• Welcome to TechPowerUp Forums, Guest! Please check out our forum guidelines for info related to our community.

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

btarunr

Editor & Senior Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Oct 9, 2007
Messages
47,304 (7.52/day)
Location
Hyderabad, India
System Name RBMK-1000
Processor AMD Ryzen 7 5700G
Motherboard ASUS ROG Strix B450-E Gaming
Cooling DeepCool Gammax L240 V2
Memory 2x 8GB G.Skill Sniper X
Video Card(s) Palit GeForce RTX 2080 SUPER GameRock
Storage Western Digital Black NVMe 512GB
Display(s) BenQ 1440p 60 Hz 27-inch
Case Corsair Carbide 100R
Audio Device(s) ASUS SupremeFX S1220A
Power Supply Cooler Master MWE Gold 650W
Mouse ASUS ROG Strix Impact
Keyboard Gamdias Hermes E2
Software Windows 11 Pro
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.



View at TechPowerUp Main Site | Source
 
Joined
Sep 26, 2022
Messages
227 (0.28/day)
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 :)
 
Joined
Nov 27, 2023
Messages
2,505 (6.36/day)
System Name The Workhorse
Processor AMD Ryzen R9 5900X
Motherboard Gigabyte Aorus B550 Pro
Cooling CPU - Noctua NH-D15S Case - 3 Noctua NF-A14 PWM at the bottom, 2 Fractal Design 180mm at the front
Memory GSkill Trident Z 3200CL14
Video Card(s) NVidia GTX 1070 MSI QuickSilver
Storage Adata SX8200Pro
Display(s) LG 32GK850G
Case Fractal Design Torrent (Solid)
Audio Device(s) FiiO E-10K DAC/Amp, Samson Meteorite USB Microphone
Power Supply Corsair RMx850 (2018)
Mouse Razer Viper (Original) on a X-Raypad Equate Plus V2
Keyboard Cooler Master QuickFire Rapid TKL keyboard (Cherry MX Black)
Software Windows 11 Pro (24H2)
“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.
 

..0

Joined
Sep 13, 2013
Messages
107 (0.03/day)
System Name deleted account.
DSC causes so many problems, we really need UHBR13.5 at least. 4k 240hz is really struggling now on 1.4
 
Joined
Mar 14, 2014
Messages
1,431 (0.36/day)
Processor 11900K
Motherboard ASRock Z590 OC Formula
Cooling Noctua NH-D15 using 2x140mm 3000RPM industrial Noctuas
Memory G. Skill Trident Z 2x16GB 3600MHz
Video Card(s) eVGA RTX 3090 FTW3
Storage 2TB Crucial P5 Plus
Display(s) 1st: LG GR83Q-B 1440p 27in 240Hz / 2nd: Lenovo y27g 1080p 27in 144Hz
Case Lian Li Lancool MESH II RGB (I removed the RGB)
Audio Device(s) AKG Q701's w/ O2+ODAC (Sounds a little bright)
Power Supply Seasonic Prime 850 TX
Mouse Glorious Model D
Keyboard Glorious MMK2 65% Lynx MX switches
Software Win10 Pro
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 :)
Pretty sure they just change the way it's encoded. No real big physical difference that would make 2.1 costly.

“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.

DSC 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.
 
Joined
May 8, 2018
Messages
1,571 (0.65/day)
Location
London, UK
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.
 
Top