Apple can actually make an incredible gpu

[holytoledo]

So you're saying Apple didn't request the SLI variant and simply picked it "off the shelf" (secret shelf) that IMG had for them?

 

Would love to see your link for this just because I want to read up on this.

 

It's great performance and we've all won because of it. I didn't even know about IMG but that's some good work!

[jrfox87]

I hope Apple doesn't take this as a reason to start making their own CPUs and even GPUs. 

 

Going from PPC to x86 was a good thing for everyone. It made things a hell of a lot easier to deal with. Please don't go back to truly making your own walled garden of hardware. 

 

Or do it. You'll still probably sell roughly a shit ton of products every minute. 

 

I think the biggest thing that would have them considering it right now is the massive broadwell delay. You just know Apple is not happy with Intel right now as its likely screwed up their product release plans.

[Mew]

3fps...

The air 2 is running a higher resolution because that test is on screen fps.

[flibberdipper]

Damn. That is pretty impressive.

[patrickjp93]

I would encourage them to pursue x86 though. They have the capability, imo, to compete with Intel and actually push Intel to improve even more.

Apple can't push Intel without feeding Intel in the x86 realm. They'd have to go through ARM. Also, until software catches up, Intel has no reason to innovate.

[Mew]

Apple can't push Intel without feeding Intel in the x86 realm. They'd have to go through ARM. Also, until software catches up, Intel has no reason to innovate.

There is a reason to innovate, if they just rebrand the same thing over and over instead of what they're doing right now, no one would have a reason to upgrade. Also, Apple is the reason that Intel Iris and Iris Pro graphics are actually competitive with low end discrete mobile gpu.

[patrickjp93]

There is a reason to innovate, if they just rebrand the same thing over and over instead of what they're doing right now, no one would have a reason to upgrade. Also, Apple is the reason that Intel Iris and Iris Pro graphics are actually competitive with low end discrete mobile gpu.

Intel originally had no plans for intense 3D graphics in its GPUs. The main idea was to develop for OpenCL compute and provide enough graphics power for bare-bones usage in business applications. Since CPU innovation really has nowhere to go apart from lowering power consumption, now Intel is pushing its iGPU, and I think we very well see AMD's and Nvidia's lowend dGPU sales swallowed up.

Also, you forget about the swathes of PCs around the world still hosting Core 2 Duos and Quads.

[wrath]

hmm nice

[Mew]

Intel originally had no plans for intense 3D graphics in its GPUs. The main idea was to develop for OpenCL compute and provide enough graphics power for bare-bones usage in business applications. Since CPU innovation really has nowhere to go apart from lowering power consumption, now Intel is pushing its iGPU, and I think we very well see AMD's and Nvidia's lowend dGPU sales swallowed up.

Also, you forget about the swathes of PCs around the world still hosting Core 2 Duos and Quads.

Yeah, at my school they use ivy bridge in the school library, but they use c2q in the engineering labs. it's a pain to use the c2q

[patrickjp93]

Yeah, at my school they use ivy bridge in the school library, but they use c2q in the engineering labs. it's a pain to use the c2q

No need to tell me.

[LukeTim]

I think you both misunderstood me.

 

IMG did the work of designing the cores AND putting them together, Apple just put them in a SoC.

 

Apple hold a large stake in IMG so they get specially designs solutions that nobody else gets access to, at least not for any reasonable length of time.

 

I can assure you that is not how it works. Apple probably approached IMG to ask if it could be done and to make sure they had the licensing worked out for them to use 2 of the same IP Cores in one SoC... and Apple probably did a lot of the work on it themselves (they haven't been hiring GPU engineers for the past few years for nothing) whilst IMG will have provided a lot of technical support in the process. I work in the industry. Trust me.

 

However, I freely admit that this is assuming that it is indeed two GX6450s stuck together like Anandtech says. If it is a whole 8-cluster design that's perhaps a different story.

[Mew]

I can assure you that is not how it works. Apple probably approached IMG to ask if it could be done and to make sure they had the licensing worked out for them to use 2 of the same IP Cores in one SoC... and Apple probably did a lot of the work on it themselves (they haven't been hiring GPU engineers for the past few years for nothing) whilst IMG will have provided a lot of technical support in the process. I work in the industry. Trust me.

 

However, I freely admit that this is assuming that it is indeed two GX6450s stuck together like Anandtech says. If it is a whole 8-cluster design that's perhaps a different story.

 

Anandtech analysis are usually spot on and very in depth. An 8-cluster gpu design from Imagination doesn't even exist- 

 

With 8 clearly visible GPU clusters, there is no question at this point that A8X is not using a GX6650, but rather something more. And this is perhaps where the most interesting point comes up, due to the fact that Imagination does not have an official 8 cluster Series6XT GPU design. While Apple licenses PowerVR GPU cores, not unlike their ARM IP license they are free to modify the Imagination designs to fit their needs, resulting in an unusual semi-custom aspect to their designs (and explaining what Apple has been doing with so many GPU engineers over the last couple of years). In this case it appears that Apple has taken the GX6450 design and created a new design from it, culminating in an 8 cluster Series6XT design. Officially this design has no public designation – while it’s based on an Imagination design it is not an official Imagination design, and of course Apple doesn’t reveal codenames – but for the sake of simplicity we are calling it the GXA6850.

[Jcowley]

I can assure you that is not how it works. Apple probably approached IMG to ask if it could be done and to make sure they had the licensing worked out for them to use 2 of the same IP Cores in one SoC... and Apple probably did a lot of the work on it themselves (they haven't been hiring GPU engineers for the past few years for nothing) whilst IMG will have provided a lot of technical support in the process. I work in the industry. Trust me.

 

However, I freely admit that this is assuming that it is indeed two GX6450s stuck together like Anandtech says. If it is a whole 8-cluster design that's perhaps a different story.

 

I also work in the industry - so unless we both work similarly close to one or both of these companies one of us is wrong and I don't believe it's me.

[LukeTim]

I also work in the industry - so unless we both work similarly close to one or both of these companies one of us is wrong and I don't believe it's me.

 

I will admit, I was speculating based on what I have read from Anandtech; wrongly using my assumed authority as being in the industry as a justification.

You may well be right. We don't really know.