digg

Join DiggAbout

Discover the best of the web!
Learn more about Digg by taking the tour.

Nvidia declares the CPU dead

tgdaily.com — Just a short tidbit, but it has all the makings of a great soap opera. First chapter: Intel thinks the CPU can be a GPU. Second chapter: Nvidia is offended. Third chapter (where we are right now): Nvidia fires back and says the CPU is dead. Wonderful! Can there be a more entertaining piece just before the weekend? Sit back and enjoy!

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • Omek, on 04/26/2008, -21/+2Would they just quick bickering and just partner with each other. My word! They would be twice as powerful...
    • Emused, on 04/26/2008, -18/+1I posted this comment yesterday
      http://digg.com/tech_news/AMD_splitting_into_two_c ...
    • moocow1452, on 04/26/2008, -1/+25Last thing we need is a processor monopoly...
    • ElAssoWipo, on 04/26/2008, -8/+22Intel doesn't need Nvidia.

      I got an matx intel board with x3000 integrated gfx, I can play Bf2 maxed out and I get 70fps, bf2142 at average settings: 65 fps, far cry average settings:50fps. I also play need for speed 2, HL2 and a few other games with great results (I've never seen games load this fast, no matter what the rig is).

      Here's a demo with the same integrated gfx architecture:
      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OogVYWQLAhM

      And my motherboard only cost $100, I don't need a sound card (integrated HD 7.1 audio) and I can play a lot of games (just not very recent ones) without a videocard on an HDtv (through HDMI, integrated). The entire PC cost me about 400$. It was supposed to just be a media centre PC then I tried Bf2 just for ***** and giggles and played all night in HD resolution on the home theatre system.

      I think Intel could outperfom any videocard within the next 5 years. If they can keep the price low (even adding 100$ to the price would still be cheaper than getting a vid card) and start competing with top of the line, or at least current moderatly high-end videocards, nobody will be buying a very expensive videocard anymore. The x4500 is coming out this year and it's supposed to be already 3x faster than x3000.


      • GOVATENT, on 04/26/2008, -0/+6the nice things about a gpu is that you can upgrade to support newer features. With IGPU you need a new mother board.
        • ElAssoWipo, on 04/26/2008, -2/+1but I can get 2 mobos for the price of one videocard. And then add a videocard on top of that.
        • Myztry, on 04/27/2008, -0/+1I used to build and upgrade lots of systems for people. I don't bother anymore. Prices are too low to make any worthwhile savings, and by the time upgrading comes around, the connector form factors (CPU slot, AGP/PCE-E, SD/DDR, PATA/SATA) etc all change. And the legacy parts gain a premium price...
      • mancat, on 04/26/2008, -1/+8I'd love to know how you're pulling that off, because I can't play jack ***** on my x3000, even with the latest drivers and an otherwise beefy system.
        • ElAssoWipo, on 04/26/2008, -0/+2There's no pulling off anything, install and play.

          I got 2.6 ghz dual core, 4 gigs of ram, an HDD and a DVD drive. And I'm running Vista 64 home premium.
      • SteveMax, on 04/29/2008, -0/+1need for speed 2? That didn't even use the GPU if I remember correctly. Only NFS2: Special Edition added Glide support. Anyway, every card on the market, integrated or not, should run an 11-years-old game perfectly.
    • ThndrShk2k, on 04/26/2008, -0/+2"Nvidia has sent around an email to "friends" declaring the CPU essentially dead, we learned today from a post over at the Inquirer."

      Um, yeah. Don't believe everything you read, especially from Inquirer
  • Emused, on 04/26/2008, -13/+6'Intel’s Larrabee was called "Laughabee".' HAHAHAHAHAH
  • gr3yn3t, on 04/26/2008, -3/+78Holy blogspam, batman!
    http://www.tgdaily.com/content/view/36889/118/
  • naonao, on 04/26/2008, -19/+137 Diggs to reach the front page and 2 comments excluding mine.
    • apophenic, on 04/26/2008, -1/+3It's eight in the morning EST...
      • naonao, on 04/26/2008, -5/+1Ah, my mistake, I live in Britain and it's half one. Sorry about that.
        • BearinG, on 04/27/2008, -0/+2Everytime someone says that, there's an explanation.. stop saying it.
  • cutekelvins, on 04/26/2008, -2/+41Competition is good for everyone. Let's hope they fight and make things better for consumers. Amen.
    • skunkman62, on 04/26/2008, -0/+4so say we all
    • maninalift, on 04/27/2008, -0/+1I'm not so sure. Competition between CPU and CPU is good, likewise GPU. It keeps the technology stable but progressing. This sort of thing CPU vs GPU just might push the technology forward even harder but on the other hand it might just be a pain in the arse, leading to a landscape of incompatible hardware and a nightmare for middleware developers in particular.
  • govsucks, on 04/26/2008, -2/+58Good, let them compete, it will make for faster processors on both ends. I will use both of them and process whatever I want faster.
  • wytedevl, on 04/26/2008, -8/+3Wasn't this story, or a different version of it posted about 2 weeks ago?
  • joel8x, on 04/26/2008, -19/+7Screw Nvidia and their crappy drivers too. Can you imagine how ***** your company must be that your customers have to hack and distribute your drivers independently to make your products stable?
    • sjbdallas, on 04/26/2008, -6/+2I don't know why you're being dug down. You're absolutely correct.
    • consoneo, on 04/26/2008, -0/+7When did this happen? I heard about it with Creative, but not nVidia... Am I out of the loop??
  • roosterjack, on 04/26/2008, -8/+3Interesting. I say let them compete to make the consumers benefit.
    • Dylson, on 04/26/2008, -0/+3They aren't going to compete. They already have a strong relationship.
    • clharlem149, on 04/26/2008, -0/+1how come the first two guys that say let them compete get dugg up significantly but the third guy that says it gets buried, and has a conflicting comment that gets dugg up?
  • Dylson, on 04/26/2008, -7/+1haha nice lol
  • Shadowgamers, on 04/26/2008, -5/+89CPUs are dead? I wonder what their computers are running on...
    • sinatosk, on 04/26/2008, -0/+5GPGPU probably.... uses the same instructions as the CPU but with other instructions for Graphics aswell :p

      I think....
      • Shadowgamers, on 04/26/2008, -1/+8But that's still a CPU, it just has something that an ordinary one doesnt :V
        • KMartSheriff, on 04/26/2008, -0/+5He was being sarcastic...

          I hope...
    • ArvinJA, on 04/26/2008, -0/+2Love... Pure Love...
    • grumpyrain, on 04/27/2008, -0/+2Ninjas
    • wozinator, on 05/12/2008, -0/+0My guess would be Nvidia would probably claim to be using a "custom" version of ITS running on a "custom" processor card centered around the 74181...
  • djpaec, on 04/26/2008, -17/+9Yes the CPU is dead, why doesn't everyone take there Intel chips out of there machines and send them to me. I'm sure they'll run fine.
    • marx2k, on 04/26/2008, -7/+11Their
      • djpaec, on 04/26/2008, -23/+3O NOES I USED IMPROPER GRAMMAR ON THE INTERNET IN A COMMENT I TYPED IN 8 SECONDS I FAIL AT THE INTERNETS!
        • consoneo, on 04/26/2008, -1/+14Yep.. Mostly because of this comment.
  • Jovensdesciple, on 04/26/2008, -48/+4I'll declare Obamas time for being a messiah is over. He's got big ears, his pastor is a huge rascist, his fellow church goers are huge rascists, he hates America and everyone who signs up for the army... He hates typical white people and his grandma
    • smacksaw, on 04/26/2008, -1/+14LOLWUT???
      • Jovensdesciple, on 04/26/2008, -21/+2Oh, I'm sorry, and his wife hates America too. She had never been proud of her country untill people started voting for her husband in the democratic primaries. And she said she thinks America is a mean country. which it is not. It is sweet. Hillary/Joven 08
        • JigoroKano, on 04/26/2008, -1/+13Are you in your own cult?
          • t2t2, on 04/26/2008, -0/+6I want one, please!

            It shall be Cult of Pirates!
        • BearinG, on 04/27/2008, -0/+2And all this time I thought this was about Intel and nvidia
    • shawnanigans, on 04/26/2008, -0/+2Those are all ridiculous, but why did you start with big ears?
  • fuhlavaflave, on 04/26/2008, -3/+8Whatever happened to that add-on card that would do physics computations independent of the GPU? I remember reading about it on Valve's forums one time. Anyone?
    • frostbytemike, on 04/26/2008, -0/+6Ahh yes the Ageia PhysX card. The only thing that thing could do was to lower your frame rates. To boot the card was only compatible with some games. The only game i knew that worked with the card was GRAW. Why have a physics card when cpus nowadays have multicores?
    • digiwand, on 04/26/2008, -1/+17Ageia was recently purchased by nVidia. While the physX add-on card promised much and was/is available, it never really delivered on those promises and it failed to get the necessary game support.

      In most of the games it did support it actually slowed down the framerates as it added a ton of particles to the game if it had hardware physX support, which did not help its reputation at all.

      It was a good idea poorly executed, most of which you'll see picked up by the GPU companies and properly executed on a spare GPU in a multi-card system. (The current rumor is all about nVidia working PhysX into Cuda, but that is such BS it ain't funny. ;) )
      • dsmx, on 04/26/2008, -0/+8Actually that isn't b/s they are already putting the code into the next set of drivers for the 8xxx and 9xxx series last I heard.
        • digiwand, on 04/26/2008, -1/+3No, it is bs. They're putting it in the drivers yes, but that has nothing to do with CUDA. (I have a buddy working with CUDA who's been schooling me. ;) )
          • KMartSheriff, on 04/26/2008, -1/+5[citation needed]
          • digiwand, on 04/27/2008, -0/+2I was wrong, my bad. They are writing the PhysX in CUDA and including it in the drivers.

            Sorry for the mistake, like I said I'm still be edumacated in this stuff.
        • digiwand, on 04/27/2008, -0/+1You're correct DSMX, I was mistaken. It will be coded in CUDA and included in the drivers.

          Sorry 'bout that, I really thought it wasn't.
  • kije, on 04/26/2008, -14/+6Well the CPU may not be dead but AMD is certainly on life support.
    • digiwand, on 04/26/2008, -1/+2If AMD can hold out until the 45nm phenoms come out they'll be alright, the 45nm are clocking much better. :)
    • STARTSOMETHING, on 04/26/2008, -2/+3I still only buy Amd chips.
      • alclone, on 04/26/2008, -1/+10Thank you.

        It makes the Intel chips cheaper for me to buy :)
  • srudes2, on 04/26/2008, -7/+2Waha I love the description of this article! Awesome!
  • Myztry, on 04/26/2008, -2/+31Hardly. It's taken nearly a quarter of a century to get GPU's from the likes of the 1985 Amiga's Blitter Co-processor to the stage they are now. They are obviously much evolved, but still rely primarily on rendering polygons. The Intel prototypes of ray-traced graphics is much more like a second generation then the point releases GPU's are still under.
    Even programmable shaders bear a striking (though evolved) resemblence to the 1985 Amiga's programmable 'Copper' co-processor. There has been no resounding breakthroughs for a very long time. Brute speed increases in co-processor's is a good thing. But hardly some 'be all and end all' concept where co-processor take over the main processor.
    The idea of a co-processor 'becoming the system' might sound good to investors - but it's a bit of a yawn really... Much more realistic is the main processor swallowing the functions of external co-processor chips like GPU's. A computer on a single chip, to the last function.
  • lollypopz, on 04/26/2008, -11/+4"How much faster can you render the blue screen of death?"

    Those were Huang's words from last week, regarding Intel.

    Then you have this FTA: "Nvidia's CEO did not deliver explanations on the results of Windows hardware survey which blamed nv4_displ.dll driver for almost a third of BSODs in Windows Vista"

    ... really? Well what exactly DID work on Vista the first go around?
    • ByteGuerilla, on 04/26/2008, -6/+3I built my previous computer on a budget, and I ended up installing the most vanilla card I've ever seen: an nVidia 6200. I would regularly get bluescreens of death from the nVidia display DLL. The situation improved marginally at one point when a new set of drivers was released, but still I would get BSoDs from the nVidia drivers. Not once did I get a BSoD from any other source. This is all on Windows XP (Vista wasn't even close to being out at the time).

      I did a little hunting round them thar Interwebs at the time, and found a set of statistics that said over 95% of stop errors (which is what happens when you get a bluescreen) are caused by graphics drivers (regardless of manufacturer). I considered switching to ATi but I like to dabble in Linux and I've continuously heard terrible things about ATi's support for Linux. But that's neither here nor there.
      • alphaskeptical, on 04/26/2008, -8/+2vanilla? are you actually referring to the color of the video card?
  • Jenadae, on 04/26/2008, -3/+9More competition makes more discounts. Let the battles begin boys!
  • NecroSexy, on 04/26/2008, -4/+5Intel's response: We're gonna open a can of Whoop-Ass©.
  • shiftless, on 04/26/2008, -6/+4NVIDIA really needs to work on their PR. They have made so many blatantly immature and annoying statements over the years it just bugs me!
    • kinerry, on 04/26/2008, -1/+7who gives a ***** what you think?

      everyone else is eating it up!
  • cfuse, on 04/26/2008, -1/+14I think the more important question is who approves the box art on graphics cards? That ***** rocks.
    • lateralus, on 04/26/2008, -0/+8Confirmed: Legendary gamer Fata|ity has just signed a 10-yr exclusive contract with Asus as the coverboy for the upcoming EEE Extreme Edition (x^5)
  • Gundemwing0, on 04/26/2008, -0/+2OK so the CPU is dead and so the GPU going to be the new processor that I will use. Or will nivida start coming out with new GPUs that can also be a decent CPU.
  • smacksaw, on 04/26/2008, -0/+9I was thinking about this during Terminator: The Sarah Connor Chronicles. Anyone watch that? John Connor needs to hack into this Terminator's brain and he jery-rigs a video card's GPU to do it.

    It's funny, Hollywood usually has the most un-technical explanations, but that one was actually a pretty good prognostication.
    • sjbdallas, on 04/26/2008, -0/+5I only watch it for Summer and Lena.
  • Cherubim, on 04/26/2008, -2/+35Translation. Nvidia is scared ***** of CPU manufacturers incorporating GPU functionality into their processors.
    • cquinnd, on 04/26/2008, -4/+4Just as Intel has been scared in the past of third-party companies building functionality into GPUs and other specialty processors.
    • neko, on 04/26/2008, -0/+5It's a nice idea. Personally I'm hoping the AMD/ATI merger will eventually lead to some kind of interchangable socket that can be used for both CPUs and GPUs. Imagine a motherboard with, say, four sockets, and you can mix and match CPUs & GPUs depending on your needs.

      Unlikely to happen for a long time though.
    • ThreeDee912, on 04/27/2008, -0/+2Wasn't Nvidia about to buy VIA? This would mean they would have the means to make processors, too...
  • punkcat, on 04/26/2008, -0/+9so we dugg the article that mentions the article about Nvidia?

  • funklor, on 04/26/2008, -0/+7For the CPU to be dead nVidia would have to radically define what a computer is.
  • tcpip4lyfe, on 04/26/2008, -1/+7But I like my cpu....
  • moduc, on 04/26/2008, -0/+1If what they say is correct, they could have implemented a CPU inside the graphic chip. This is like AMD integrate GPU inside CPU. Basically to compete with AMD, Nvidia does the same, and get CPU and GPU to work together. Maybe the way the do it is to based on the GPU, and then add things that are missing (I am shooting in the dark here). Either that, or Nvidia is trying to get some publicity by going reverse. It's just strange why they do this because either they fear Intel or arrogant. I don't know publicity is going to help, unless they'll release something to compete with Intel, and trying to do Apple's secret spreading marketing right now.
    • TheMachine1, on 04/26/2008, -0/+0I think it means Nvidia plans to enter the CPU market.
  • RobotLeAwesome, on 04/26/2008, -0/+2I'll just use both.
  • coresnake, on 04/26/2008, -0/+1Actually you're missing a big part of the puzzle, there was already the whoop ass statement and today on Intels official Larrabee blog they said they were working from Day 1 to support rasterization, DX, and Open GL games, meaning that Nvidia are the one's who may well be .. *****.
    • cquinnd, on 04/26/2008, -0/+3Except we've seen Intel make these kinds of statements before, and at the end of the day gamers and enthusiasts go back to buy the next generation of GPU that manages those technologies much better.
    • crimsonalucard, on 04/27/2008, -0/+0I use intels latest graphic solution. The intel GMA 965. I have to tell you, it's the ***** thing ever. Even for integrated graphics it's the worst possible graphic solution you can get. I read that blog and those dumbasses are talking out of their asses. Intel is nowhere near ATi or Nvidia.
  • Frosty122, on 04/26/2008, -2/+1Well if AMD goes under, I wouldn't mind supporting the other "green" team.
  • rasmasyean, on 04/26/2008, -2/+1What they are saying is that they are trying to merge CPU and GPU while Intel is merging GPU with CPU…and they expect to win!
    Stuff like this has been happening for years. Integrating on the MoBo…then the chips. Eventually the whole computer will be one big chip! It’s happening now!...anyone have PDA phones?
    • Frosty122, on 04/26/2008, -0/+2Does everyone forget AMD had this idea first? It was the entire reason AMD but ATI.
  • JohnnyHotballs, on 04/26/2008, -1/+24………………………………………………………………………………………………
    ………………….._,,-~’’’¯¯¯’’~-,,…………………………………………………………
    ………………..,-‘’ ; ; ;_,,---,,_ ; ;’’-,…………………………….._,,,---,,_………………
    ……………….,’ ; ; ;,-‘ , , , , , ‘-, ; ;’-,,,,---~~’’’’’’~--,,,_…..,,-~’’ ; ; ; ;__;’-,……………
    ……………….| ; ; ;,’ , , , _,,-~’’ ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ¯’’~’-,,_ ,,-~’’ , , ‘, ;’, …………
    ……………….’, ; ; ‘-, ,-~’’ ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;’’-, , , , , ,’ ; |…………
    …………………’, ; ;,’’ ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;’-, , ,-‘ ;,-‘…………
    ………………….,’-‘ ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;’’-‘ ;,,-‘…………..
    ………………..,’ ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;__ ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ‘-,’……………..
    ………………,-‘ ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;,-‘’¯: : ’’-, ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; _ ; ; ; ; ;’,……………..
    ……………..,’ ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;| : : : : : :| ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ,-‘’¯: ¯’’-, ; ; ;’,…………….
    …………….,’ ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ‘-,_: : _,-‘ ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; | : : : : : :| ; ; ; |……………
    ……………,’ ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ¯¯ ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;’-,,_ : :,-‘ ; ; ; ;|……………
    …………..,-‘ ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ,,-~’’ , , , , ,,,-~~-, , , , _ ; ; ;¯¯ ; ; ; ; ;|……..........
    …………,-‘ ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;,’ , , , , , , ,( : : : : :) , , , ,’’-, ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;|……………
    ……….,-‘ ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;’, , , , , , , , ,’~---~’’ , , , , , ,’ ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;’,…………..
    …….,-‘’ ; _, ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ‘’~-,,,,--~~’’’¯’’’~-,,_ , ,_,-‘ ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ‘,………….
    ….,-‘’-~’’,-‘ ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; | ; ; | ..L.O.L.. ,’; ,’’¯ ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ,_ ; ‘-,………..
    ……….,’ ; ;,-, ; ;, ; ; ;, ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ‘, ; ;’, . . . . .,’ ;,’ ; ; ; ;, ; ; ;,’-, ; ;,’ ‘’~--‘’’………
    ………,’-~’ ,-‘-~’’ ‘, ,-‘ ‘, ,,- ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ‘, ; ; ‘~-,,,-‘’ ; ,’ ; ; ; ; ‘, ;,-‘’ ; ‘, ,-‘,……………..
    ……….,-‘’ ; ; ; ; ; ‘’ ; ; ;’’ ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ‘’-,,_ ; ; ; _,-‘ ; ; ; ; ; ;’-‘’ ; ; ; ‘’ ; ;’-,…………..
    ……..,-‘ ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;¯¯’’¯ ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; , ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;’’-,……….
    ……,-‘ ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ,, ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; |, ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ‘-,…….
    …..,’ ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;,’ ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;|..’-,_ ; ; ; , ; ; ; ; ; ‘,…..
    ….,’ ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; | ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;,’…….’’’,-~’ ; ; ; ; ; ,’…..
    …,’ ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;’~-,,,,,--~~’’’’’’~-,, ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;,’…..,-~’’ ; ; ; ; ; ; ,-‘……
    …| ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ‘, ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;,’…,-‘ ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;,-‘……..
    …’, ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ,-‘ ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ,’….’, ; ; ; ; _,,-‘’…………
    ….’, ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ,-‘’ ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;,’…….’’~~’’¯………………
    …..’’-, ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;_,,-‘’ ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ,-‘…………………………….
    ………’’~-,,_ ; ; ; ; _,,,-~’’ ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;,-‘……………………………..
    ………..| ; ; ;¯¯’’’’¯ ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;,,-‘……………………………….
    ………..’, ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;,-‘…………………………………
    …………| ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;|…………………………………..
    …………’, ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ~-,,___ ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;’,………………………………….
    ………….’, ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;,-‘….’’-, ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ‘,…………………………………
    ………..,’ ‘- ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;,-‘’……….’-, ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ‘,………………………………..
    ……….,’ ; ;’ ; ; ; ; ; ; ,,-‘…………….’, ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;’,……………………………….
    ………,’ ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;,-‘’…………………’’-, ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; |……………………………….
    ……..,’ ; ; ; ; ; ; ;,,-‘………………………’’, ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; |………………………………
    ……..| ; ; ; ; ; ; ;,’…………………………,’ ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;,’……………………………….
    ……..| ; ; ; ; ; ; ,’………………………..,-‘ ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ,’’………………………………..
    ……..| ; ; ; ; ; ;,’……………………….,-‘ ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ,-‘………………………………….
    ……..’,_ , ; , ;,’……………………….,’ ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ,-‘……………………………………
    ………’,,’,¯,’,’’|……………………….| ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ‘--,,………………………………….
    ………….¯…’’………………………..’-, ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;’’~,,…………………………….
    ……………………………………………’’-,, ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;’’~-,,……………………….
    ………………………………………………..’’-, ; ; ; ; ; ,,_ ; ;’-,’’-,……………………..
    …………………………………………………..’, ; ; ; ; ; ; ‘-,__,--...........................
    ……………………………………………………’-, ; ; ;,,-~’’’ , ,|, |……………………
    ………………………………………………………’’~-‘’_ , , ,,’,_/--‘……………………
    ...…........................I….....D…O…N…'...T.....…G…E...T.......I.T.......................
    • darkamster07, on 04/26/2008, -2/+6this really isn't a pedobear thing here, and i know he's recently come into his own on digg but you don't need to insert him into every article. now leave b4 i call hansen....
  • Enron1985, on 04/26/2008, -0/+8So far, Intel's graphics solutions have been completely useless for anyone serious about gaming. It would be nice if expensive graphics cards were not neccessary, but Intel certainly has alot of work to do if they want to change that.
  • m60dude5, on 04/26/2008, -1/+2This war between Intel and Nvidia is getting really old. A computer can't run without a processor, nor can it run without video (It can it'd just be really boring). It's stupid. It's like Walmart and McDonalds arguing over who has the best food. It's pointless because they're both in different areas, commercially.
    • crimsonalucard, on 04/27/2008, -0/+0Well what if walmart starts selling burgers and fries?
  • fuzzynyanko, on 04/26/2008, -1/+4Around the P2 era, you could get away with rendering graphics on the CPU, but not anymore for anything around Bioshock's level of graphics. Intel's GMA was a good step in the right direction, but it's not enough. I wonder how long it'll take Intel to pull off that level of graphics. At least one thing is good: Intel is working to make higher graphics standard on a PC.

    AMD's idea of slapping a GPU core onto a CPU die is great, especially with the advent of hybrid crossfire. I do wonder, though, if AMD and NVidia can get together and standardize SLI and Crossfire.
  • Gutterpunk, on 04/26/2008, -3/+5Thats has nvidia attitude written all over. Do a Google for "nvlddmkm", and check out the gigantic forum posts on the nvidia (nzone/slizone) forums. Frequent Vista crashes that nvidia can only explain as being the user's/PC fault, not theirs in any ways. Those have been plaguing *all* of their products since Vista came out. No official answer addressing any of this has ever been made.
    Reading that email, I understand why. They probably blame Intel for their drivers problem
    • kweeky, on 04/26/2008, -1/+1Unfortunately you're right. nVIDIA has had unbelievably shocking support for their customers. Intel on the other hand has had a history of highly tested and supported products (may not always be the best - but at least it's supported)
  • verkon, on 04/26/2008, -0/+1Screw Intel, bring back the Motorola 68000!
  • nycmac247, on 04/26/2008, -0/+2Hasn't this been done for years and years and years by really high-end visualization systems like SGI?
    http://www.sgi.com/
  • bnolsen, on 04/26/2008, -0/+2Hmm...I can run one of my AGP computers today without a GPU and it's fine (voodoo3). So what computer can I run with a GPU only and it be usable?
    Basically nvidia is on the wrong end of this argument and they look stupid making it.
    Paradigm shifts are good for the market. They make companies either adjust or get out. Nvidia isn't sitting very pretty at this moment. They're in danger of seriously becoming utterly irrelevant in a few years.
  • FyberOptic, on 04/26/2008, -4/+2How else can Nvidia continue to con people into buying poor overpriced hardware if Intel comes up with a superior graphics interface to take advantage of all the cores processors have these days? Of course they're threatened by such revelations. As they should be.

    All a graphics card really needs to perform these days is a way of displaying output to a particular video display type. It doesn't need to be a computer in and of itself, requiring its own power connection and fans and everything, for heaven's sake. There's no reason why a properly designed motherboard couldn't take advantage of one of the cpu cores to handle 3d calculations and all that (possibly even using a specially allocated section of ram as video memory to improve performance), while another core does physics calculations, and whatever's left runs the game itself. The future lies in multi-purpose processor cores, not in video cards that run as fast and hot as the main cpu itself.
    • combatchuck, on 04/26/2008, -1/+4Except for the fact that a GPU is several hundred times faster at 3D calculations than a CPU, and its memory is way faster, you have a point. Sort of. Maybe not.
    • cultist667, on 04/30/2008, -0/+2***** nvidia.
  • mintblogger, on 04/26/2008, -0/+3In the end consumer is going to benefit :D
  • MrViklund, on 04/26/2008, -0/+1Hah. They are so going to eat ***** for this later.
    Marked as inaccurate.
  • kurtwinter, on 04/26/2008, -3/+1The only delusional people here are Intel. The Core chip (as ***** awesome as it is) is a fluke in the product pipeline. It was a guy working a lab that has since been downsized that worked the Tualatin design into a socket 478 with a modern fab - which is the basis for that system now. Management wanted to push more of the ***** "extreme" Pentium IV room heaters, while AMD ate their lunch in desktop heavy lifting. The message is: Intel's management is incompetent Wall Street sycophants who are incapable of providing leadership, either internally or for the industry.
  • monroylobo, on 04/26/2008, -0/+2"You're dead!" "No, you're dead!" Shouldn't corporate people be more mature than five-year-olds?
  • harrybirney, on 04/27/2008, -0/+0It's a great pity that Nvidia (The greatest software driver writing company in the world )(Sarcasm unlimited!!!!!!) even thinks it could get it right and replace the functionality of the CPU and motherboard chip set. Still they struggle to satisfy their existing clients with halfway decent graphics drivers and provide even half the functions that they promised for their high end cards.
  • Myztry, on 04/27/2008, -0/+1If graphics shifted to parallel raytracing then a whole lot of nVidia techologies would become worthless. All the hacks that make polygons appear semi-realistic are natural attributes of raytracing. The algorithms are simple. They just require massive amounts of (floating point) calculating power. A function which would benefit not just graphics but software in general.
    Multi-cores are ideal for raytracing. Multi-cores are happening regardless. And raytracing is beautiful to behold. Games could start to look like the raytraced intro's for real...
    • crimsonalucard, on 04/27/2008, -0/+1Yeah, it won't happen any time soon. I say give it 20 years. Right now real time raytracing is something of a 'holy grail' in computer graphics.
      • Myztry, on 04/27/2008, -1/+1Crap. Raytracing is a task where a single frame can be rendered in parallel by multiple independent processors. They're getting pretty good results in software only by spreading across multiple cores.
        With the speed limits reached, processor are spreading out into parallel cores. Raytracing relies purely on mathematical grunt, so multi-core FPU's either as parts of the core, or as standalone units will benefit not just graphics, but all software. Software could increasingly run in parallel as opposed to 'sleeping for slices'.
        Current GPU features such as texture stretching only have one purpose. They can't become part of the general hardware resource pool, and as such are limited in value across the board.
  • cultist667, on 04/30/2008, -0/+1***** you nvidia. I bough a new pc around nvidia tech to learn later fullscreen video overlay is is removed and I now have an ati card on a nvidia chipset. ***** you to hell I am going to file a class action suit against your ass you *****. Its listed in all manuals for every nvidia card on the market I wonder what a jury would think of that in court.
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.