I, for one, got it Reading Carmack's statement was a bit shocking to me, he never struck me as the sellout type.
I, for one, got it Reading Carmack's statement was a bit shocking to me, he never struck me as the sellout type.I do have a serious point to this - Intel can roll out as many talking heads as they like all promising the world "game-changing" performance...
But till they deliver a product that can actually put frames on screens quick enough (without additional "interesting" artifacts) - I'll assume they are full of crap.
But don't be wrong and believe Intel won't go higher with their Xe.
Sure looks like DG1 is the only 10 nm dGPU. I could see them going higher, but that's not going to happen until 7 nm. I will say that it'd be just way too easy for them to give up and just focus on compute... or maybe only get serious several years from now if they manage to get 7 nm working well.
Some rumors going around that Xe dGPUs aren't going well as expected. TGL seems to be going well though.
Intel for some reason has trouble scaling up from the iGPU level. Iris Pro sucked because of that. Haswell's Gen 7.5 HD 4400 was pretty good, but Iris Pro 5200 sucked power. Skylake's Gen 9 HD 520 was again pretty good on the efficiency department, but Iris Pro 580 fell flat on its face.
The Iris Pro 580 needed 3x the EUs, 128MB eDRAM, 3x the TDP and twice the cores to be just 2x as fast as the HD 520 that's in the Skylake generation U processors.
Yep, wccftech interprets this now as DG1 is tigerlake's iGPU in a discrete form factor, with 96EUs.Карточка документа
portal.eaeunion.org
More DG1 sightings... looks like Intel is intending to do a 96 EU model to go along with 128.
Yep, wccftech interprets this now as DG1 is tigerlake's iGPU in a discrete form factor, with 96EUs.
Unless they price it at $99, I can only see this thing as a proof of concept, nothing more.Yea it'll be an alternative in Cometlake and AMD systems. Not having to share TDP or VRAM will make it faster than the one in Tigerlake, at the cost of higher power use and larger area.
Unless they price it at $99, I can only see this thing as a proof of concept, nothing more.
Eww. So much for Intel seriously entering the dGPU market on 10nm. Why, Raja, why?
Well, then you can hope for the Xe architecture to scale up in an efficient manner(unlike with previous efforts) and the 512EU version clocking at 1.5GHz+.
Well, then you can hope for the Xe architecture to scale up in an efficient manner(unlike with previous efforts) and the 512EU version clocking at 1.5GHz+.
So it's just a proof of concept then. Nothing wrong with that, don't misunderstand me. As long as their marketing won't say too much bsYou've seen systems that use dGPUs that seem barely better than the iGPUs right?
Nvidia can't be selling them for much.
I'm assuming DG2 got canned due to bad 10 nm yields and it's competitiveness in general.
I don't think Intel will give up on dGPUs, but only because I do think they have a scalable design capable for gaming coming. But my guess for now is that you won't see that until 7 nm. This one product might be the only thing they release until then.
I just read the write up of Xe on Anandtech, and I'm feeling... Skeptical. Lots of implausible numbers thrown around, like "50x increase!".
I still don't see them delivering this till the end of 2021. Contract or no contract, risk production or no risk production, doesn't matter.Hmm, maybe not though.
They didn't specify what they were comparing it to. They said 40x DP FP Flop per EU.
Intel Gen architectures have 1:4, DP to SP ratio, which would make Ponte Vecchio 10x. That seems crazy right? But nope.
It's because Gen 11 doesn't have DP FP hardware! That's part of their quest to make it power/area efficient on client and gaming.
So 40x could mean back to 1:2, if Gen 11 performs like 1:80 due to emulation.
And Ponte Vecchio has 8 GPU dies per card, times two for two boards, making it total of 16 dies. If Ian is right on each Ponte Vecchio being ~66 TFlops DP with 2400 nodes, then each die has 4TFlop DP compute power.
Which coincidentally is equal to 512EU running at 1GHz with 1:2 DP ratio. But, with a real product, even Linpack isn't 100% efficient. Maybe it'll need 1.2GHz to get that performance. You'll have the Sapphire Rapids chips contribute some too.
He also thinks its possible its only 1200 nodes. Then you are talking each GPU needing to deliver double that which is 8TFlop DP. So 1024EU with 1.2GHz or 512EU with 2.4GHz. The former seems likely.
It could be 1200 nodes. This is based on the fact that it talks about Aurora having 10PB of memory. That means each node with 2x Sapphire Rapids has 8TB of memory.
4TB per CPU makes sense when you consider 8 memory channels and using 512GB, 3rd generation Optane DC PMM devices. That makes slightly more sense than 2TB per CPU using 256GB Optane modules when assuming total of 2400 nodes?
Hmm, maybe not though.
They didn't specify what they were comparing it to. They said 40x DP FP Flop per EU.
Intel Gen architectures have 1:4, DP to SP ratio, which would make Ponte Vecchio 10x. That seems crazy right? But nope.
It's because Gen 11 doesn't have DP FP hardware! That's part of their quest to make it power/area efficient on client and gaming.
So 40x could mean back to 1:2, if Gen 11 performs like 1:80 due to emulation.
And Ponte Vecchio has 8 GPU dies per card, times two for two boards, making it total of 16 dies. If Ian is right on each Ponte Vecchio being ~66 TFlops DP with 2400 nodes, then each die has 4TFlop DP compute power.
Which coincidentally is equal to 512EU running at 1GHz with 1:2 DP ratio. But, with a real product, even Linpack isn't 100% efficient. Maybe it'll need 1.2GHz to get that performance. You'll have the Sapphire Rapids chips contribute some too.
He also thinks its possible its only 1200 nodes. Then you are talking each GPU needing to deliver double that which is 8TFlop DP. So 1024EU with 1.2GHz or 512EU with 2.4GHz. The former seems likely.
It could be 1200 nodes. This is based on the fact that it talks about Aurora having 10PB of memory. That means each node with 2x Sapphire Rapids has 8TB of memory.
4TB per CPU makes sense when you consider 8 memory channels and using 512GB, 3rd generation Optane DC PMM devices. That makes slightly more sense than 2TB per CPU using 256GB Optane modules when assuming total of 2400 nodes?
A new proprietary Intel programming language to develop in, with a software stack that claims to automagically target whatever hardware you need from their wildly disparate product line.
If there is anything they can do right, it's that. Intel is revisiting HSA (essentially). SVM and more. Though I'm skeptical about the hardware interface they'll use for their dGPUs, I think they'll do very well targeting iGPU Gen11 and Gen12/Xe.
This isn't just a GPU API. It's meant to target CPU, GPU, FPGA and AI devices. Good luck to them...