Then don’t buy it.They clearly priced it to sell (which in itself invites some thoughts why).
Do you think reviews would have been as positive if the price was $300 or $350-375? To have sustainable discrete product they need 45-50% gross margins, maybe even higher to justify the aggro.
Always seems sensible thing to do when buying a product that will depend on future updates from the company.
I won't.Then don’t buy it.
You should be, enjoy it while it lasts, because it won't last for long.Frankly it has been years since we have seen a decent card at a decent price. I am excited about this development.
WYM AMD is barely on it, AMD is profiting massively off of AI right now even if they are in Nvidia's shadow. Besides, GPU is in fact crucial going forward for their business IDK how you can say otherwise, the entire direction of the consumer PC market is going to involve GPUs more than ever and only making CPUs is not a viable strategy. Look at meteor lake, lunar lake, AMD strix/strix halo, increased AI processing requirements even on consumer processors. A large point of Intel's tiled architecture was so they could do more than just compute, so they could choose to integrate less or more powerful graphics onto their chips. If they were looking to just keep their trash HD graphics forever and only focus on CPU compute they would've stayed monolithic at least for longer they they did.CPUs, which is the core business where they are losing massive market share especially in Data Center that brings almost no money, plus big risk to Laptops share that can kill them if they lose there too.
GPUs don't even factor in this - they can go to NVIDIA tomorrow and offer to kill their GPUs in exchange for NVIDIAs iGPUs across all Intel line fabbed on Intels 18A, unless regulators block this (which I think should happen, but who knows), or do that with AMD which will be cleared by regulators, either way it's 💀 to Arc
That boat has sailed, even AMD is barely on it, Intel board understands that bit well.
Hey, if it gets dropped next year, at least people who get it will have gotten themselves a piece of historyYou should be, enjoy it while it lasts, because it won't last for long.
You can get this with a simple optical shrink for ACM.B580 +25% perf at 1080p with 272 mm2 vs 406 mm2 A770. 86% increase
That's very (completely) irrelevant for GPUs as a whole.BMG +25% perf at 1080p with 19.6 vs 21.7 transistors. 38% increase transistor for transistor
Some clues here: https://www.realworldtech.com/tile-based-rasterization-nvidia-gpus/Interesting change at BMG, could anyone talk about what exactly this does?
Here are a couple obvious fundamental problems with GPUs as far as Intel is concerned (that affects AMD too):Besides, GPU is in fact crucial going forward for their business IDK how you can say otherwise
A large point of Intel's tiled architecture was so they could do more than just compute, so they could choose to integrate less or more powerful graphics onto their chips.
I am glad your finances can support that move.I won't.
You should be, enjoy it while it lasts, because it won't last for long.
No you can't, N6 does not offer at all close to a 25% performance increase especially given that the b580 uses less transistors resulting in a 38% performance increase transistor for transistor. As for density increase like I said earlier BMG provides 33% more transistors per mm2 while N5 is only 20% more dense by TSMC numbers which you said your self are often larger nominally than in real life. That means that BMG is 15-25% more dense by design alone regardless of node.You can get this with a simple optical shrink for ACM.
Sucks relative to what? Power is better than 4060 and way better than rx 7600 while offering higher performance than both cards, idle power is a problem though i'll heed to that. Perf/area BMG is worse than its competition, but at the same time it's leagues better than ACM which is the entire argument here. What is important is that BMG has made massive improvements over ACM and that its a good sign of what's to come with future generations.That's very (completely) irrelevant for GPUs as a whole.
All that matters if final perf/power/area and boy does BMG suck at that.
Why are you so concerned?We would appreciate it if you stop crapping on intel’s efforts.
Because I want three viable vendors for cards it’s a basic principle that you need three competitors to have a healthy market that has innovation and reasonable prices. One dominant market leader is not a healthy market.Why are you so concerned?
How would me "crapping on Intel's efforts" here would make any difference to Intel's success or failure?Because I want three viable vendors for cards
Show me an industry where there is one provider AND prices are reasonable & innovation occurs. Utilities as in gas or electric don’t count.How would me "crapping on Intel's efforts" here would make any difference to Intel's success or failure?
3 competitors often don't work in this sort of super high tech market, at best it's two and often it's just one, which is the worst situation possible, at least with two things can be balanced. Intel is just undermining AMD here by dumping guaranteed to be loss making (costs other than manufacturing which are heavy) product, this is a predatory practice actually that should not be welcomed if you want healthy competition.
It's not even clear that AMD can make it now in GPU market with NVIDIA getting crazy revenues from AI.
Do you know what shrink means? Put ACM-G10 on N5 and you wouldn't be far if at all.No you can't, N6 does not offer at all close to a 25% performance increase especially given that the b580
Irrelevant metric.given that the b580 uses less transistors resulting in a 38% performance increase transistor for transistor
Relative to what's like 3 weeks away (frankly it sucks balls even now, but will be outright catastrophic soon).Sucks relative to what?
what thePower is better than 4060 and way better than rx 7600
It's not worse, it's catastrophic.Perf/area BMG is worse than its competition, but at the same time it's leagues better than ACM which is the entire argument here.
No it's not, not relative to contemporary comp.but at the same time it's leagues better than ACM which is the entire argument here
So you are predicting RX 8600 8GB will crap on B580 and cost $259.99 max?Relative to what's like 3 weeks away (frankly it sucks balls even now, but will be outright catastrophic soon).
No, just PPA and PPW.So you are predicting RX 8600 8GB will crap on B580 and cost $259.99 max?
Never happens for sure, but if that's what you want to avoid (like myself) then backing weak 3rd horse with broken legs will only undercut 2nd horse that is trying desperately to catch up with the market leader here, supporting Intel in this is supporting NVIDIA's dominance.Show me an industry where there is one provider AND prices are reasonable & innovation occurs. Utilities as in gas or electric don’t count.
Yes did you even read my post. I said that BMG is 33% denser than ACM, N5 is only 20% denser on paper (which means less in actual designs) meaning that BMG is 15-25% denser than ACM with BOTH ON N5 while still offering a noticeable performance improvement.Do you know what shrink means? Put ACM-G10 on N5 and you wouldn't be far if at all.
IDK about that, I know for one thing Nvidia isn't going to offer anything better price/perf. As for profitability both Nvidia and AMD nxet-gen will be much more profitable to B580 but I don't think either of them will severely upset the price tier that the B580 is at.Relative to what's like 3 weeks away (frankly it sucks balls even now, but will be outright catastrophic soon).
I was wrong, perf/power is worse than 4060 normally but close enough to trade blows depending on game/resolution, better than 7600.Power is better than 4060 and way better than rx 7600
Blackwell is not likely to provide any price/perf improvements while even if RDNA 4 provides a +25% performance for their low-end GPU AND prices their low-end offering extremely aggressively, battlemage will still be competitive at least when it comes to ray-tracing and 1440p performance.No it's not, not relative to contemporary comp.
Seems like Intel is a much better bet with oneAPI and plethora of software libs that are meant to be used with it
I don't really like to support monopolies. On the other hand, I think it's great to support open source software and Intel does it open source. Here you go: oneDNN
It's a dead API (in GPU field) - it was touched by Raja ...
For what you want to do - get NVIDIA.
Yes, me neither, but you said you wanted to do the following -I don't really like to support monopolies
would like to utilize cards in a different way (AI, image / video processing, coding)
Radeon is interesting, but so far I've been more disappointed than not
"Source: I made it up"ROCm (open source) is developing more rapidly than before, by comparison oneAPI is dead.