It is 45nm. I was trying to put 32nm for 64 cores. And 45nm for 32cores for highend.Originally Posted by Vozer
How do you know that, Shintai?I thought the first Larrabee cards would be 45nm?
It is 45nm. I was trying to put 32nm for 64 cores. And 45nm for 32cores for highend.How do you know that, Shintai?
Crunching for Comrades and the Common good of the People.
Are there any good benchmarks to put the base for this statement? I'm strugling finding any tbhYeah I know, and that's what I'm saying.. Current Ati IGP is significantly faster than GM4500, so I'm wondering why the Graph only shows a modest improvement by 2010,
Intergrated graphics leadership?
http://www.hkepc.com/?id=1510&page=5&fs=idn#view
the 780G is an avarage of 17% faster (excluding 3dmarks) then the G45, but still both fail to supply adequate fps for 1280x1024.
This is a common perception and not necessarily incorrect. However, every discussion, commentary, and such I see on this topic takes the gamer/enthusiast view on integrated graphics.Yeah I know, and that's what I'm saying.. Current Ati IGP is significantly faster than GM4500, so I'm wondering why the Graph only shows a modest improvement by 2010,
Intergrated graphics leadership?
Let's ask a question -- how many people have set out to build a gaming platform as said -- "I want IGP, discrete is not nearly as good" (let's assume they have some clue as to what they are doing), i.e. do people who are serious about gaming really consider integrated graphics a viable option? Not really .... it is clear in the data (Hornet provided a good data set) that the ATI and nVidia are better 3D performers than Intel for games ... but even they are inadequate for what a gamer would consider good. FPS on ATI IGP or nVidia IGP are still not adequate to make a good game experience.
So what good is the IGP for? Well, basically anything else except 3D gaming... and this, in fact, is the bulk of the industry. Intel has a good, firm lead in graphics over both nVidia and ATI in terms of marketshare which includes IGP... for good reason, the chipsets with IGP from Intel are very weak on 3D graphics but strong on features that commercial enterprise managers find useful (remote management, stability, connectability, etc etc) ... so Intel has an IGP chipset that is adequate for graphics but strong on enterprise features ... they sell the bulk of this into businesses who really don't give a flip about whether someone can play HL2 Episode 2 at 23 FPS.
I jokingly summarize the concept that Intel embraces the ideal that a computer is a tool, where as ATI/AMD seems to embrace the idea that a computer is a toy.
Jack
One hundred years from now It won't matter
What kind of car I drove What kind of house I lived in
How much money I had in the bank Nor what my cloths looked like.... But The world may be a little better Because, I was important In the life of a child.
-- from "Within My Power" by Forest Witcraft
Anybody remember those simulated benchmarks of Barcelona?
Yeah. Exactly.
E8400 @ 4.0 | ASUS P5Q-E P45 | 4GB Mushkin Redline DDR2-1000 | WD SE16 640GB | HD4870 ASUS Top | Antec 300 | Noctua & Thermalright Cool
Windows 7 Professional x64
Vista & Seven Tweaks, Tips, and Tutorials: http://www.vistax64.com/
Game's running choppy? See: http://www.tweakguides.com/
That is a software issue
Built into the chipset. Wake on lan, remote manageability are features built into the chipset.
One hundred years from now It won't matter
What kind of car I drove What kind of house I lived in
How much money I had in the bank Nor what my cloths looked like.... But The world may be a little better Because, I was important In the life of a child.
-- from "Within My Power" by Forest Witcraft
LAN's work on AMD too
Of course they do, they even support wake on lan (through a chipset) ... but Intel has built manageability features into the chipset and complimented them with technologies that ride outside of simple software implementations. This is why Intel owns 90% of the corporate space, and 80% of the market. AMD is trying to replicate this, but only has achieved a small subset recently.... they will improve overtime, but Intel still has the advantage.LAN's work on AMD too
Last edited by JumpingJack; 10-04-2008 at 09:22 AM.
One hundred years from now It won't matter
What kind of car I drove What kind of house I lived in
How much money I had in the bank Nor what my cloths looked like.... But The world may be a little better Because, I was important In the life of a child.
-- from "Within My Power" by Forest Witcraft
Correct me if I'm wrong but isn't a 2GHz chip pushing 1,024 vectors much less efficient than a 725MHz chip that pushes 800? Sounds like ATi/AMD is way ahead in that case!
Current: AMD Threadripper 1950X @ 4.2GHz / EK Supremacy/ 360 EK Rad, EK-DBAY D5 PWM, 32GB G.Skill 3000MHz DDR4, AMD Vega 64 Wave, Samsung nVME SSDs
Prior Build: Core i7 7700K @ 4.9GHz / Apogee XT/120.2 Magicool rad, 16GB G.Skill 3000MHz DDR4, AMD Saphire rx580 8GB, Samsung 850 Pro SSD
Intel 4.5GHz LinX Stable Club
Crunch with us, the XS WCG team
Does it matter? In the end, it is what the performance measures up to ... Run 10 stream processors at 2 GHz or 20 stream processors at 1 GHz ... the clock, number of vectors processed, efficiency are all causes to the effect.Correct me if I'm wrong but isn't a 2GHz chip pushing 1,024 vectors much less efficient than a 725MHz chip that pushes 800? Sounds like ATi/AMD is way ahead in that case!
One hundred years from now It won't matter
What kind of car I drove What kind of house I lived in
How much money I had in the bank Nor what my cloths looked like.... But The world may be a little better Because, I was important In the life of a child.
-- from "Within My Power" by Forest Witcraft
The company I work at have about 100 companies as customers and I can assure you that this is NOT an issue when they selects computers (I didn't know that this was a problem..). Portables are common on companies today and that is a strong area for intel.
The main reason why intel is strong is tradition and marketing. Companies don't know that much about hardware. Hardcore gamers, overclocers etc know much more about computers.
Ok that's your company, your company portfolio however it is not the market. AMD has been trying to crack the commercial space for as long as they have existed, they have yet been unable to do so.
But to assume an IT manager does not know about HW and what is needed is simply ludicrous. Obviously, Intel offers up what they need otherwise they would not be preferentially buying Intel. I work for a similar size company (my IT guy services around 100 systems), and my IT guys swears by it. Does that prove my point, no ... does your statement rebutt it ... absolutely not. The data that supports my argument is that the market is lopsided Intel in this regard.
Last edited by JumpingJack; 10-04-2008 at 09:35 AM.
One hundred years from now It won't matter
What kind of car I drove What kind of house I lived in
How much money I had in the bank Nor what my cloths looked like.... But The world may be a little better Because, I was important In the life of a child.
-- from "Within My Power" by Forest Witcraft
Larrabee is pushing 1.024 vectors per clock (assuming 64 cores doing 16 each). 1.024x2000MHz = 2.048.000Correct me if I'm wrong but isn't a 2GHz chip pushing 1,024 vectors much less efficient than a 725MHz chip that pushes 800? Sounds like ATi/AMD is way ahead in that case!
RV770 is pushing 800 vectors per clock. 800x725MHz = 580.000
That's why they say the theoretical throughput of Larrabee is astounding compared to today's GPUs.
Friends shouldn't let friends use Windows 7 until Microsoft fixes Windows Explorer (link)
LAN's work on AMD too
http://cache-www.intel.com/cd/00/00/...366_236366.pdf
Crunching for Comrades and the Common good of the People.
One problem tho is. That AMDs vectors are 4+1. Or in worst case only 160, best case 800. And nVidia is 1+1 or worst case 240 or best case 480. Larrabee is always 512(with 32cores) nomatter the load and type of the graphics. Then there is ofcourse the pure clockspeed difference. Tho nVidia is close on that part.
Larrabee can shift its power accordingly to the game. Something current GPUs are ages away from. Not even to mention the memory efficiency that will increase dramaticly.
Note: Section 5.4.
http://softwarecommunity.intel.com/U...e_manycore.pdf
Crunching for Comrades and the Common good of the People.
Yep, it was just to put it in the same way of the original OCTDK "exclusive" posted here, personally I can't wait to see what this monster can do. I only pray Intel for a extremely reduced idle power consumption, I don't care about load PC at all.
Friends shouldn't let friends use Windows 7 until Microsoft fixes Windows Explorer (link)
You should visit some companies, you will be amazed
In my country we are ahead of usa companies too so I think the situation is worse there
I am sure he doesn't understand.
One hundred years from now It won't matter
What kind of car I drove What kind of house I lived in
How much money I had in the bank Nor what my cloths looked like.... But The world may be a little better Because, I was important In the life of a child.
-- from "Within My Power" by Forest Witcraft
I know this is OT but I am interested to know what you can do on intel computers that you can't do on AMD computers because of the chipset.I am sure he doesn't understand.
If this is the reason why intel has 80% market share it must be somethin increadible...
GMA4500 is 65nm part, but that on a side I'm amazed how you're enthusiastic about something that you don't have single shred of hard facts/numbers.
Adobe is working on Flash Player support for 64-bit platforms as part of our ongoing commitment to the cross-platform compatibility of Flash Player. We expect to provide native support for 64-bit platforms in an upcoming release of Flash Player following the release of Flash Player 10.1.
i guess graphics cards will be as fast as larrabee (as speculated), when it comes to market
its usually a bad idea to let informations get leaked so far from launch, lots of time for the competitors to develop something themselves (like nvidias g80 unified shaders or the rv770 shader number secret, shows that it helps to keep yourselves hushed up)
system:
Phenom II 920 3.5Ghz @ 1.4v, benchstable @ over 3,6Ghz (didnt test higher)
xigmatek achilles
sapphire hd4870 1gb @ 820 1020
Gigabyte GA-MA790GP-DS4H
8gb a-data 4-4-4-12 800
x-fi xtrememusic
rip 2x 160gb maxtor(now that adds up to 4...)
320gb/250gb/500gb samsung
I´m not talking about the G45 chipset. But the one on the same package as Auburndale and co.
But hey, its only the personal comments that matters anyway.
And before you say its just G45 on the CPU package. No its not. No DDR2 controller, No FSB and a new interconnect and displaylink.
Last edited by Shintai; 10-04-2008 at 01:12 PM.
Ummm...Overclock?
Runs and hides.
I never said they can't do computers, Gosh. What I said is Intel offers up compelling features that AMD has not, at least not until recently, and even today Intel still provides functionality that AMD does not have. And these are features architected into the chipset.
Heck, AMD went out and mortgaged themselves to the eyeballs to try to be able to bring a platform to market that can compete.
You continue to be of the opinion that if AMD is not viewed upon as tops in everything that somehow this is bashing AMD... this is not bashing AMD this is simply pointing out the obvious. There are many other reasons why Intel has recaptured the market share back to 80% and why they hold 80%. One reason though is what we are talking about. Intel holds the lion share of the commercial market. AMD holds a huge market share in retail, at least here in the US, surpassing Intel by a wide margin. There are again many reasons for this.
Even today, AMD seems to be focusing on the wrong things if they want to crack that commercial space. Just take a moment to listen... AMD touts their platform advantages as being better at graphics -- specifically, 3D gaming and HD decoding. Now think about it, you're an IT manager who is charged with outfitting your company with HW for each employee.... you have two choices. Computer maker A touts and supports being able to play games with acceptable frame rates and watch Blu-Rays smoothly without taxing the CPU, computer maker B advertises and supports being able to track your company assets, administer them remotely even without a functional OS. As a guy who will ultimately need to maintain these computers and wanting to maximize productivity, which one sounds more compelling for their feature set?
Last edited by JumpingJack; 10-04-2008 at 03:19 PM.
One hundred years from now It won't matter
What kind of car I drove What kind of house I lived in
How much money I had in the bank Nor what my cloths looked like.... But The world may be a little better Because, I was important In the life of a child.
-- from "Within My Power" by Forest Witcraft
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks