Originally posted by blacknova
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Bye DirectX?
Collapse
X
-
Originally posted by XorEaxEax View PostThe beauty of OpenCL would be that programs written in it runs on both CPU and GPU using the same code.
Comment
-
Originally posted by TwistedLincoln View PostIf I remember correctly, there are parts of OpenCL that are covered by software patents, and as a result support for it cannot be completely implimented in Free Software projects that are to be distributed in countries that recognize such patents, such as the US.
Comment
-
To me, the likely reason AMD and Intel are pouring money into OpenCL is because it fits with their GPU+CPU Fusion/Larrabee platforms which I'm guessing is where computing is heading. Having both GPU and CPU on the same chip allows for access to the same shared memory caches and removes the need to ship data on the (comparatively very slow) PCI bus.
And then it's a matter of adding more and more cpu (and perhaps gpu?) cores onto the chip to be able to compete with discrete graphics in performance, with OpenCL being the framework to enable efficient use of these cores in parallell (although there are others, they are tied to specific platforms like CUDA (NVidia), DirectCompute (Windows) ).
The losers here would be NVidia since afaik they do not have a licence to implement the x86/x64 instruction set (which is just insane, talk about closing the market for competition!) and is therefore unable to compete by offering the same type of solution. If this is indeed the case then NVidia must doing anything in their power to make sure that their dedicated GPU's stay well ahead of the CPU+GPU solutions from Intel/AMD.
Again this is just me speculating, I'm hardly an expert in these matters.
Comment
-
Originally posted by XorEaxEax View PostTo me, the likely reason AMD and Intel are pouring money into OpenCL is because it fits with their GPU+CPU Fusion/Larrabee platforms which I'm guessing is where computing is heading.
Having both GPU and CPU on the same chip allows for access to the same shared memory caches and removes the need to ship data on the (comparatively very slow) PCI bus.
And then it's a matter of adding more and more cpu (and perhaps gpu?) cores onto the chip to be able to compete with discrete graphics in performance, with OpenCL being the framework to enable efficient use of these cores in parallell (although there are others, they are tied to specific platforms like CUDA (NVidia), DirectCompute (Windows) ).
The losers here would be NVidia since afaik they do not have a licence to implement the x86/x64 instruction set (which is just insane, talk about closing the market for competition!) and is therefore unable to compete by offering the same type of solution. If this is indeed the case then NVidia must doing anything in their power to make sure that their dedicated GPU's stay well ahead of the CPU+GPU solutions from Intel/AMD.
Comment
-
Originally posted by XorEaxEax View PostHaving both GPU and CPU on the same chip allows for access to the same shared memory caches and removes the need to ship data on the (comparatively very slow) PCI bus.
Having the GPU on-chip is really only a performance benefit if you can use it as a co-processor rather than for 3D rendering. A separate CPU and GPU built by competent design teams will otherwise always be capable of faster 3D rendering than a single chip because you have twice as many transistors and can consume far more power.
Comment
Comment