CPU/Mobo Intel Ivy Bridge to Feature as Much as 1GB On-chip Graphics Memory, Rumors Say

If ever there was such a waste of features, it is this THIS!!!

Like a 32 shader 1GB IGP in the age of HD7000 and GTX what not on a Intel Core iSomethingMeaningless would make any sense at all.
 
comp@ddict said:
If ever there was such a waste of features, it is this THIS!!!

Like a 32 shader 1GB IGP in the age of HD7000 and GTX what not on a Intel Core iSomethingMeaningless would make any sense at all.
Click to expand...
the useless support is intended for marketeers and not for end-users :lol:
 
you nailed it

But there are still people which go to the dealer and ask for 1GB graphics card. So Intel are not so dumb, they just know how to sell this to dumb people.

comp@ddict said:
If ever there was such a waste of features, it is this THIS!!!

Like a 32 shader 1GB IGP in the age of HD7000 and GTX what not on a Intel Core iSomethingMeaningless would make any sense at all.
Click to expand...
 
graphics card are not advertised much,and surprisingly when i tell them about me getting some cheap gfx card for 6k they are awestruck,saying why so expensive??

so guess these peoples are the one who'd go with this baby...and i'm sure that intel's gonna make hell lot of money by advertising this!!!
 
Exactly ppl are so much attracted by the '1'GB GPU. Even the mighty GTX580 has 1.5GB VRAM and the HD6970 has 2GB VRAM but the mobile GT445M comes in a 3GB VRAM version :P

So all companies are now resorting to upping the VRAM and the customer thinks higher VRAM better GPU (Just like ppl think higher MP cam is better) :P
 
Yeah, I remember my friend, he got soo happy by buying a 9400GT 1GB, he said,

"Dude the shopkeeper told me 9600GT has only 512MB, 9400GT has 1GB, so obviously it's faster"

Lollets
 
comp@ddict said:
Yeah, I remember my friend, he got soo happy by buying a 9400GT 1GB, he said,

"Dude the shopkeeper told me 9600GT has only 512MB, 9400GT has 1GB, so obviously it's faster"

Lollets
Click to expand...

:D..... Shopkeepers are always ready to fool newbies...
 
Correct me, if wrong. But Ivy Bridge is for compensating 'bandwidth gap' that exists between processor integrated graphics and dedicated GPUs, which is caused because of system memory being slower than video buffer.
Although integrating the memory controller as well as the GPU inside the CPU core has alleviated this by a great deal, even fast DDR3 memory can't make up for the bandwidth gap that exists between processor integrated graphics and dedicated GPUs.

To put things into perspective, a fast Core i7 900-series CPU, with triple channel 2000MHz DDR3 memory, tops out at 48GB/s while a mainstream video card, such as the Radeon HD 6970 can deliver an impressive 152.3GB/s.

But, according to SemiAccurate, Intel may have found a solution for this problem as the company presumably considers introducing on-chip video buffer in the upcoming Ivy Bridge processors, by using stacked memory a technology called silicon interposing.

By pairing this two solutions together, Intel would be able to include impressive amounts of video memory in their CPUs, silicon interposing driving the cost of such a solution down.
Click to expand...

It sounds as, intel want's to include on chip video-buffers so as to lower bandwidth gap.
Looking at image gives idea that processor will mainly contain Ivy Bridge(processor core), Memory(Video memory), and Silicon Interposer(act as buffer between processor and memory).
There are no signs of graphics core(maybe Ivy Bridge will itself contain it. It's still unclear. Besides, if there had to be a graphics core, it had to be near video memory, which isn't a the case.), so don't just rant that this is clever marketing targeting noobs.
Yeah yeah, we know bandwidth on GPUs is not fully utilized, but still...

Again, these are just rumors...:P
 
People are already fooled by 1GB memory.
Like I have searched in Kolkata and got 99% of video cards are come with 1GB memory except few cheap like 512MB of 8400GS.
Sellers will tell u that company don't make less than 1GB.....:@
Even worst think is I saw recently Zotac 9600GT Green Edition 1GB and it is DDR2.....WTF:huh:
 
Not just the people.. Most of the time it's the shopkeeper who gives the "recommendation" as to which is better (Not for the user, but for themselves in terms of profit). When I go to some shop to buy components, many have tried their best to promote a particular product... even going to the extent of saying that the brand I asked for has too many failures/bad service/low cost components and what not.. Mostly they resort to such practices when they dont have stock of what you are asking for..... Unless you are stubborn on what you want, they will make you get something else

Actually the development cost of such useless marketing gimmick is also pushed onto people who use dedicated graphics. You wont use it all your life, but you pay for it and it will be there doing nothing. Just like I pay for mobile camera hardware/software even though I dont want it but have no choice.
 
comp@ddict said:
Yeah, I remember my friend, he got soo happy by buying a 9400GT 1GB, he said,

"Dude the shopkeeper told me 9600GT has only 512MB, 9400GT has 1GB, so obviously it's faster"

Lollets
Click to expand...
in my case my friend challenged me with his 9400GT 1GB verses my 9800GT 512 :D

u know we cant make some 1 believe the truth
 
This thread has gone completely off track, without even reading the main article. Only Sudarshan seemed to have got it.

What's so bad of this feature? Memory is terribly cheap these days, and IGP get memory bandwidth bottlenecked quite often then not. Intel seemed to have made the strides in the right direction with Sandy Bridge, and this is a stepping stone. HD3000 IGP seems to play a lot of mainstream games at lower resolution, a refresh of the chip with higher on-board memory would actually kill of a lot 80-100USD discrete cards!!

Although the higher memory would be used by the marketing team extensively, its not such a bad deal for an IGP. Especially since memory prices are reaching rock bottom..
 
Agree with Aces and Sudarshan... why are people relating this with cheap graphic cards. This is indeed a good news for lower-powered PCs i.e. Office PCs and netboxes. Not only this will reduce the latency between graphic subsystem and processor, this will give a little more muscle to Intel's on-die graphic chips. Sandy-bridge already has quite potent video hardware for video acceleration/decoding and encoding, adding a dedicated vram on the chip will stop the onboard/on-die graphic from sharing the slower ram from main system memory.
 
Back
Top