Oh dear, not this again.
PowerVR Series 6 now official
- Thread starter roninja
- Start date
Oh dear, not this again.
WRONG
I can confirm that using Brown Sauce is wrong. Especially on chips (yes, even PowerVR ones).
Last edited by a moderator:
D
Deleted member 13524
Guest
I just looked at the first post in this thread and it's 3 years old!
Woah, it looks like it'll take well over 3 years for IMG to get a GPU family from announcement to a shipping product.
Was this delay really planned or were they counting on ST-Ericsson to bring a SoC to market earlier this year?
Woah, it looks like it'll take well over 3 years for IMG to get a GPU family from announcement to a shipping product.
Was this delay really planned or were they counting on ST-Ericsson to bring a SoC to market earlier this year?
Rogue started shipping early this year... in TVs which is maybe a bit less noticable.
K-
A range of TVs in LG's Cinema 3D series use the LG H13 SoC with PowerVR's G6200 core.
http://withimagination.imgtec.com/i...-with-powervr-series6-graphics-start-shipping
http://withimagination.imgtec.com/i...-with-powervr-series6-graphics-start-shipping
Dominik D
Regular
I have no idea but judging by the slow GUI on my TV I'd guess good GPU would help TVs not suck at user experience.
I think one very important factor is power dissipation. We have almost zero information about this so we can't know whether a GPU will consume too much power for smart phones or not. This is very strange because we know power dissipation of most GPU of PC.
Without information of power we can't even compare which mobile GPU is more power-efficient. How can we say a GPU is "better" without such important data? For example, is a mobile GPU with 300Gflops/5watt "better" than another with 50Gflops/0.5Watt?
ltcommander.data
Regular
http://withimagination.imgtec.com/index.php/powervr/powervr-gpu-the-mobile-architecture-for-compute
It's been previously reported that lossless compression was added to the G6x30 over the G6x00 and IMG seems to officially confirm this in reply to someone's question in this article. They claim 2:1 compression rate or better for render targets.
So basically both have extra functionality (new compression protocols) and extra efficiencies, with XT giving up to 50% faster per clock compared to 6, and xe targetting very low end designs.
Based on the info released, 6XT doesn't appear to provide anywhere near the same boost in upper performance ceiling to 6, as 5XT did to 5.
Was a single-core SGX 5XT really more than 50% faster than a SGX5 in for example GLBenchmark?
If memory serves well clock for clock it was rated by IMG at 40% (I'm just too bored to dig out the initial 5XT announcements). Just for the record's sake a 543 against a 540 has 2.5x times the FLOPs/clock/ALU, 1.75x times the triangle throughput and twice the Z check units (at the same frequencies both).
For S6XT I don't expect any as signficant changes in terms of arithmetic throughput (if any at all) but mostly in the triangle throughput, z/stencil department amongst others.
Besides that ULP GPU IP announcements from the big players has become these days so non telling and dry that they could just announce a couple of codenames for new core variants and call it a day. Before I can see a benchmark result of a 6XT core I couldn't for the world guess what exactly could have changed and I severely doubt they haven't added any hw.
