Quote:
Originally Posted by tangey
I was advised that the major tech hurdle was getting the required performance in the sub-watt region.
|
Oh yes, that makes sense. I am under the impression they don't consider handheld to be their first market for it though. Of course, it may still turn out to be first (several years down the road) if they fail to find licensees elsewhere.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by tangey
i.e. something that has the ability to move graphics in an entirely different direction, with a big big emphasis on the cost reductions that this technology can bring, for example, in game design.
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Shifty
I'm also not seeing where the massive savings in game design are to come from. 1/10 to 1/5??
|
It was marketing bullshit for Larrabee, and it's marketing bullshit for Caustic. If genuinely fast enough it does shift some of the complexity from software to hardware/driver, but any small developer can get the exact same benefits in a different way by licensing a game engine. And there's no way it could reduce cost by 80% for anything but a tech demo.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by tangey
Aslo time factor may be because they see themselves pretty busy in developing/delivering Rogue over the next number of years  |
They've already developed and delivered the first version of Rogue - while customer support does take a lot of time and effort, these are mostly separate teams from those doing the actual architecture R&D. I doubt it's much of an issue.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Shifty
Okay, that's sort of sound in theory, but then they believe they've tied up the realtime RT tech very nicely with their patents. Hence, if Caustic + IMG have done a thorough job, it might not be possible for other IHVs to add effective RT hardware and they'll remain too slow for realtime apps, so the technique won't be targeted. For OpenRL to be fully adopted it has to be useable at speed for everyone. I don't know how IMG can solve that.
|
There's always something weird with an open standard that requires specific patents to implement efficiently, especially when paired with a business plan that assumes an early mover advantage but eventual widespread adoption. I suppose that on paper they're hoping for others to implement the standard but much less efficiently - in practice, there's no way NVIDIA/AMD will be stupid enough to do that.