Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

It Looks Like Intel Could Begin Pushing Graphics Tech More Seriously

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #11
    Originally posted by johnc View Post
    Great. So they're going in the opposite direction of what people want.

    How many people want to spend $400 on an i7 CPU and care anything about the graphics? It's just a waste of die area and money. Put CPU cores there instead.
    Not me. I am waiting for Raven Ridge. Fuck dGPU for everyday use. 4 CPU cores with nice on-die GPU, preferably with HBM is just what I need for all my machines.

    I'm typing this on A8-7600 on system with 3 monitors. It works fine. I'm running all my 2D stuff on it and occasional game or two - nothing really serious - Sauerbraten, billiard or two and occasional Old Hitman under wine. I also run my 2D cad stuff on it fine.

    It's great step away from noisy 200+W crap to have cheap, silent machine right on my desk. And leave it on without thinking about electricity bill, overheating etc.

    NextGen Zen APU could more than cover all of my 3D needs ( like FreeCad, some simulations etc) and if I ever need bigger CPU or GPU muscle, I can have it on separate node.

    Comment


    • #12
      Originally posted by duby229 View Post
      Multiple people on this thread have called Intel graphics fine.... Really? Apparently you guys never worked in a computer repair shop. Almost all times when someone complains there games don't work well, or that there computer is too slow the solution is a clean up and a graphics card replacement or a new laptop sale. The reason why is usually Intel's incapable graphics. Literally the only product they have that can be called Ok-ish is Iris, and only the ones with eDRAM at that. And they are -WAY- overpriced.
      iGPUs are not for gamers. In our office everyone uses iGPUs. Some laptops have hybrid setups, but most ultrabooks only come with iGPU. It's more than sufficient. Even the laptops chips support 3 x 1440p screens or 4k via the dock. We still use 1440p or 2560x1600.

      Comment


      • #13
        Now why do I have a feeling that Ryzen has finally woken Intel up and they're realizing that a Ryzen APU could be a very competitive solution? So far AMD's APUs have had one major disadvantage compared to Intel's CPUs with iGPUs and that's been the CPU. The Ryzen+Vega APU that leaked a couple of months ago looks like a very competitive package if AMD prices it aggressively and knowing them, they probably will.

        I do have to say that I haven't been this exited about competition in the computer hardware days since the Phenom II vs Sandy Bridge days.
        "Why should I want to make anything up? Life's bad enough as it is without wanting to invent any more of it."

        Comment


        • #14
          I'd love Intel have better graphics because they serve as a floor for low end models from nVidia/AMD and game developers want to be playable in these cards.

          Comment


          • #15
            https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=100310

            Could we have more stable drivers for users of their products? Also CherryTrail in Linux consume much more power in suspend and seems like nobody from Intel working on this.

            Comment


            • #16
              Originally posted by t.s. View Post

              I think the problem lies in windows and/or hdd. Just put something other than windows, and put ssd on those laptop. TADA.. The issues' solved.
              That's a joke right?It must be because for decades Intel's DDX driver has been horribly buggy. It's only been the last few years that the modesetting DDX driver essentially fixed that finally, The problem is that most people still aren't using the modesetting DDX and are still experiencing a horribly bugged desktop.
              Last edited by duby229; 15 July 2017, 12:23 PM.

              Comment


              • #17
                Originally posted by caligula View Post

                iGPUs are not for gamers. In our office everyone uses iGPUs. Some laptops have hybrid setups, but most ultrabooks only come with iGPU. It's more than sufficient. Even the laptops chips support 3 x 1440p screens or 4k via the dock. We still use 1440p or 2560x1600.
                That's fine if you want to pay waay too much money for it and essentially have 0 requirement for anything 3 dimensional. (EDIT: At least at those resolutions.)
                Last edited by duby229; 15 July 2017, 12:19 PM.

                Comment


                • #18
                  Originally posted by L_A_G View Post
                  Now why do I have a feeling that Ryzen has finally woken Intel up and they're realizing that a Ryzen APU could be a very competitive solution? So far AMD's APUs have had one major disadvantage compared to Intel's CPUs with iGPUs and that's been the CPU. The Ryzen+Vega APU that leaked a couple of months ago looks like a very competitive package if AMD prices it aggressively and knowing them, they probably will.
                  You know, this is reasonable to assume since the rather knee-jerk reaction to Ryzen, Ryzen Thread-ripper in particular (Also called the X299 platform), has been a rather confusing mess so far, not really impressing enthusiasts by much, and VERY rushed to market, which is uncharacteristic of Intel.
                  I don't think that Intel can afford to be caught flatfooted twice in the PC market, which would be a first. It would break a ton of good will they have gained over the years.
                  Originally posted by caligula View Post
                  iGPUs are not for gamers.
                  They are and they arn't. The games that would work with any iGPU tend to NOT be nearly as taxing as the latest and greatest in the market... if you have no interest in AAA games, VR, you are relatively safe with them. That said they are also the type of components that are tossed to the mainstream consumer, where the money is quite frankly. The fact that Intel has regained an interest in developing iGPU's again is a good thing in the market as a whole, and should honestly have Nvidia rather worried... that is not a game they are in, the integrated circuit, and should the advancement of them ramp up between Intel and AMD, that leaves Nvidia is a very niche market outside of their portable/mobile ARM developments.
                  Last edited by Duve; 15 July 2017, 12:25 PM. Reason: Added more, didn't want to double post.

                  Comment


                  • #19
                    Originally posted by Duve View Post

                    You know, this is reasonable to assume since the rather knee-jerk reaction to Ryzen, Ryzen Thread-ripper in particular (Also called the X299 platform), has been a rather confusing mess so far, not really impressing enthusiasts by much, and VERY rushed to market, which is uncharacteristic of Intel.
                    I don't think that Intel can afford to be caught flatfooted twice in the PC market, which would be a first. It would break a ton of good will they have gained over the years.
                    That's not true, AMD smashed Intel's product lineup first with the Thunderbird, then with Thoroughbred/Barton and then again with the Sledgehammer/Winchester.

                    Comment


                    • #20
                      Originally posted by RussianNeuroMancer View Post
                      Also CherryTrail in Linux consume much more power in suspend and seems like nobody from Intel working on this.
                      Cherrytrail is already an obsolete legacy platform. Fixing those issues won't increase any sales except for low end chinese tablets.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X