Intel has answers for AMD’s Fusion - bit-tech.net Forums

Tim S · 19th Sep 2007, 01:24

http://www.bit-tech.net/news/2007/09..._amds_fusion/1

Intel says it will propel integrated graphics performance by a factor of ten by 2010. Will this be enough to take on Fusion?

Bladestorm · 19th Sep 2007, 01:35

Hmm, even 10x almost nothing .. in 3 years ? they'll probably still be at the point that major game engine developers say they wish they'd cut it out and stop making them ;p

Larrabee sounds vaguely interesting, though even if it is relatively easy to develop for, presumably a cpu-based implementation will still be vastly different from what major graphic engine developers have been designing and working with and the hardware industry has been developing graphics cards around ? surely ?

Intel might have the corporate power to launch physics processors into the mainstream though.

Edit add : morning tim

Bluephoenix · 19th Sep 2007, 15:37

the IGP on the CPU is interesting because if done right it will remove any process delay caused by the FSB or similar.

I think discrete graphics will still have a place for those who need more powerful solutions (however this will certainly be a kick in the pants for notebooks)

iwod · 23rd Sep 2007, 13:00

I argee.. 10x increase in 3 years is almost nothing. 20x to 30x would be nice to get gaming on IGP going.

19th Sep 2007, 01:24	#1
Tim S Pewlius Caesar bit-tech Staff Join Date: Nov 2001 Location: Ascot, Berks Posts: 18,021	Intel has answers for AMD’s Fusion http://www.bit-tech.net/news/2007/09..._amds_fusion/1 Intel says it will propel integrated graphics performance by a factor of ten by 2010. Will this be enough to take on Fusion? __________________ Tim on Twitter \| Tim's Blog \| Tim's Flickr The bit-tech Blog \| bit-tech on Twitter \| Join the bit-tech & Custom PC folding team (#35947)

19th Sep 2007, 01:35	#2
Bladestorm Hypermodder Join Date: Dec 2005 Location: United Kingdom Posts: 682	Hmm, even 10x almost nothing .. in 3 years ? they'll probably still be at the point that major game engine developers say they wish they'd cut it out and stop making them ;p Larrabee sounds vaguely interesting, though even if it is relatively easy to develop for, presumably a cpu-based implementation will still be vastly different from what major graphic engine developers have been designing and working with and the hardware industry has been developing graphics cards around ? surely ? Intel might have the corporate power to launch physics processors into the mainstream though. Edit add : morning tim __________________ Athlon 64 X2 3800+ @ 250x10 (1.475v) \| EVGA GTX 260 55nm SSC \| A8N-SLI Premium \| 2x(4GB) Corsair Twinx2048-PC3200C2 \| Asus Xonar DX \| Antec truepower 550w \| Akasa Eclipse-62 DDC12VPlus1, DD TDX, 3/8 tygon r3603 tubing, PA120.2, DD double floppy bay res

19th Sep 2007, 15:37	#3
Bluephoenix Spoon? What spoon? Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: Daytona Beach, FL Posts: 936	the IGP on the CPU is interesting because if done right it will remove any process delay caused by the FSB or similar. I think discrete graphics will still have a place for those who need more powerful solutions (however this will certainly be a kick in the pants for notebooks)

23rd Sep 2007, 13:00	#4
iwod Minimodder Join Date: Jul 2007 Posts: 44	I argee.. 10x increase in 3 years is almost nothing. 20x to 30x would be nice to get gaming on IGP going.