Creative drops consumer P10

Mephisto

Newcomer
http://www.guru3d.com/interview/creative-092002/

So ultimately the commercial realities of doing business with P10 in the desktop space were looking riskier in that even any performance lead would be short term and pricing would be under pressure from day one as NVIDIA and ATI try to deliver one another a fatal blow. Against this backdrop and in order to maintain our retail dominance in Europe we elected to continue working with NVIDIA.
 
Mephisto said:
http://www.guru3d.com/interview/creative-092002/

So ultimately the commercial realities of doing business with P10 in the desktop space were looking riskier in that even any performance lead would be short term and pricing would be under pressure from day one as NVIDIA and ATI try to deliver one another a fatal blow. Against this backdrop and in order to maintain our retail dominance in Europe we elected to continue working with NVIDIA.

I saw that coming. Then again, who didn't? In fact, I had a discussion about this somewhere on the Net just this month!
 
Ummmm, isn't this very quote on the front page?

However, in reality there was never likely to be a consumer based P10. At the Wildcat VP launch they never signalled intent on releasing it, but rather 3D chips at the 'SoundBlaster Price point' ($99) or chips with more pixel pushing power for the high end.

P10 was designed over the last two and a half years for workstation use, Creative only thouught about purchasing them this year. It's going to take a little more time for real Creative/3Dlabs consumer chips to come through.
 
No it is going to take a huge effort and expenditure ... I dont think they will be trying it at all to be honest.
 
I kind of agree with Mfa. It may be more effort and costly to try and compete with NVIDIA and ATI rather than use their chips.

However the mid market is still open and perhaps 3DLabs and Creative will try to pursue that. Again though, this is assuming that the 3DLabs technology is not able to compete with the high-end cards at a similar time-frame and price point.
 
DaveBaumann said:
However, in reality there was never likely to be a consumer based P10. At the Wildcat VP launch they never signalled intent on releasing it, but rather 3D chips at the 'SoundBlaster Price point' ($99) or chips with more pixel pushing power for the high end.

Not according to the interview they did in the last copy of Maximum PC. They indicated direct desktop competition with nVidia and ATI's suite of cards. I think I still have that issue lying around here somewhere.
 
Derek Smart [3000AD said:
]
DaveBaumann said:
However, in reality there was never likely to be a consumer based P10. At the Wildcat VP launch they never signalled intent on releasing it, but rather 3D chips at the 'SoundBlaster Price point' ($99) or chips with more pixel pushing power for the high end.

Not according to the interview they did in the last copy of Maximum PC. They indicated direct desktop competition with nVidia and ATI's suite of cards. I think I still have that issue lying around here somewhere.

Yep, I remember that statement from Creative as well (can't remember where though).

Anyway, this could turn out to be a drawback for getting OpenGL 2.0 out the door anytime soon. If 3dlabs is purely aiming at the workstation segment with OpenGL 2.0 it might not be where other players like ATI and nVidia wants to go, as they want a future OpenGL that can bridge both worlds (as they design a common chip for both the prof and consumer).
 
According to latest news OpenGL is doing very well, because ATI, Nvidia, 3DLabs and other IHVs are working together on new extensions. In the last couple months ARB made some serious progress and they just need to keep up good work.
 
Not surprising. P10 was only a 4 pipeline design, was it not?

perhaps Creative/3DLabs will have a fully DX9, 8 pipe, P15 or P20 sometime next year.
 
Why do people keep with the falacy of needing 8 pipelines to be DX9? Once again, there is no requirement to have a set number of pipelines; one only needs to be able to perform 16 textal-ops in 1 pass.

--|BRiT|
 
BRiT said:
Why do people keep with the falacy of needing 8 pipelines to be DX9? Once again, there is no requirement to have a set number of pipelines; one only needs to be able to perform 16 textal-ops in 1 pass.

--|BRiT|

Exactly as you said.

Just take a look on the rumoured details about R9500 (they were available on the Power Color website for a few hours - I copied it):

"Specification

Powered by the AGP 8x RADEON 9500 Visual Processing Unit (VPU).
Complete DirectX 9.0 support for precedented realism and sophisticated visual effects.

(...)
DirectX 9.0 and the latest OpenGL functionality allowing gamers to experience complex, movie-quality effects in next-generation 3D games and applications.
(...)
3D Features
Four parallel rendering pipelines.
Four parallel geometry engines.
AGP 8x technology support.
SMARTSHADER 2.0.
Programmable pixel and vertex shaders.
16 textures per pass.
(...)
Supports DirectX 9.0 and the latest version of OpenGL. (...)"

And Dx9 require 16 textures per pass only - there's no word about pipelines or TMUs or anything else.

PS: Of course, maybe PColor details were wrong, who knows but I hope, they weren't... ;)
 
Derek Smart [3000AD said:
]
DaveBaumann said:
However, in reality there was never likely to be a consumer based P10. At the Wildcat VP launch they never signalled intent on releasing it, but rather 3D chips at the 'SoundBlaster Price point' ($99) or chips with more pixel pushing power for the high end.

Not according to the interview they did in the last copy of Maximum PC. They indicated direct desktop competition with nVidia and ATI's suite of cards. I think I still have that issue lying around here somewhere.

Yes, I remember too.
Actually he didn't speak about timeframe but indicated the will to do it, sure.
 
Back
Top