| |||||||||||||
What AMD's ATI acquisition means for Linux (and Macs) (Linux-Watch)What AMD's ATI acquisition means for Linux (and Macs) (Linux-Watch)Posted Jul 25, 2006 18:34 UTC (Tue) by brouhaha (guest, #1698)In reply to: What AMD's ATI acquisition means for Linux (and Macs) (Linux-Watch) by corbet Parent article: What AMD's ATI acquisition means for Linux (and Macs) (Linux-Watch) I suspect that they'll just bring it on-die. There's no point to actually integrating it into the processor core; just giving it a port to the crossbar switch is sufficient.
(Log in to post comments)
What AMD's ATI acquisition means for Linux (and Macs) (Linux-Watch) Posted Jul 25, 2006 21:56 UTC (Tue) by drag (subscriber, #31333) [Link] Yep it would just be another core on a multicore chip.
Think about it.. A graphics chip utilizing the same manufacturing proccess and having the similar clock settings (even running at 50% speed would be fast) and such being used in opteron/amd64 chips.
I think that it would effectively blur the line between software rendering and hardware rendering. Also if they keep it open enough it should be very usefull for running high speed encryption/decryption as well as media encoding.
What AMD's ATI acquisition means for Linux (and Macs) (Linux-Watch) Posted Jul 26, 2006 7:23 UTC (Wed) by Wol (guest, #4433) [Link] You miss the point. Graphics and CPU technology are converging (what is a GPU, if not a powerful, dedicated, CPU?).
AMD need to put GPU technology into the CPU (at which point the CPU will become a massively parallel processor, and GPUs will disappear...). It won't be "just another core".
Look at the Open Graphics Project. Although it is allegedly "just a video card", it's actually a pretty powerful DSP and by reprogramming the firmware it would be very easy to turn it into a parallel co-processor, a pc on a chip, a soundcard, or whatever. If AMD can't put that flexibility into its CPUs, it'll be a goner in the next few years.
Charlie wasn't saying "this is a convenient acquisition so AMD can compete with Intel on the graphics front". He said "this is a survival play so AMD can catch up with what Intel currently have in planning". AMD need ATI so they can match the stuff that Intel currently has on the back of a napkin, that will take five years to appear but will be nothing like what we have today ...
Cheers,
|
|||||||||||||