Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Nvidia Claims Intel's Larrabee Is "a GPU From 2006"

Posted by Soulskill on from the dem's-fightin'-woids dept.

Barence sends this excerpt from PC Pro: "Nvidia has delivered a scathing criticism of Intel's Larrabee, dismissing the multi-core CPU/GPU as wishful thinking — while admitting it needs to catch up with AMD's current Radeon graphics cards. 'Intel is not a stupid company,' conceded John Mottram, chief architect for the company's GT200 core. 'They've put a lot of people behind this, so clearly they believe it's viable. But the products on our roadmap are competitive to this thing as they've painted it. And the reality is going to fall short of the optimistic way they've painted it. As [blogger and CPU architect] Peter Glaskowsky said, the "large" Larrabee in 2010 will have roughly the same performance as a 2006 GPU from Nvidia or ATI.' Speaking ahead of the opening of the annual NVISION expo on Monday, he also admitted Nvidia 'underestimated ATI with respect to their product.'"

1 of 278 comments (clear)

  1. Repudiating my own quote by Ideaphile · · Score: 5, Informative

    Although I appreciate the attention from NVIDIA and Slashdot, I can't support that alleged quote from my blog (http://speedsnfeeds.com).

    First, what's being described as a quote is actually just John Montrym's summary from my original post, which is here:

    http://news.cnet.com/8301-13512_3-10006184-23.html

    What I actually described as equating to "the performance of a 2006-vintage... graphics chip" was a performance standard defined by Intel itself-- running the game F.E.A.R. at 60 fps in 1,600 x 1,200-pixel resolution with four-sample antialiasing.

    Intel used this figure for some comparisons of rendering performance. If Larrabee ran at 1 GHz, for example, Intel's figures show that it would take somewhere from 7 to 25 Larrabee cores to reach that 60 Hz frame rate.

    Larrabee will probably run much faster than that, at least on desktop variants.

    Well... rather than writing the whole response here, I think I'd rather write it up for my blog and publish it there. Please surf on over and check it out:

    http://news.cnet.com/8301-13512_3-10024280-23.html

    Comments are welcome here or there.

    . png