R3400

I don't want to turn this thread into an TBDR-Thread, but imho this statement from Anandtech in the GMA900-Review is certainly wrong, or?

Intel has a licensing agreement with STMicroelectronics. If that name sounds familiar, it's because STMicro was the company behind the Kyro and Kyro II. Those who've been following the graphics industry for a while will already have guessed that Intel is using their own flavor of STMicro's tile based rendering technology.
 
mboeller said:
I don't want to turn this thread into an TBDR-Thread, but imho this statement from Anandtech in the GMA900-Review is certainly wrong, or?

Intel has a licensing agreement with STMicroelectronics. If that name sounds familiar, it's because STMicro was the company behind the Kyro and Kyro II. Those who've been following the graphics industry for a while will already have guessed that Intel is using their own flavor of STMicro's tile based rendering technology.

Utterly, completely and totally wrong, AFAIK.

"STMicro's tile based rendering technology"

This would be the same STMicro who withdrew from the desktop graphics market a couple of years ago? :?
 
mboeller said:
I don't want to turn this thread into an TBDR-Thread, but imho this statement from Anandtech in the GMA900-Review is certainly wrong, or?

Intel has a licensing agreement with STMicroelectronics. If that name sounds familiar, it's because STMicro was the company behind the Kyro and Kyro II. Those who've been following the graphics industry for a while will already have guessed that Intel is using their own flavor of STMicro's tile based rendering technology.
I'm pretty sure it's rubbish. It's a tile based renderer, but not a tile based deferred renderer (like the kyros). Aren't all graphic chips tile based anyway today?
 
Back
Top