People “probably won’t” need discrete graphics cards anymore – Intel

[ClosetFanBoy]

http://www.tgdaily.com/content/view/36726/135/

Maybe? Maybe not? I'm sure it would be a long ways off, but with Nvidia scouting around for an x86 license, future proofing is in the works me thinks....

[Libertysyclone]

Haha, in the same report he stated "in the 80's we didnt need discrete graphics cards"

IMO we are a visual people, and for the CPU to catch up to the power of the GPU its going to have to make HUGE leaps and bounds.

If intel is so anti GPU why are they making one?

[rhink]

They said in the future, not the present. The trend is going to be for more and more stuff to get crammed onto the same chip, since we're running out of things to do with more transistors besides more CPU cores, which has diminishing returns if your apps aren't extremely parallel. So, you start slapping on other bits of functionality... it's already started, for example AMD's integrated memory controller. They are also working on graphics integrated with the CPU. In theory, you could get a CPU/GPU combination that's as fast as what we have now. The only problem with this whole concept is the number of pins they'll have to cram on that package to get enough bandwidth to feed both the CPU and GPU... how they plan on solving that, I'd love to see.

[Eliminator]

im sure people will be totally happy with intel xtreme graphics in the future..... not

[ClosetFanBoy]

Personally I would like to see a CPU/GPU design. Whats the future hold? Motherboard sized video cards? Screw all that ****.

[crainger]

History repeats itself. As I said before. Welcome to 1950.

[methimpikehoses]

History repeats itself. As I said before. Welcome to 1950.

nvm

[Gimlis]

People “probably won’t” need discrete graphics cards anymore.


Hmm

Regardless of CPU power or capability I don't think the discrete graphics cards will fall from use anytime soon. Even if there is enough CPU power to keep up with 3d rendering, the dedicated memory available too and on the add in cards offers benifits.
even working with 2d and standard desktop office apps I've seen a noticeable slowdown due to the system memory being shared to support integrated video when compared with a system with an add in card. So even if the processing power is there are still other bottlenecks that will need to be over come before dropping graphics cards could or would be plausable option.

[ViN86]

the real question is why would i not want a discrete video card just because the CPU can do it?

GPU's are still highly specialized floating point calculators and are still way beyond CPU's. i mean, that Nehalem is running 8 cores just to perform that, and it's still at 17 fps. i would love to have a Nehalem like that for physics calculations alone and have a discrete video card for rendering things.

[walterman]

I remember the days when a Celeron 400MHz was faster running Unreal 1 than a Voodoo 1 :)

Personally i would prefer to keep having dedicated hardware to accelerate the graphics & sound, but, seems like Intel wants to return to the roots, and seems like Vista killed the hw sound acceleration.

But i can understand intel, just check these slides:
http://pc.watch.impress.co.jp/docs/2008/0407/kaigai434.htm

In special this slide: http://pc.watch.impress.co.jp/docs/2008/0407/kaigai03l.gif

AVX sounds really interesting to increase the FP performance :)

[ClosetFanBoy]

History repeats itself. As I said before. Welcome to 1950.

:p

Everything comes full circle.

[hell_of_doom227]

Microsoft and Intel are purposely killing PC as gaming platform and first step in that direction was Vista.

[Treason]

You would think that integrated 5.1/7.1 Realtek audio and nVidia's brief SoundStorm integrated audio would have put a serious dent in the discrete sound card market back in the late 90's and early 00's. But no, instead it spawned competitive companies against Creative, all vying for that 1% market share against 99% integrated.