4 ms·
That would be unfortunate. Without a competent GPU it will be increasingly difficult to compete against AMD and Nvidia who have all the pieces necessary to pro
by timschmidt 2y ago
That would be unfortunate. Without a competent GPU it will be increasingly difficult to compete against AMD and Nvidia who have all the pieces necessary to produce high end gaming PCs / workstations / datacenter GPU compute. Developing a competent GPU solution isn't really optional if one wants to compete in those spaces, despite the large up-front cost, which Intel seems to have mostly already paid.
Intel similarly cut their project Larrabee / Knights Landing / Knights Mill product line, which could have thrust x86 into the AI space in a way no other platform does offers today. They just quit too soon. Which suggests lack of vision or inability to properly communicate that vision to the management / board / investors.
- msie 2y agoSeems obvious so I suspect the cuts are going to boost some executive's compensation. Short-term gain over long-term gain.
- sidewndr46 2y agoCutting all those projects seems more like an inability to communicate those products to developers. I'm hardly pro - NVIDIA but somehow they've really excelled at convincing software developers that their product is the platform to build on
- timschmidt 2y agoEverything AI already runs on x86. Knight's Mill had 72 cores with 244 threads with AVX512, connected to 16gb of 400gb/s local DRAM and up to 384gb of 115gb/s DRAM. Very similar bandwidth to GPUs of the era but with the addition of more DRAM on a second performance tier a little further away from the CPU. AMD's having a ton of success with Epyc and Threadripper putting up very similar numbers. The development story for Knight's Mill was a lot simpler than for any GPU. Consequently, I don't think developers were the ones who needed convincing.