can Intel's Iris PRO inside Broadwell be a low-end discrete video card killer?

[juretrn]

So, people who don't want a discrete GPU can now get a CPU with decent iGPU and NOT suffer the horribleness that is an APU.

[Sakkura]

I'm pretty sure even at that point Intel just did a hack job on a licensed 3DFX or Imagination technologies design. I'll start digging back through the history. I don't think Intel's been doing in-house architectures for 9 years, but maybe I'm wrong, of course lord knows they weren't trying to do anything big with it, and I wouldn't count anything until around Nehalem against their 15-year victory clock (quoting the original Intel-IBM war where Intel went from ground 0 to market domination).

 

Intel bought Chips & Technologies and Real3D in the 90s. In 1998 the Intel740 graphics card was released, based on their technology. It was total shit, but it provided the foundations for Intel's later GMA architectures (on the desktop chipsets; for their phone/tablet/netbook Atom chips, they licensed PowerVR).

 

Intel actually licensed the graphics technology from Real3D to 3dfx in 2000.

[patrickjp93]

Intel bought Chips & Technologies and Real3D in the 90s. In 1998 the Intel740 graphics card was released, based on their technology. It was total shit, but it provided the foundations for Intel's later GMA architectures (on the desktop chipsets; for their phone/tablet/netbook Atom chips, they licensed PowerVR).

Intel actually licensed the graphics technology from Real3D to 3dfx in 2000.

But again, do we consider that an actual effort to go into competition with ATI/3DFX/Nvidia? I don't. The use was obvious, and Intel didn't expand much on the designs except the bare minimum to keep office users happy.

[Megahurt]

Where's the proof of scaling issues?

AMD's own numbers :

 

 

from :

 

http://www.anandtech.com/show/9319/amd-launches-carrizo-the-laptop-leap-of-efficiency-and-architecture-updates/3

 

Per core pair, so per module, so around 40W per cpu.

[peanutsrevenge]

Given Intel are working with 14nm to AMDs 28nm, it's no wonder they have more performance.

[Sakkura]

But again, do we consider that an actual effort to go into competition with ATI/3DFX/Nvidia? I don't. The use was obvious, and Intel didn't expand much on the designs except the bare minimum to keep office users happy.

 

Doesn't really affect the question of whether the tech was developed by Intel. Anyway, I think they intended to offer serious competition, but the product just fell flat.

 

I love the excerpt from this article from before the release:

 

 

Having staked claim to much of your PC's guts--from the CPU and supporting chip set to the motherboard itself--Intel is now eyeing the graphics system with its first desktop graphics chip, the Intel740.

 

Early indications point to an impressive debut. Several major graphics board vendors, including Diamond Multimedia, Number Nine, and STB Systems, say they will sell 2D-3D boards based on the Intel740; Intel can also put the chip directly on motherboards. And Chips & Technologies, a provider of graphics chips for notebooks, is now part of Intel. Does all of this mean that smaller chip makers will be run out of town?

 

Goliath, Meet the Davids

 

Here is a more detailed story of the Intel740.

[patrickjp93]

AMD's own numbers :

from :

http://www.anandtech.com/show/9319/amd-launches-carrizo-the-laptop-leap-of-efficiency-and-architecture-updates/3

Per core pair, so per module, so around 40W per cpu.

Hmm, interesting, though they could revise the CPU HDL to be better oriented. The scaling may also not be a perfectly monotonic function.

[patrickjp93]

Given Intel are working with 14nm to AMDs 28nm, it's no wonder they have more performance.

That has nothing to do with it other than the end TDP. Seriously people, performance is based on architecture as long as we're not performing near TJunction levels of heat.

[peanutsrevenge]

That has nothing to do with it other than the end TDP. Seriously people, performance is based on architecture as long as we're not performing near TJunction levels of heat.

It means they have far more space to put stuff on the die without a MASSIVE chip which is also expensive, hence, a huge amount of space for GPU because they're both so small.

[patrickjp93]

It means they have far more space to put stuff on the die without a MASSIVE chip which is also expensive, hence, a huge amount of space for GPU because they're both so small.

That would only affect prices and yields, and look at how many transistors Intel and AMD are working with. Intel's at what, 1.7 billion now with the 5775C? AMD's at 3.1 billion with the Carrizo quad cores. The node size has little to do with it other than thermals and electrical efficiency, and Denard Scaling already hit diminishing returns around 65nm.

[Sakkura]

That would only affect prices and yields, and look at how many transistors Intel and AMD are working with. Intel's at what, 1.7 billion now with the 5775C? AMD's at 3.1 billion with the Carrizo quad cores. The node size has little to do with it other than thermals and electrical efficiency, and Denard Scaling already hit diminishing returns around 65nm.

 

The Core i7-5775C does not have an integrated southbridge like Carrizo does, and its transistor count is probably much higher than 1.7 billion. In fact it's pretty much certain that it's above 1.9 billion. But I don't think anyone has the actual number.

[Thony]

Forecast: AMD out of business in 5 years.

[Opcode]

Forecast: AMD out of business in 5 years.

Well Kaveri/Godavari are two year old products... That's like comparing a GTX 980 to a GTX 680. We won't know if Intel is going to throw any kind of dominance over AMD in integrated graphics until we see more finalized mainstream products from both of them (Skylake + Zen).

[Thony]

Well Kaveri/Godavari are two year old products... That's like comparing a GTX 980 to a GTX 680. We won't know if Intel is going to throw any kind of dominance over AMD in integrated graphics until we see more finalized mainstream products from both of them (Skylake + Zen).

Iris pro is looking like a killer to many people. But I get you, we don't have much info on that new AMD chip in terms of real life performance.

[Sakkura]

Forecast: AMD out of business in 5 years.

 

Repost.

 

http://linustechtips.com/main/topic/371294-kerrisdale-capital-investment-analysts-predict-that-amd-will-most-likely-have-to-file-for-bankruptcy-in-2020/

[Thony]

Repost.

http://linustechtips.com/main/topic/371294-kerrisdale-capital-investment-analysts-predict-that-amd-will-most-likely-have-to-file-for-bankruptcy-in-2020/

Forgot about this.

The AMD lady has a very tough job to do. Kinda feel sorry for AMD but after all its their own fault...

Funny I how got the "5 years" spot on haha. Shame I didn't get that yesterday with freaking £74m jackpot in Euro millions :'(

[patrickjp93]

The Core i7-5775C does not have an integrated southbridge like Carrizo does, and its transistor count is probably much higher than 1.7 billion. In fact it's pretty much certain that it's above 1.9 billion. But I don't think anyone has the actual number.

The Z97 chipset is only 230 million transistors. Not even remotely worth a mention.

[Sakkura]

The Z97 chipset is only 230 million transistors. Not even remotely worth a mention.

 

Of course it's worth mentioning, in addition to the fact that your 1.7 billion number is just wrong.

[Guest Strangerbob]

adaptive sync support or BUST

[Guest Strangerbob]

oh and for all the AMD haters...  i really hope amd does quit and you all get what you deserve

[patrickjp93]

Of course it's worth mentioning, in addition to the fact that your 1.7 billion number is just wrong.

Core M was 1.3 according to ExtremeTech. I guessed given CPU cores don't make up the majority of the die, and I threw a question mark at the end. You don't have to be an ass. And actually the estimates of the 5775C altogether are 1.9 billion across both dies (eDRAM is still built on either 32nm or 45 nm, and I forget which). In other words, AMD is still 50% less efficient than intel with the transistor budget, even if you did throw 200 million more on for the south bridge!

[patrickjp93]

adaptive sync support or BUST

It's already there in the eDP standard. Now, does Intel have the frame rates to make it worthwhile? No.

[Guest Strangerbob]

It's already there in the eDP standard. Now, does Intel have the frame rates to make it worthwhile? No.

 

You have ZERO clue what adaptive sync is if you think it requires you to have some massive framerate.

[patrickjp93]

You have ZERO clue what adaptive sync is if you think it requires you to have some massive framerate.

facepalm*. There's no point in having adaptive sync unless your frame rates bounce around between highs and lows a lot. Unless you're consistently flitting between 70+ and 50-, there's no point in having a FreeSync/GSync product, based on Adaptive Sync or not. Does Intel have the graphics power and lack of uniformity necessary to justify investment in such a product feature? No.

[Sakkura]

Core M was 1.3 according to ExtremeTech. I guessed given CPU cores don't make up the majority of the die, and I threw a question mark at the end. You don't have to be an ass. And actually the estimates of the 5775C altogether are 1.9 billion across both dies (eDRAM is still built on either 32nm or 45 nm, and I forget which). In other words, AMD is still 50% less efficient than intel with the transistor budget, even if you did throw 200 million more on for the south bridge!

 

Broadwell-U is 1.9 billion transistors, so Broadwell-H is automatically going to be more than that. And then you have to account for the chipset, which is a significant difference.