First Intel Processor with AMD Radeon Graphics Within 2017

[cdawall]

I think the only way NVIDIA could be competitive in the x86 space is if they some how manage to contract Jim Keller to design it. He might flatly decline the offer because of the obvious conflict of interest with AMD.

Additionally, NVIDIA's revenue is going to fall from $5 billion to $3.5 billion. They have to tighten their belt so starting a new, costly R&D project in a highly competitive market isn't exactly going to excite investors.

Jim Keller was merely a contract worker for AMD. The only conflict would be if he signed paperwork to keep him out of the x86 market.

 

[FordGT90Concept]

It could trigger a similar lawsuit like Zenimax just won against Facebook (IP theft). AMD wouldn't have to try very hard to win such a case if Keller did work for NVIDIA on x86.

 

[cdawall]

It could trigger a similar lawsuit like Zenimax just won against Facebook (IP theft). AMD wouldn't have to try very hard to win such a case if Keller did work for NVIDIA on x86.

I agree to a point. It would end up depending how licensing went. I would be more curious how they would get a license to produce x86 products. Last x86 thing nvidia produced was embedded 386SX

 

[Camm]

Your actually thinking of the Transmeta product.

Transmeta was bought in 2006, didn't think the drop of that from Project Denver happened straight after being bought.

I agree to a point. It would end up depending how licensing went. I would be more curious how they would get a license to produce x86 products. Last x86 thing nvidia produced was embedded 386SX

Purchasing VIA would be the obvious approach, but there's far too many other patented shit outside the base x86 instruction set that AMD-Intel cross license that would inhibit most coming to market with a true x86 chip.

Only way anyone will come to market with x86 is thru an ARM chip with some form of emulation, bit like the Snapdragon 835 partnership with Microsoft.

 

[cdawall]

Purchasing VIA would be the obvious approach, but there's far too many other patented shit outside the base x86 instruction set that AMD-Intel cross license that would inhibit most coming to market with a true x86 chip.

Only way anyone will come to market with x86 is thru an ARM chip with some form of emulation, bit like the Snapdragon 835 partnership with Microsoft.

I do not believe VIA still holds an x86 license they only had a 10 year agreement with intel which was established in 2003.

https://www.cnet.com/news/intel-via-bury-the-hatchet/

If you look at their x86 CPU releases they have not released a new cpu since 2011, which would follow the agreement running out in 2013.

 

[FordGT90Concept]

If NVIDIA truly has no x86 licenses anymore, the only way they'd get one is by suing Intel on anti-competitive grounds. That doesn't seem likely.

Only way anyone will come to market with x86 is thru an ARM chip with some form of emulation, bit like the Snapdragon 835 partnership with Microsoft.

Pretty sure x86 has nothing to do with Snapdragon 835. Windows Phone has always ran on ARM and the Windows Store apps work through the Universal Windows Platform which is platform agnostic.

http://1reddrop.com/2016/11/28/snapdragon-835-processor-microsoft-surface-phone-next-year/
All three will likely sport the Snapdragon 835 processor, but only the 8 GB and 6GB RAM versions will be able to run X86 apps (desktop apps) in Continuum Mode when docked to a monitor or a laptop.

Thing is, Continuum Mode is already a thing and it makes no mention of x86:
http://www.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/Continuum

It's just full screen Windows Phone applications on monitor/laptop with native support for keyboard and mice. A convenience feature.


ARM would do a terrible job emulating x86. x86 can easily emulate ARM though.

 

[Camm]

Pretty sure x86 has nothing to do with Snapdragon 835. Windows Phone has always ran on ARM and the Windows Store apps work through the Universal Windows Platform which is platform agnostic.

Snapdragon 835 running x86 Win32 apps. Its a thing, and makes sense after Intel dropkicked its Atom SoC plans.

 

[FordGT90Concept]

0:22 in the video "64-bit Operating System, ARM-based processor." Windows is not running emulated on there. It is like a derivative of Windows RT for the Surface.

1:31 it has to be a Windows on Windows emulator not unlike what x86-64 Windows already uses to emulate x86 applications. That's pretty impressive.

 

[Camm]

0:22 in the video "64-bit Operating System, ARM-based processor." Windows is not running emulated on there. It is like a derivative of Windows RT for the Surface.

1:31 it has to be a Windows on Windows emulator not unlike what x86-64 Windows already uses to emulate x86 applications. That's pretty impressive.

I would need to find the article, but Microsoft made it pretty clear this was only possible on 835 silicon. Probably sits somewhere between a hard and soft solution.

 

[dorsetknob]

I'm pretty sure that was a ARM binary translator, not a native x86 chip.

Quite wrong
in fact very wrong

have a read here ( and in case you cannot be bothered )
http://www.nvidia.com/page/uli_m6117c.html
M6117C

386SX Embedded Microcontroller

Product Overview

The M6117C is a highly integrated, low voltage, single-chip implementation of Intel? 386SX compatible microprocessor plus ULi M1217B chipset. The M6117C provides the following functions : 1) Intel? 386SX core 2)Supports EDO DRAM controller including FP mode 3) Coprocessor Interface 4) ISA interface 5) Peripheral Interface (includes two cascaded 8237 DMA controllers, a 74612 memory mapper, 2 cascaded 8259 interrupt controller, and an 8254 programmer counter 6) Built-in RTC 7) Built-in PS2 Keyboard Controller and Mouse 8)Built-in WATCHDOG timer 9)16-bit GPI/O10) IDE interface.

Features

Static Intel 386SX compatible Core

• Operating Power Supply 5.0V
• Operating frequency 25Mhz to 40Mhz

Coprocessor Interface

• Supports 80387SX coprocessor interface
• Memory Controller
• Supports EDO DRAM
• Supports on board memory size up to 16M bytes for 386SX or
• 64M bytes upgrade system using 256K, 512K, 1M, 4M or 16M
• SIMMs
• Supports up to 4-bank DRAM interface
• Page interleave DRAM access for FP mode
• Programmable shadow RAM from A to B segment in 128K byte and C to F segment in 32K byte unit
• Provides "RAS only" refresh or "CAS before RAS" refresh types
• Parity generation and checking

OK Sir Not an ARM binary translator But a FULL BLOWN x86 Chip
Production Ceased and There was no further Development was made Because Intel would not extend their licence to include later patents for new x86 instruction sets and other developments.
So for Nvidia Despite having a licence they had an Intel Brick wall built in their path
And So they Discontinued x86 Development

 

[Casecutter]

I think we're making to much of this...

If this has merit it's with the fact the deal with Nvidia is not getting renewed, and AMD will cross-license some older IP as to shader design etc; so Intel to design new iGPU, but not at the level that can't ever really compete with AMD's APU.

While perhaps Apple is buying from both Intel and RTG and looking to use both in developing a MCM that uses a custom graphics and a custom CPU (small and no iGPU) for upcoming Macbook Pro and iMacs.

 

[dorsetknob]

I think we're making to much of this...

we usualy do

 

[Captain_Tom]

I'm struggling with the business sense of this. If Ryzen is a competent chip it will erode Intel's market share, slowly admittedly. Why invest in your only competitor who may have something good going on?

Unless it's a simple case of Intel throwing money at AMD so it can concentrate more on CPU design and stop wasting R&D on iGPU.

Hmm.... Need more info before chin rubbing starts.

I think the answer is quite simple: Intel now needs to invest in their CPU's again.


If you will recall Intel took the lead with the ""Core" series, and then cemented their domination with the "i" series. Right when the "i" series came out, they started making integrated graphics.

That is no coincidence. Intel invested in graphics when it made little financial sense to further invest in their CPU architectures. There's no point in wasting money on something that needs no extra capital to keep printing money. That money would be better used investing in products that will give you further advantages.


iGPU's did help Intel a lot. They allowed Intel to more easily capture Apple and much of the notebook market once companies realized they could save money and battery life with Intel's APU designs.


However now AMD will once again bring heavy competition to Intel's CPU's, and at the same time Intel has hit a wall in how strong they can efficiently make their own iGPU's. Thus it is just good business to save money and have someone else fill in that gap (AMD).



Don't forget that XBOX One's have Sony Blu Ray players. Good business is just good business.

 

[BiggieShady]

Don't forget that XBOX One's have Sony Blu Ray players. Good business is just good business.

Ha, didn't know that thanks for that

 

[Camm]

Don't forget that XBOX One's have Sony Blu Ray players. Good business is just good business.

That makes it even sillier that the X1's BDR plays 4k where as the PS4 Pro's doesn't. Man the tech world makes no sense sometimes :\.

 

[Kanan]

this is not "news" but rumor. people think this is good for AMD but what kyle is suggesting is something different entirely. if you have been following this story since the beginning then you will understand that in the long run this is bad for AMD. the original story is intel did not simply want to license the tech from AMD but they want RTG for themselves. and Raja was suppose to be intel "inside person" to make that happen. he even mentioned that intel already lay off massive people from their GPU division to be replace entirely by RTG.

I think people at amd are smarter than you or me. I think they did the right decision. This will be a great partnership that will pay off, giving them much needed money to compete against anyone and to invent new technology.

 

[Captain_Tom]

That makes it even sillier that the X1's BDR plays 4k where as the PS4 Pro's doesn't. Man the tech world makes no sense sometimes :\.

They are different models. MS thought it was worth the extra money to put 4K playback in their console. Sony didn't.


Considering the PS4 is constantly sold out, and the PS4S is outselling the XB1S while making a higher profit per unit; I would say they made the right choice from a business perspective.


Don't be surprised if similar things happen with AMD graphics in Intel chips

 

[ReaperX87]

I honestly do not believe that there is any truth to this. Why would intel who is competitor to AMD and vise-versa even want to implement any tech from a competitor in something of their's. Doesnt make sense from a business stand point. It would interfere with revenue made by that chip's sales.

 

[ensabrenoir]

AMD gave Intel graphics, Intel gave AMD hyper threading

 

[FordGT90Concept]

SMT design is very intrinsic to the microarchitecture itself. Bulldozer was an attempt at a different kind of SMT (two integer clusters, two threads) the problem with that is that software was largely developed for Intel's flavor of SMT (one core, switch between two threads giving each about equal process time). Since Bulldozer was a complete failure, they pitched that design, started from the ground up, and implemented a similar mechanism to Hyper-Threading.

Hyper-Threading can get -10% to +40% performance out of 8 threads versus 4 threads. It'll be interesting to see how Ryzen compares.

 

[john_]

Here we go again

AMD shares surge on a report of laptop chip deal with Intel to fight off Nvidia

 

[thesmokingman]

Here we go again

AMD shares surge on a report of laptop chip deal with Intel to fight off Nvidia

What do you mean here we go again??

https://newsroom.intel.com/editoria...nce-cpu-discrete-graphics-sleek-thin-devices/

Not concrete enough for ya?

 

[john_]

What do you mean here we go again??

https://newsroom.intel.com/editoria...nce-cpu-discrete-graphics-sleek-thin-devices/

Not concrete enough for ya?

The previous post was done when it was still a rumor. What you post here was already posted by me long before your post. You are not going to find that post, because a new article was written for the front page of TPU and any discussions are done there. So, next time avoid sarcasm if you don't know the facts.

To the moderators.
Be fair. If you delete this post, delete also the post I am replying too.

 

[dorsetknob]

To the moderators.
Be fair. If you delete this post, delete also the post I am replying too.

It does not work like that
If you Reply to a post and your Reply is inappropriate ( Enough to be moderated /Deleted )
why should the post your inappropriately Replied to Also Be Deleted ???
If that post had no problems then the Mod Team would leave it UP

 

[john_]

It does not work like that
If you Reply to a post and your Reply is inappropriate ( Enough to be moderated /Deleted )
why should the post your inappropriately Replied to Also Be Deleted ???
If that post had no problems then the Mod Team would leave it UP

I guess sarcasm and irony is appropriate to get a like from you.