Intel confirms Arc A380, Arc A350 desktop GPU names through a leaked driver

[PocketNerd]

6 hours ago, RejZoR said:

I wonder who will be brave enough to buy something entirely new and unproven, even if it's from known vendor

Completely unrelated, but I bought JBL's Quantum gaming headphones despite being a 1st gen product and have not regretted the decision.

As for GPUs and Intel, would be worth giving drivers time to mature but sure.

[HenrySalayne]

14 hours ago, RejZoR said:

I wonder who will be brave enough to buy something entirely new and unproven, even if it's from known vendor like Intel.

Definitely! It will be probably quite hard to sell new GPUs in global chip shortage while manufacturers like Nvidia relaunch 4 year old designs to squeeze out some more money.

7 hours ago, PocketNerd said:

Completely unrelated, but I bought JBL's Quantum gaming headphones despite being a 1st gen product and have not regretted the decision.

Now JBL is stealing the "Quantum" term from Digico.

[RejZoR]

7 hours ago, PocketNerd said:

Completely unrelated, but I bought JBL's Quantum gaming headphones despite being a 1st gen product and have not regretted the decision.

As for GPUs and Intel, would be worth giving drivers time to mature but sure.

I mean, it's not like JBL is a newcomer in headphones department... Sure Intel sticks GPU's into every single CPU almost, but there is a big difference between low power garbage GPU's that can barely run CS:GO from whatever years ago it was released and high power GPU that can push out 100fps at 4K in a modern game with ray tracing.

[porina]

8 hours ago, NumLock21 said:

In other news lawyers from Airbus told Intel to drop to change their model numbers because their customers are getting confused between the A380 plane and A380 video card.

If Airbus were to attempt something like that under trademark law, they would likely lose. Trademarks are applied for and granted for certain business areas. If two similar marks are used in widely differing areas, there's no problem.

 

37 minutes ago, RejZoR said:

Sure Intel sticks GPU's into every single CPU almost, but there is a big difference between low power garbage GPU's that can barely run CS:GO from whatever years ago it was released and high power GPU that can push out 100fps at 4K in a modern game with ray tracing.

I think the mistake that is often made is thinking Intel are going from nothing to being a competitive player in the dGPU field. We've already had initial Xe in two generations of desktop and mobile CPUs. Alchemist will be an update from that. Size I think matters relatively little as GPUs scale well. You just do much more of the same on a bigger GPU than a smaller one of the same feature set. There might be some rough edges from game developers not optimising or testing as much on Intel to date, but that is not likely to be more than a short term problem at worst.

[WolframaticAlpha]

12 hours ago, Quackers101 said:

also that oneAPI can help a lot. not sure how good it will perform with oneAPI but cool

oneAPI will help with compute only. I have tried OpenVINO and it was pretty fine. So the developer experience wouldn't be that hellish(but it obviously depends upon the complexity of the program)

 

 Coincidentially the last A380 rolled off the line

17 hours ago, RejZoR said:

I remember old days when XGI existed and released Volari series graphic cards. XGI consisted of SiS and Trident engineers which back then was still very well known. And even back then I wondered, who bought those cards. Turns out not many as it didn't work out well, mostly because of under performing and software issues. Mainly software issues

Intel has much deeper pockets, but it will need 2-4 generations before actually getting competitive. I would predict that most of Intel's sales will come from OEMs like Hell and HP. I wouldnt be too surprised if Intel brings out dirty bundling deals and/or nvidia/AMD react with some other crap. The fate of their GPUs really lies in the hands of management and OEMs

[Lightwreather]

39 minutes ago, WolframaticAlpha said:

Coincidentially the last A380 rolled off the line

I'm still crying about that.......

It's not a phase mom

[leadeater]

53 minutes ago, WolframaticAlpha said:

OEMs like Hell

lol oddly accurate to their current day company and products

[CarlBar]

On 12/19/2021 at 11:06 AM, leadeater said:

Intel Marketing Team: "Why is everyone talking about airplanes?!?!"

 

https://i.imgur.com/hqqJ2up.mp4

[AndreiArgeanu]

At this rate, by the time Intel releases these gpu's you'll actually be able to find 30 series cards in stock at MSRP at which point it'll be far more difficult for them to sell unless they provide a great value proposition compare to what would be available.

[porina]

1 hour ago, AndreiArgeanu said:

At this rate, by the time Intel releases these gpu's you'll actually be able to find 30 series cards in stock at MSRP at which point it'll be far more difficult for them to sell unless they provide a great value proposition compare to what would be available.

At what rate? The release window is given as Q1 2022 so within about 3 months at most from now. While I can't say I can predict the future, I don't see anything to suggest the semiconductor supply issues will be sufficiently sorted any time in the next year. The only possible "maybe" impacting factor for gaming GPUs specifically is if Ethereum manages to go POS at the latest given date of mid 2022 having enough impact in itself. But that will be well after the launch window if it even happens.

 

I'm more interested to find out just how much did Intel order from TSMC? I would love it if they straight off overtook AMD to take 2nd position in the dGPU market.

[Quackers101]

49 minutes ago, porina said:

I would love it if they straight off overtook AMD to take 2nd position in the dGPU market.

I guess it depends on the deals done. like also for the consoles. Since intel will have wider support with both AI and raytracing. they and nvidia might be more considered by others? unless AMD does something or holds power in other areas?

 

It would be fun if AMD can push back, if not, it might not be as fun.

9 hours ago, porina said:

I think the mistake that is often made is thinking Intel are going from nothing to being a competitive player in the dGPU field. We've already had initial Xe in two generations of desktop and mobile CPUs. Alchemist will be an update from that. Size I think matters relatively little as GPUs scale well. You just do much more of the same on a bigger GPU than a smaller one of the same feature set.

yes and no, got to admit they do likely have a lot more experience and bigger than certain others. As for the GPU itself, it can be hard for them to hit the right notes on the GPU market and first mistakes for such a card. Although they have done some NUC's as well. so it would be fun to see what they do, and hopefully it ads something to the market.

9 hours ago, porina said:

There might be some rough edges from game developers not optimising or testing as much on Intel to date, but that is not likely to be more than a short term problem at worst.

Not sure it will be that of an issue, so long the games aren't using some secret sauce?

[porina]

17 minutes ago, Quackers101 said:

I guess it depends on the deals done. like also for the consoles. Since intel will have wider support with both AI and raytracing. they and nvidia might be more considered by others? unless AMD does something or holds power in other areas?

My thinking may be somewhat more simplistic. While not a great data source, the Steam Hardware Survey is possibly the best we have. Current gen AMD dGPUs are hardly making a dent in gaming space. The reasons may be varied. Is it mining? Is it performance? Or my best guess: they're simply not making that many of them. AMD's prioritising their fab allocation on more profitable areas. I have no evidence to back it up, but even at elevated GPU pricing, I suspect profitability is not as good as server tier silicon or the consoles.

 

So for that reason, I have to wonder if Intel might outsell AMD dGPUs in the short term. If Intel wants to get traction, they have to get the numbers out there.

[leadeater]

3 hours ago, porina said:

AMD's prioritising their fab allocation on more profitable areas. I have no evidence to back it up, but even at elevated GPU pricing, I suspect profitability is not as good as server tier silicon or the consoles.

Well if I were AMD I'd be putting more allocation towards CPUs than GPUs as that is actually more profitable market and also where they have the largest performance lead. Second would be custom SoCs i.e. Sony and Microsoft.

 

That may be quick surface level analysis of the situation but it doesn't really take much to know Nvidia is in a far stronger competitive position than Intel is for their respective markets and we know the addressable market size for CPUs is larger than GPUs. As for consoles, well those sell by the truck loads and every single one of them will have your own chip it in unlike OEM PC market sales.