Tuesday, April 23rd 2024

Intel "Battlemage" Graphics Architecture to Update Display Engine with UHBR13.5

Intel's next-generation Xe2 "Battlemage" graphics architecture is expected to introduce a significant update to the display engine over the current Xe "Alchemist." The display engine handles the various display I/O of the GPU. For most users with a single display that's running at or under 4K @ 60 Hz, this is irrelevant, however, as your resolution, refresh-rates, color bit-depth, and dynamic-range go up, some of the newer display connector formats become relevant. Intel beat both NVIDIA and AMD to be the first GPU maker to implement DisplayPort 2.1 albeit with a UHBR10 link layer (which is needed for DP 2.1). The DP 2.1 spec prescribes certain optional higher link layer bit-rates, such as UHBR13.5 and UHBR20. AMD was the first to implement UHBR13.5 and UHBR20 with the Radiance display engine in its RDNA 3 GPUs, and we're learning that Intel wants to catch up.

Driver patch notes unearthed by Phoronix find references to Arc "Battlemage" GPUs supporting UHBR13.5. These drivers are believed to have previously supported UHBR20, but support for the higher bit-rate was removed from the current version of drivers. It indicates that Intel is still evaluating the higher bit-rates on its unreleased GPUs, and production-ready versions could implement at least UHBR13.5. DisplayPort 2.1 with UHBR13.5 (13.5 Gbps per lane), over a DP80-ready DisplayPort cable yields a maximum resolution of uncompressed 8K @ 60 Hz with HDR, or 4K @ 240 Hz with HDR. Intel is expected to debut "Battlemage" with its Core Ultra 200-series "Lunar Lake" mobile processors, later this year.
Sources: Phoronix, VideoCardz
Add your own comment

5 Comments on Intel "Battlemage" Graphics Architecture to Update Display Engine with UHBR13.5

#1
sephiroth117
I think there’s no rush because screens are just starting to get dp2.1 (and at what cost..) and DSC is quite efficient and user-friendly

now, at one point it doesn’t hurt for GPU makers to add few bucks and DP2.1 UHBR20 :)
Posted on Reply
#2
Onasi
“production-ready versions could implement at least UHBR13.5. DisplayPort 2.1 with UHBR13.5 (13.5 Gbps per lane),”

Maybe this should be rephrased a bit to look less weird? Maybe something like “It indicates that Intel is still evaluating the higher bit-rates on its unreleased GPUs, and production-ready versions could implement at least DisplayPort 2.1 with UHBR13.5 (13.5 Gbps per lane) which, over a DP80-ready DisplayPort cable, yields a maximum resolution of uncompressed 8K @ 60 Hz with HDR, or 4K @ 240 Hz with HDR.”. Just to make the whole thing a bit neater. Maybe it’s just me.

Aaaaaaanyway, I feel like 13.5 will be what all the vendors will go for next gen. Full fat UHBR20 seems so far unnecessary and, probably, expensive for anything that’s not professional cards. We’ve seen AMD go down this route already.
Posted on Reply
#3
..0
DSC causes so many problems, we really need UHBR13.5 at least. 4k 240hz is really struggling now on 1.4
Posted on Reply
#4
Upgrayedd
sephiroth117I think there’s no rush because screens are just starting to get dp2.1 (and at what cost..) and DSC is quite efficient and user-friendly

now, at one point it doesn’t hurt for GPU makers to add few bucks and DP2.1 UHBR20 :)
Pretty sure they just change the way it's encoded. No real big physical difference that would make 2.1 costly.
Onasi“production-ready versions could implement at least UHBR13.5. DisplayPort 2.1 with UHBR13.5 (13.5 Gbps per lane),”

Maybe this should be rephrased a bit to look less weird? Maybe something like “It indicates that Intel is still evaluating the higher bit-rates on its unreleased GPUs, and production-ready versions could implement at least DisplayPort 2.1 with UHBR13.5 (13.5 Gbps per lane) which, over a DP80-ready DisplayPort cable, yields a maximum resolution of uncompressed 8K @ 60 Hz with HDR, or 4K @ 240 Hz with HDR.”. Just to make the whole thing a bit neater. Maybe it’s just me.

Aaaaaaanyway, I feel like 13.5 will be what all the vendors will go for next gen. Full fat UHBR20 seems so far unnecessary and, probably, expensive for anything that’s not professional cards. We’ve seen AMD go down this route already.
They really should skip 13.5 at least for the highest end cards. 4K 240Hz monitors are here.
TurmericDSC causes so many problems, we really need UHBR13.5 at least. 4k 240hz is really struggling now on 1.4
Could you mention some of the problems? I never really believed DSC is the miracle people want to tout it for but that's not something I can test myself. Just compressing data that much has to have a downside and its just written off as being perfect magic.
Posted on Reply
#5
Metroid
So basically this is saving $3, I do understand if they do this to low end gpus but high end, dp 2.1 80g is a must, 54g is not enough for 4k 240hz lossless.
Posted on Reply
Nov 23rd, 2024 07:26 EST change timezone

New Forum Posts

Popular Reviews

Controversial News Posts