3 ms·
Why doesn’t Intel make a chip specialized for gaming? Something like a dual core CPU optimized for single threaded performance and a variable number of GPU core
by abtinf 7y ago
Why doesn’t Intel make a chip specialized for gaming? Something like a dual core CPU optimized for single threaded performance and a variable number of GPU cores (a guaranteed minimum up to a perfect maximum), binned by clock speed. Skip all the support for extra pcie lanes (except maybe for storage).
From your comment, it seems like Sony tried exactly this but failed. Is there an inherent flaw in such a design or just poor execution?
Edit: the biggest problem I see with such a design is RAM IO, but I would think that could be mitigated. Maybe even eliminate support for DDR, instead embedding 4 or 8 GB in the package.
- tehidiot 7y agoThat's what the current console SOCs pretty much are - intergrated CPU/gaming GPU on one die backed by unified GDDR for both CPU/GPU, though 8 weak cores as it was the only viable architecture AMD had at the time for a console type device. From what I understand this is still different from the Sony approach where you'd have a weaker GPU, but would offload shaders etc to the CPU which could do this due to it's powerful dedicated vector processing units. Of course this had the flaw of GPUs eventually develping shader capabilities etc and making it pointless - and harder to program for if you have to target PC/xBox etc as well.
- deleted 7y ago[deleted]
- hyperpallium 7y agoIDK specifically, but generally: parallelism is the way to get more compute despite limited GHz, and something like GPU architecture is a neater fit than general-purpose CPU architecture. BTW the latest AMD GPU architecture (RDNA) is specific for gaming, in that they get around 40% better framerates for the same raw GFLOPS of their previous architecture (GNC).