Intel's Larrabee Graphics Chip Delayed Indefinitely

[Speedy2]

Nope... See there WERE actual ATi chips by now and they were very good value for money.

(lots of blah blah deleted)

Yeah right, if I could actually BUY an 5800 card anywhere that would be true. Is this just another blind fanboy speaking here who cannot accept criticism or facts about the "other" side? Jeez.
Fermi WILL come out, it will be like 5 months behind ATI and it can be expected that the fastest cards will be quite a bit faster than ATI's current offerings and also more expensive. Just like it was before 5xxx came out.

Intel admit defeat, funny man. Funny.

You do realise that Tegra is just a re-branded ARM chip?

Another one of these empty statements. Intel already accepted defeat big time when they killed the Pentium 4 and continued developing the Pentium-M (later to be known as the Core) instead. They accepted defeat when they ditched Rambus and are now ditching FB-DIMMs in favour of DDR-RAM. You are just talking BS there.
The CPU part of Tegra is not what Intel is after but the GPU part. It can play HD flawlessly and consumes far less power than Intel's forays into the low power sector. And it's already THERE, I can't buy any Intel systems-on-a-chip for mobile devices.

 

[Eidorian]

It looks like Clarkdale and Arrandale will at least have limited GPGPU functions.

 

[flopticalcube]

It looks like Clarkdale and Arrandale will have at least limited GPGPU functions.

But the benefit will certainly be limited since they share the same module which has a finite power capability.

 

[TMar]

I have said for years that Intel needed to try to move Nvidia under their thumb, the same way AMD did with ATI. Intel's more to not license Nvidia is just a tactic to weaken their market value.

As far as "nVidia has pushed themselves into irrelevance", maybe you haven't been around long enough but Nvidia and ATI have always had this seesaw game of going back and forth with each other. And every time one of theses flip-flops happen someone like you always points to this nonexistent sinking ship. Welcome to 15 years ago.

 

[Eidorian]

But the benefit will certainly be limited since they share the same module which has a finite power capability.

TDP should be already calculated for full CPU and IGP load. You won't get Turbo Boost from either component though.

 

[MorphingDragon]

OpenCL was also based on Nvidia's CUDA, as opposed to ATI's stream

Proof?

BTW, the so called high performance CUDA cards are just different drivers and more ram. Same goes with the Quadro cards. Proven by the fact you can get a Quadro card by soft modding its GeForce equivalence.

 

[holmesf]

Proof?

BTW, the so called high performance CUDA cards are just different drivers and more ram. Same goes with the Quadro cards. Proven by the fact you can get a Quadro card by soft modding its GeForce equivalence.

Of course the official position is that OpenCL was developed in collaboration with both AMD and Nvidia. But having used both, I can tell you that OpenCL and CUDA are practically identical, the main difference being that OpenCL is compiled at runtime.

Even AMD admits the two are practically the same (look at the tables comparing concepts and interfaces between C for CUDA and OpenCL):
http://developer.amd.com/documentation/articles/pages/OpenCL-and-the-ATI-Stream-v2.0-Beta.aspx

 

[MorphingDragon]

(lots of blah blah deleted)

Yeah right, if I could actually BUY an 5800 card anywhere that would be true.

It all depends on wherre you live.

Is this just another blind fanboy speaking here who cannot accept criticism or facts about the "other" side? Jeez.
Fermi WILL come out, it will be like 5 months behind ATI and it can be expected that the fastest cards will be quite a bit faster than ATI's current offerings and also more expensive. Just like it was before 5xxx came out.

Theres a difference between Critique and noise.

 

[MorphingDragon]

Of course the official position is that OpenCL was developed in collaboration with both AMD and Nvidia. But having used both, I can tell you that OpenCL and CUDA are practically identical, the main difference being that OpenCL is compiled at runtime.

Even AMD admits the two are practically the same (look at the tables comparing concepts and interfaces between C for CUDA and OpenCL):
http://developer.amd.com/documentation/articles/pages/OpenCL-and-the-ATI-Stream-v2.0-Beta.aspx

Similar and same are different words, look them up.

If you're calling the programming Syntax similar then I agree with you. But if you're saying the the APIs are EXACTLY the same then I have to digress.

 

[holmesf]

If you're calling the programming Syntax similar then I agree with you. But if you're saying the the APIs are EXACTLY the same then I have to digress.

The syntax is similar, but more than that the most important abstractions (thread blocks = work groups, local memory = shared memory, etc) have a one to one mapping. I wouldn't say the APIs are exactly the same, because they aren't. But the APIs don't differ in fundamental ways either (other than the fact that CUDA is a C extension and OpenCL is compiled at runtime).

 

[twoodcc]

i guess they hit a road block with this. i'm sure apple is pushing intel to make this, and make it right. we'll see next year hopefully