4 ms·

Intel has literally sent out engineers to LTT and Gamers Nexus to make this exact point. That being said, the cards are already out on the market and people can

Intel has literally sent out engineers to LTT and Gamers Nexus to make this exact point. That being said, the cards are already out on the market and people can still buy them, so it's not like tech reviewers can hold off based on promised future performance. FWIW I've heard DXVK actually can run on Windows, but you can't use it in AppX containers. Perhaps Intel bundling it with Ark's drivers would be a better option moving forward?

hajile 4y ago
A few from a low-end SKU available only in China isn't exactly a launch. I've seen paper launches with more chips than that.
onli 4y ago
Btw, the second Gamers Nexus Arc video about tear reduction and frame graphs was awesome - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8ENCV4xUjj0 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8ENCV4xUjj0. It's okay that those cards are reviewed according to their current state. They are pretty bad. But that doesn't mean the second or third generation of those cards has to be bad, when they remove the resizable bar requirement (so they can be used in older systems) and improve the drivers. DXVK would be a great route, but I doubt Intel can push this on a driver level - it would be more of a Steam or Windows thing. I assume those cards will be a great option for Linux systems soon, where DXVK is the default anyway. It's good to have an alternative to AMD.
- BearOso 4y ago
  > remove the resizable bar requirement They'd have to add support for changing the base address register. The easy default is just mapping all the memory directly. It's a lot more programming work to transfer data when you only have a 256MB window to work with. No use sticking with a limit that PCIe hasn't had since 32-bit.
  - rrss 4y ago
    There are still a ton of systems which have firmware that does not support large or resizable BAR. Support only became common in the last year or two (after AMD marketed as SAM and pushed to get it supported). So requiring the “easy default” to be available means prohibiting any one with a system from ~2020 or earlier from upgrading to these GPUs.
    - BearOso 4y ago
      Well, they just added small BAR support to the Linux driver, so Intel certainly agrees.

hajile 4y ago

A few from a low-end SKU available only in China isn't exactly a launch. I've seen paper launches with more chips than that.

onli 4y ago

Btw, the second Gamers Nexus Arc video about tear reduction and frame graphs was awesome - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8ENCV4xUjj0 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8ENCV4xUjj0. It's okay that those cards are reviewed according to their current state. They are pretty bad. But that doesn't mean the second or third generation of those cards has to be bad, when they remove the resizable bar requirement (so they can be used in older systems) and improve the drivers. DXVK would be a great route, but I doubt Intel can push this on a driver level - it would be more of a Steam or Windows thing. I assume those cards will be a great option for Linux systems soon, where DXVK is the default anyway. It's good to have an alternative to AMD.

BearOso 4y ago
> remove the resizable bar requirement They'd have to add support for changing the base address register. The easy default is just mapping all the memory directly. It's a lot more programming work to transfer data when you only have a 256MB window to work with. No use sticking with a limit that PCIe hasn't had since 32-bit.
- rrss 4y ago
  There are still a ton of systems which have firmware that does not support large or resizable BAR. Support only became common in the last year or two (after AMD marketed as SAM and pushed to get it supported). So requiring the “easy default” to be available means prohibiting any one with a system from ~2020 or earlier from upgrading to these GPUs.
  - BearOso 4y ago
    Well, they just added small BAR support to the Linux driver, so Intel certainly agrees.