Printable View
Read more at EE TIMESQuote:
Lucid (Kfar Netter, Israel), which employs 27 workers, aims to provide a graphics acceleration traffic organizing chip that can support up to four graphics processing units (GPUs) simultaneously. Lucid said it expects to have first full production silicon samples by the end of 2007. The company plans to hit volume sales with a large board manufacturer such as Asustek, Leadtek or GigaByte and a system integrator such as Dell, HP or Alienware.
So it's a chip to improve scalability on multi-GPU. From my understand, NV's quad SLi didn't scale well was due to limitation on AFR, and I've heard this from NV and ATI. And this limitation is supposed to improve in DX10
I don't see how 1 chip can help overcome that hurdle without using extra CPU/RAM.
Maybe you can mix cards, ATI and Nvidia..Quote:
while the driver helps makes the application indifferent to the graphics processors in use.
That, if possible, would make big performance hit compared to two cards of same vendor. Actually this means that this chip can accelerate each vendors cards: ATI, NVidia, XGI or S3.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ubermann
Maybe Intel is making this for their own GPUs...
Intel IS Making these for their own Chipsets and for their current (pathetic) Graphics chips to help them compete with nVidia/ATi. Ironically they have yet to surpass Via in Graphics performance
im not sure. pairing two of the best cards usually means pairing two of the same cards...Quote:
Originally Posted by Cooper
(unless you want ati for fear performance + nvidia for some other game?)
I wonder if any of the employees worked for Wicked 3D.
http://www.reghardware.co.uk/2006/12...md_integrated/Quote:
Originally Posted by nn_step
http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/chi...65-gf6150.html
Eh? Perhaps the results may be a bit skewed because the Athlons were too slow:rolleyes: but this looks like typical nn FUD.
Besides what the poster above me already pointed as ridiculously false in your statement, its worth mentionning that intel has a 51% market share in mobile graphics (obviously the largest market shate) and 35% in the desktop market vs 24 for nvidia and 22 for ATI so im thinking they feel pretty comfortable.Quote:
Originally Posted by nn_step
Edit-- forgot the source
http://www.tgdaily.com/2006/12/06/am...phics_q3_2006/
Edit: flames removed.
Quote:
Originally Posted by nn_step
Quote from this site http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/chi...gf6150_15.htmlQuote:
Originally Posted by xbitlabs
EDIT: Didn't see the previous posts. :wasntme:
I've already addressed Intel vs Nvidia. This is a rather old review but..Quote:
Originally Posted by nn_step
http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/chi...s-roundup.html
I see nowhere where Via beats Intel.
Maybe this is like the thing Alienware promised pre-SLI?
VIA had to buy out S3 just to try to stay even with Intel's...Quote:
Originally Posted by nn_step
Now that's the most funniest thing I've ever heard this year :rofl: - no offense man but you made me laugh with tears,...Quote:
Besides what the poster above me already pointed as ridiculously false in your statement, its worth mentioning that intel has a 51% market share in mobile graphics (obviously the largest market shate) and 35% in the desktop market vs 24 for nvidia and 22 for ATI so im thinking they feel pretty comfortable.
Yeah and those graphics sure look awesome - you realy need the most powerful chips to play those games, it's beyond the present G80, if it had Windows Vista would be with DX11 support. (being Sarcastic).Quote:
intel has a 51% market share in mobile graphics
The truth is that those graphics or similar to the first Nintendo or maybe Super Nintendo if I take N-Gage for example (nothing compared to DX7 or DX8 graphics on PC).
Here you did it again - comparing all Intel integrated Chips on market with Nvida/ATi, which work more with cards for different purpose like High Graphics Gaming for example - you just compared a Family car with A Top Sport car from Ferrari and you're surprised that the family car sells better.:DQuote:
35% in the desktop market vs 24 for nvidia and 22 for ATI
Intel integrated graphics aren't that bad. Obviously their primary market is general desktop use and some video playback and they're fine for that. They can even play the odd old game. For integrated graphics thats fine, to play any games in high resolution, or with aa/af you NEED dedicated graphics, even nvidia and ati's integrated graphics strugge with games.b When you compare all vendors integrated solutions intel doesn't fare badly at all. The 965 was a bit of a mis-step prioritising functionality to the detriment of performance, but the next variants should thanks to increased transistors, scale the design up and form a more balanced solution.
If intel move to dedicated graphics cards then obviously they will have more transistors and a greater power/heat envelope to play with, so there is no way to really know how they will fare until they release a product.
I guess its a good thing the post i was replying to was about integrated graphics then! Or else my post would have looked pretty foolish.Quote:
Originally Posted by XSAlliN
Farraris are only better than Toyotas in terms of raw performance and exlusivity, but lags behind in every other metrix.Quote:
Originally Posted by XSAlliN
I was trying to make a point whit that comparison - this topic is not about cars.Quote:
Farraris are only better than Toyotas in terms of raw performance and exlusivity, but lags behind in every other metrix.
Those high sells were for office - if I own a company I buy systems with integrated graphic chips, because I want my employers to do their jobs not play games all day and Intel makes pretty solid boards for this purpose so all this makes sense.Quote:
Intel integrated graphics aren't that bad. Obviously their primary market is general desktop use and some video playback and they're fine for that. They can even play the odd old game. For integrated graphics thats fine, to play any games in high resolution, or with aa/af you NEED dedicated graphics, even nvidia and ati's integrated graphics strugge with games.b When you compare all vendors integrated solutions intel doesn't fare badly at all. The 965 was a bit of a mis-step prioritising functionality to the detriment of performance, but the next variants should thanks to increased transistors, scale the design up and form a more balanced solution.
Compared to VIA - I agree but whit ATi/Nvidia there is no comparison.Quote:
I guess its a good thing the post i was replying to was about integrated graphics then! Or else my post would have looked pretty foolish.
you should be smart enough to draw parallels between cars and gfx cards. :)Quote:
Originally Posted by XSAlliN
integrated graphics is like civics. good energy efficiency for everyday commutes at very affordable price with everything you need inside.
Intel's integrated graphics is actually fairly competitive against NVidia and ATi/AMD's integrated solutions, but sucks compare to discrete gfx cards. But not everyone needs 600HP Porsche for their daily commute on Laguna Seca.
my buddys on base IBm thinkpad has an integreated X300 and it r0x0rz all the dell laptops
I can even play civ4 on it. With my P4 willy 1.5ghz with 512mb of ram and Geforce 4mx440 I couldn't even TOUCH his fps with a integrated x300 and celeron m 1.6ghz with 256mb of ram.
Now it gets tricky, i've seen 600HP Civics :DQuote:
Originally Posted by vitaminc
Old thread I know, but just read this update and it's nice to see things are progressing:
http://lucidlogix.com/news/pr_2008_07_14.html
They might just pull it off - then again it might just turn out to be vaporware.
Seems like a hardware solution to a problem software hasn't been able to solve - I guess with that roster if anyone can pull it off it's these guys. :p:
lol blast from the past. :p:
imagine the combination possibilities... 4 GTX280s... 4 DX11U chips... and maybe 2 9800GX2 plus 2 4870X2... now that would be somethin... i pray this thing hits the market before i build my PC...
Holy thread revival batman! :eek::eek:
Interesting, says coming in 2009 also. But it appears that they need to actually be on the GFX card or the MoBo. So unless those people support them...
No, apparently it will be its own add-in board as well. So should be easy to pop in and run.Quote:
Originally Posted by Aberration
It says add in board, but that is not the impression I get from the picture they show.
It says the chip must be between the GPU and chipset, not possible if its on a card by itself.
If you look at the picture of the AIB, it has the HYRDA chip, and then 4 other chips around it. I think those represent multiple GPU cores.
I think this will just replace or coexist with the bridge chip that is used now.
So this is the microstutter solution? :)
Hm, yeah, I guess.. Well, if they could get AIB partners to do that I'd be up for that too. I'm not upgrading in the gfx department till Q1 09 anyway.Quote:
Originally Posted by Aberration
No longer speculation, the company was announced today.
There is a thread discussing this HERE.
.