Intel's Secret GPU

Dunno, the difference between those two could as well be just a different presentation from what I see there.
 
On reconsideration, Metagence IP does seem to make sense in the context of very programmable shader execution units for SGX. SGX documentation does make a point of its multithreading capabilities and also their patented status, too.
 
mat said:
just found this one: Intel's future graphics tech is Power VR

Edit: but it talsk about G965, not discrete GPUs

That's unproven, so far as I know.

There is one undisputable fact --both Intel and ImgTec are stirring in the discrete desktop space again after a long nap. There are two possibilities:

1). ZOMG!!! (this one has been discussed above and in various threads).
2). Vista is being perceived as an opportunity by lots of folks to have another go, no conspiracies required.
 
If true, there's a third possibility:
3. The merger of ATI and AMD may open up the discrete desktop market.
 
Except the stirring was apparent before the merger was a done deal, so I rather doubt cause and effect there.
 
Chalnoth said:
Intel's "secret" GPU? Give me a break. Intel's the leading manufacturer of GPU's! Now that Vista's coming around and will require some amount of power, it should be no secret that Intel would like to retain that marketshare in its integrated designs.

Their GMA950 already supports Aeroglass. BTW, why doesn't their GMA900 support Aeroglass? It's virtually the same thing as the 950, but at a lower clock speed. Niether one has hardware vertex shaders, though the GMA950's typical pairing with a Core Duo probably helps out there.
 
Fox5 said:
Their GMA950 already supports Aeroglass. BTW, why doesn't their GMA900 support Aeroglass? It's virtually the same thing as the 950, but at a lower clock speed. Niether one has hardware vertex shaders, though the GMA950's typical pairing with a Core Duo probably helps out there.
Perhaps. But there may yet be noticeable differences in how snappy the interface is between the absolute lowest-end 3D hardware that can support Aeroglass and higher-end hardware.
 
Fox5 said:
Their GMA950 already supports Aeroglass. BTW, why doesn't their GMA900 support Aeroglass? It's virtually the same thing as the 950, but at a lower clock speed. Niether one has hardware vertex shaders, though the GMA950's typical pairing with a Core Duo probably helps out there.
Apparently GMA900, even though it supports all the needed features, is just too slow
 
Kaotik said:
Apparently GMA900, even though it supports all the needed features, is just too slow

People already had the GMA900 running on older beta versions of Vista, though I'm not sure how well it ran, but I believe it ran pretty much the same as any other card. Haven't heard of anyone having performance problems with aeroglass yet. And really, if Microsoft is not going to bring back GDI+, then they should at least allow the GMA900 to do aeroglass even if most effects are disabled since it could still be faster than GDI.

Anyhow, the only real difference between the gma900 and the gma950 is fillrate, and it's not even that large of a fillrate boost. (depending on the configuration, they're both available in varying speeds) The main advantage the gma950 has is a newer platform with higher memory bandwidth and faster cpus (to make up for the software vertex shaders and software t&l).
 
geo said:
Except the stirring was apparent before the merger was a done deal, so I rather doubt cause and effect there.

I consider cause and effect here unlikely too; even if I'd accept a theory like that, I could easily reverse it and claim that AMD might got interested in ATI, because they found out about Intel's possible plans.

Both ways it sounds like nonsense to me. AMD needed a foothold with graphics and chipsets and that's all and that even if Intel stays strictly to it's in house IGP development w/o any third party IP.
 
AMD/ATI's take:

X-bit labs: There are a lot of rumours that Intel is coming back to the market of discrete GPUs. Could such rumours be a reason of AMD-ATI merge?

Tom McCoy: We have heard that rumour too, but we do not know whether they are true or not true. But Intel has a long history of always trying to capture all the silicon on the motherboards that are housing Intel CPUs. Hence, that would be consistent with their strategy to use other independent companies to support their economy when they need it and cut them off when they do not.

http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/editorial/display/amd_atyt_interview_7.html

Interesting that they went right to "independent companies" there, isn't it? Rather than assuming Intel had their own in-house design. Who could they have in mind (yes, that's a rhetorical question)?
 
Ha. I'm sure they do. "The Symbiosis of Rumor-Mongering: Cause and Effect in the Intersection between Industry and Community"

Tell me that doesn't sound like a master's thesis. :LOL:
 
Back
Top