.
Last August, NVidia showed a demo running real time tracing. 2 million polygons, a car running
through a downtown-like area. ray-traced. reflective stuff all over, windows on buildings, the car body, headlights, chrome bumpers etc. 15-30 frames per second, full HD, live. Up to 5
ray bounces, actual shaders running on the surfaces. Very impressive. (Running on
4 or 8 Quadro cards, IIRC) Just a demo, but really cool.
Intel has its own high-powered ray tracing people working as well, They are trying
to be ready for when Larrabee is available. Their guys are also top-notch. No actual
hardware yet, but expect a very nice demo the day of the Larrabee availability
announcement.
It's going to be fun to watch, as someone who gets to play with whichever cool tech
prevails. I hope they both survive. No *way* would this have gotten pushed out if
there were not such heated competition. - phosphor112, on 02/19/2009, -0/+5AMD = delicious..they are great..kind of lacking in the CPU compared to Intel, but open source FTW.
- mypetridish, on 02/19/2009, -0/+5we can read, and stop replying to the first poster simply to get attention and thus getting dugg (down.
- noumuon, on 02/19/2009, -0/+5except many of nvidia's technologies make your statements, topher, meaningless.
- bratterscain, on 02/19/2009, -0/+4I'm using a Q6600. If you can't max it out, you're not using the right app. There's a couple video encoders I know that will use all 4 cores and max it to 100%. With that said, the new quad cores are a beast compared to what I was used to.
- mypetridish, on 02/19/2009, -0/+4and if Nvidia is the one afraid of Intel, why the heck would they be the one trying to stiffle down competition from Nvidia?
it's the other way around. Intel is trying to lock Nvidia out of their i7 architecture - BassCadet, on 02/19/2009, -2/+6Who is this guy fooling? Is there ANYONE here who thinks that a $500 graphics card is a better bargain than an infinitely more flexible CPU like a $300 Core i7 chip?
I like Nvidia cards in my computers but this guy needs to shut his mouth, he is making his company look bad. - wissler, on 02/19/2009, -1/+5Not so. And even if it were so, sprinkling some general purpose computing power around the GPU's is always an option. Software is entering a multi-threaded era.
- Gonasadude, on 02/19/2009, -1/+5Intel was referring to their Integrated Memory Controllers (like in the Core i7), not integrated graphics.
- mypetridish, on 02/19/2009, -0/+4but if Ion is already capable of running i7, as what AMD claimed, what kind of "technical help" would they need from Intel? Isn't it clear that Intel is trying to play hardball against Nvidia, perhaps trying to get a new license fee or locking Nvidia out of the competition for good?
- inactive, on 02/19/2009, -0/+3I'm more concerned with actually getting games on the pc in the first place.
- meed, on 02/19/2009, -0/+3"The days of a dedicated GPU slap in add-on card are numbered, long live the Central Processing Unit."
That day has already come for half the computer market that aren't going to be performing intense 3D applications. Intel has been killing the discrete graphics card for simple computing.
As a gamer I highly doubt that, if anything the GPU will start performing more functions while the CPU will too. Think about it, GPUs today has it's own dedicated memory and is scalable (more than one depending on your needs). A GPU integrated into the chipset (and probably on the CPU as well) would have to share system ram meaning that the memory controller (on the cpu or chipset) has double the work to do meaning it will bottle neck both the cpu and gpu at the same time.
Basically if you think your going to be able to play graphically intense games purely on cpu power again your dreaming if the architecture remains similar to what it is now. - mypetridish, on 02/19/2009, -0/+3how about CUDA? that's something coming up soon
- DotGet, on 02/19/2009, -2/+5Encoding a 720p video took about 15-25%, variable. Just did it a couple of days ago. I imagine two would do 30-50%. I don't see the point in digging me down, btw. I was merely pointing out that it's an incredible processor. Which it is.
- iignotus, on 02/19/2009, -0/+3I'm not sure, but it does look pretty neat.
-Mike - volacide, on 02/19/2009, -0/+3I might get dugg down for this but if so that's ***** because this is the damned truth of the matter.
I'm still running a Socket 939 FX60 on a PCI-E mobo with 4gbs of DDR3200 ram and a Radeon 3870 512.
With the exception of Crysis I run every game at 1920x1200 at max settings (not including AA but there's no need at that resolution). Now for Crysis I run it at 1440x900 at fake DX10 and max settings.
This is the truth. If you don't want to believe it that's fine, be blissfully ignorant. While Intel has been pumping out some awesome CPU's that have really been kicking AMD's ass, they're just not necessary for any of the games that are out now besides Crysis. I like Crysis, but when I can play any other game that has come out even after that at 1920x1200 at max there really is no need to upgrade.
I have a long history of hating Nvidia because of them always trying to cut corners for performance by reducing Image Quality on a driver level basis. That's *****, paying 500 bucks for a GPU that isn't even capable of full IQ. Granted they've cleaned up their act for a while but I've devoted myself to playing on ATi and as you can see from my results, have benefited from just fine. Besides, the 4870(x2) is a ***** beast. - MaverickAlex, on 02/19/2009, -3/+6Thats not that big of a load, only one app is going to be active at any time. Try encoding a couple of videos at once.
- godinster, on 02/19/2009, -2/+5It's a shame you'll buy nothing else seeing as how ATI has the edge at the moment. A year and a half ago you'd be in the right, though.
- specialK16, on 02/19/2009, -0/+3Ortheos is right. GPUs are good for what we know as embarrassingly parallel applications, a GPU cannot efficiently run an OS nor most applications nowadays.
- Elranzer, on 02/19/2009, -1/+4"(well, Linux will of course, but I mean real OS'es)"
Honestly, I was going to Digg you up until I read this. Of course, Linux isn't actually an OS (it's a kernel, Fedora or Ubuntu is the "OS") but still, Unix is the only real OS and anything based off of it. - bratterscain, on 02/19/2009, -0/+3"real OS'es". Uh oh, wait 'til the Linux guys read this. So I suppose Digg is running on a fake OS?
- venom8599, on 02/19/2009, -0/+3Just speculating here, but I'd be willing to bet it's about licensing QuickPath (Intel's HyperTransport ripoff) that is used for the new CPUs with integrated memory controllers.
- Discola, on 02/19/2009, -0/+3It's Nvidia's Ion platform, designed for small form-factored uses like media-center pcs while retaining the graphic horsepower of an Nvidia GPU. Uses the Intel atom processor.
http://www.nvidia.com/object/io_1229608554532.html -
Show 51 - 100 of 126 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is