Slashdot Mirror
Intel Discrete Graphics Chips Confirmed
Arun Demeure writes "There have been rumors of Intel's re-entry into discrete graphics for months. Now Beyond3D reports that Intel has copped to the project on their own site. They describe it as a 'many-core' architecture aimed at 'high-end client platforms,' but also extending to other market segments in the future, with 'plans for accelerated CPU integration.' This might also encourage others to follow Intel's strategy of open-sourcing their Linux drivers. So, better watch out NVIDIA and AMD/ATI — there's new competition on the horizon."
Competition is almost always good, so I look forward to this. I'd like to see Intel push ATI and Nvidia to create more power efficient chips, as it's quite rediculous right now.
I am guessing in this context "discrete" means seperate from the motherboard.
If you look at the vast majority of chips either ATI or nVidia sell, they're actually pretty efficient.
But they invariably _have_ to have some benchmark-breaking super-card to grab the headlines with. The way it works is that while only a minority of people will actually buy the top-end graphics card, there are millions of people who just need a reminder that "nVidia is fast" or "ATIs are fast". They'll go to some benchmark site to see some "nVidia's 8800 GTX is faster than ATI's X1900XTX!" article (not entirely unexpected, it's one generation ahead), end up with some vague "nVidia is faster than ATI" idea, then go buy a 5200. Which is the lowest end of two generations behind the ATI, or 3 behind that 8800 GTX.
Both ATI and nVidia even went through times of not even trying to produce or sell much of their headline-grabbing card. And at least ATI always introduces their latest technology in their mid-range cards first, and they tend to be reasonably energy efficient cards too. But it's like a chicken contest: the one who pulls out loses. The moment one of them gave up on having an ultra-high end card at all, the benchmark sites and willy-waver forums would proclaim "company X loses the high performance graphics battle!"
I don't think Intel will manage to restore sanity in that arena, sadly. Most likely Intel will end up playing the same game, with one overclocked noisy card to grab the headlines for their saner cards.
A polar bear is a cartesian bear after a coordinate transform.
Intel drivers for Linux Just Work(TM)
That might have to do with their drivers being Open Source, which has been recommended by the Linux community for a long time. According to all statements from kernel devlopers I've read, Open Source drivers are much easier to maintain.
C - the footgun of programming languages
But most people don't buy the top end. There's still a lot of computers being sold with Intel graphics chipsets, right on the motherboard, because most people could care less about which graphics card they have. They'd rather be playing games on their big TV with their console. As long as they can play Tetris variation #349 and freecell, they don't really care which graphics card they have.
Anthropic principle: We see the universe the way it is because if it were different we would not be here to see it.
If I wanted to run binary kernel modules I would just buy a 6xxx series NVIDIA and be done with it. :)
I specifically said "Open Source"
I don't know why they think they can succeed this time.
Remember when AMD made Intel clones down to the very chip architecture and it didn't matter which manifacturer you bought from?
Remember how AMD K5 sucked and people started leaning towards Intels? And then Pentium 4 happened, and AMD's new architecture was much superior? And then Core turned things on their head again?
Things change. I don't think we're using 3DFX cards anymore either too. They used to be ahead of everyone.
Intel's previous foray into the Discrete Graphics Market was the Intel i740. I got one, agreeing with PC salesman "Hey, you can't go wrong with Intel can you?" It was quite a decent chip for its time, and the driver was very stable. I don't ever recall graphics hanging once! It was disappointing when Intel bailed out of the 3D market, but to their credit they continued to update the drivers whenever a new version of DirectX rolled out.
Intel have already made a return of sorts to 3D with their Media Accelerator 9XX series chips you'll find in many Intel laptops. It's funny, because you'd expect an embedded chipset to be lame; lowest common denominator, shared RAM and akk. But this lappie has it and the graphics scream. It's faster than my nVidia 5700 which is two years old. The driver is stable too; never crashed. If they can do this with an embedded chipset 3d, imagine what they can do when they really put their mind to it?
nVidia and ATI have the market to themselves these days. nVidia has got pretty lax regarding driver stability for these days, and it's damned near impossible to get support out of them. They've fobbed off support to OEMs, who slap electronics onto cards and are in no position to help with driver problems. That's the sort of thing that happens when a company dominates a market.
If Intel can come out with some high performance electronics and stable drivers, well, Welcome back, Intel! I for one welcome you as my new Overlord!
But will they include DVI? Better yet, dual DVI for those who run either dual monitors or really large monitors which require dual link?
No, in fact they aren't even going to include DSUB outputs. They are going to use modulated RF outputs like you got on the ATARI ST and AMIGA. They will be capable of displaying NTSC resolutions at anything up to 60Hz refresh rate.
What the fuck do you think?
Has anyone considered that the reason ATI/NVidia won't open source their drivers/firmware is because there are blatant copyright and patent violations in their code? I'm not saying there are violations, but if there are, then I would expect each to violently defend against anyone seeing their source code.
Yes, this has been suggested before. These violations, if they exist, may not be deliberate though.
Remember that software patents are often very broad. It is hard to write any software at all without violating some patent or other. If you write software, and you have a lot of money, the patent trolls will come knocking. Giving away source code makes the troll's job much easier. Perhaps that is part of what NVIDIA and ATI want to avoid.
Another problem is that they've used other people's code under NDA in their drivers. There is a similar problem with Windows - Microsoft could not release the source as free software without removing a lot of third-party components.
>north
You're an immobile computer, remember?
Why can't they release open source drivers that cover as much functionality as possible and provide a close source version optionally that includes the non-oss releasable parts?
-- MartinG To mail me: echo kewyjlcxyzvjfxbqwh | tr bcefhjklqvwxyz
Yes, could care less is correct, because it's short for the phrase:
I suppose I could care less, but I'm not sure how.
I agree with you, and concede the point.*
*Here "I agree with you, and concede the point" is actually short for the phrase "I could agree with you, and concede the point, but I consider using words which mean the opposite of what you are trying to say in normal conversation to be extremely silly.".