Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 28

Thread: Intel Publishes Ivy Bridge Programming Documentation

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    15,645

    Default Intel Publishes Ivy Bridge Programming Documentation

    Phoronix: Intel Publishes Ivy Bridge Programming Documentation

    Intel quietly pushed out their "Ivy Bridge" graphics programming documentation and register specifications on Friday. This Ivy Bridge graphics core programming documentation spans 17 files spread across three volumes and 2,468 pages of technical details concerning their latest-generation graphics...

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=MTEyNTY

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    515

    Default

    It was announced at the intel-gfx mailing list and on Eugeni's blog, which is aggregated at planet.freedesktop.org. You have an interesting definition of "quietly", I must say

    Also, how exactly is not winning that bid "costing" Nvidia money, can anyone explain the logic of that to me? Does Nvidia now need to pay large sums of money because they didn't get the bid or something? Because *that* would mean "costing them money".

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    224

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gusar View Post
    Also, how exactly is not winning that bid "costing" Nvidia money, can anyone explain the logic of that to me? Does Nvidia now need to pay large sums of money because they didn't get the bid or something? Because *that* would mean "costing them money".
    If Nvidia had had a proper open source driver, they would have gotten that order. Therefore their bad strategy (to keep their drivers closed) just cost them the order, which equals half a billion dollars.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    515

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by M1kkko View Post
    If Nvidia had had a proper open source driver, they would have gotten that order. Therefore their bad strategy (to keep their drivers closed) just cost them the order, which equals half a billion dollars.
    Yeah, it cost the the order. But how is that costing them money? This is what I don't get.

    Hmm, either I read wrong before or the article has changed, it now says "beginning to lose them a great sum of money". I still don't get it. They had money and now they don't anymore? That would mean *losing* money. And there's still other people in posts saying "costing them money".
    Last edited by Gusar; 06-23-2012 at 01:40 PM.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    224

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gusar View Post
    Yeah, it cost the the order. But how is that costing them money? This is what I don't get.
    At the end of the day, they would have had half a billion dollars more than they do now with their bad strategy.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    515

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by M1kkko View Post
    At the end of the day, they would have had half a billion dollars more than they do now with their bad strategy.
    Yeah, but that doesn't mean "losing money" or "costing them money".

    I swear people have gone into total crazy mode since the Linus middle finger. *Total* crazy.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    224

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gusar View Post
    Yeah, but that doesn't mean "losing money" or "costing them money".

    I swear people have gone into total crazy mode since the Linus middle finger. *Total* crazy.
    Perhaps one could say that their strategy is costing them money indirectly, as they missed the opportunity to gain half a billion dollars.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    MA, USA
    Posts
    1,485

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gusar View Post
    Yeah, but that doesn't mean "losing money" or "costing them money".

    I swear people have gone into total crazy mode since the Linus middle finger. *Total* crazy.
    I see your point - literally, nvidia didn't lose any money at all. but since they were the ones with the first offer which they turned down, that is a lost customer, and losing a customer means money loss in future terms. in other words, nvidia lost the money they have yet to receive. no matter what, you are still right, but note that the main issue is nvidia will be less profitable.



    Anyways back to the article, IMO, documentation that in-depth isn't helpful at all. What good is a reference when you've got that many pages to go through? Its a GPU reference, how much info could they possibly supply that'd be relevant to anybody, including intel's own developers?

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    One day I'll reach Alaska, or die trying!
    Posts
    287

    Default

    Well, even on Window$, the HD4000 video display engine and its encoder/decoder is lightyears ahead of Intel's competition. There's a smoothness and clarity to it in Blu-ray (1080p) films I just can't describe. I'd love to see developers tweak Intel's newest GPU and see just how awesome it can perform in Linux. Intel should be applauded for their noble efforts to help drive open documentation on open source platforms. These are exciting times!

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    1

    Default

    Anyone who has taken high school Economics should understand the concept of opportunity-cost. Nvidia could have made a huge profit in selling those graphics cards, but they lost the order. They may not have literally lost cash they had on hand, but they did 'lose money', as they missed the opportunity to make a huge profit.

    ...Back on track, my desktop drives me crazy. Nvidia card, cruddy video acceleration in linux (in ubuntu 12.04 there's a bug that causes vdpau to suck when using Unity 3D). MY RASPBERRY PI can play video smoother than it.
    Definitely getting Ivy Bridge for my next desktop.
    Last edited by sn0w75; 06-23-2012 at 02:41 PM.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •