7 ms·
I have no idea of the likely price, but (IMO) this is the sort of disruption that Intel needs to aim at if it's going to make some sort of dent in this market.
by mft_ 1y ago
I have no idea of the likely price, but (IMO) this is the sort of disruption that Intel needs to aim at if it's going to make some sort of dent in this market. If they could release this for around the price of a 5090, it would be very interesting.
- schmorptron 1y agoMaybe not that low, but given it's using LPDDR5 instead of GDDR7, at least the ram should be a lot cheaper.
- Neywiny 1y agoCertainly an interesting choice. Dramatically worse performance but dramatically larger only time will tell how it actually goes
- schmorptron 1y agoRumor has it (according to MLID, so no one knows whether it's accurate) that AMD is also looking to use regular LPDDR memory for some of it's lower end next gen GPUs to not have to contend with nvidia over limited and cartelled GDDR7 supply. Maybe they're going to increase parallel bandwidth to compensate it? Or have wholly different tricks up their sleeve.
- woleium 1y agoprobably just a lot more of it, to capture that consumer ai market
- magicalhippo 1y agoWith 160GB, surely they can add more channels to compensate?
- benob 1y agoIs there anything preventing them from using heterogeneous memory chips, like 1/4 GDDR7 and 3/4 LPDDR? It could enable new MEO-like architectures with finer-grained performance tuning for long contexts.
- vetrom 1y agoYou'd have to burn more die space for the duplicate but different ram controller logic and cache trees, I bet. If the internal bus architecture is anything similar to QPI, getting the 'different' parts to communicate reliably is probably also a pain.
- Tepix 1y agoIt‘s LPDDR5X
- wtallis 1y agoLPDDR5x really just means LPDDR5 running at higher than the original speed of 6400MT/s. Absent any information about which faster speed they'll be using, this correction doesn't add anything to the discussion. Nobody would expect even Intel to use 6400MT/s for a product that far in the future. Where they'll land on the spectrum from 8533 MT/s to 10700 MT/s is just a matter for speculation at the moment.
- baq 1y agoWith this much ram don’t expect anything remotely affordable by civilians.
- wmf 1y ago160 GB LPDDR5 is ~$1,200 retail so the card could be sold for $2,000. The price will depend on how desperate Intel is. Intel probably can't copy Nvidia's pricing.
- baq 1y agoIt’d be a disaster for Intel if it sold for less than 3k, personally I think they’re aiming for break even at 5k a pop at least, and I wouldn’t be surprised to advertise 2x memory at half nvidia price, which would put it at ~15-20k? and a healthy margin which they need like oxygen now. Of course it’s all for naught if it doesn’t perform compute-wise.
- bildung 1y agoI also think they have to be substantially cheaper than nvidia to have any chance, but the pro 6000 with 96G is already available at 7-8k - so half the price would have to be significantly below 4k.
- baq 1y agoHuh didn’t know that, nice. Intel’s still in trouble then :) IMHO they’ll try to sell the increased ram as worth the ‘premium’ (or, worth the ‘reduced not-nvidia penalty’)
- mft_ 1y agoI agree with you, based on standard business logic, but the question is whether Intel would be willing to sell a generation at break-even to disrupt, achieve a larger (and somewhat 'sticky') install base, developer engagement, a larger mind-share, etc.?
- matt-p 1y ago
- musicale 1y agoIntel made a dent in the consumer gaming market with Battlemage. They made a dent in the HPC market / Top500 with intel MAX. It will be interesting to see if they can make a dent in the AI inference market (presumably datacenter/enterprise).
- killingtime74 1y agoNot sure where you're getting that from, battlemage has been considered a failure. https://finance.yahoo.com/news/report-indicates-intels-latest-battlemage-153803553.html https://finance.yahoo.com/news/report-indicates-intels-lates...
- Aurornis 1y ago> If they could release this for around the price of a 5090 This is not targeted at consumers. It’s competing with nVidia’s high RAM workstation cards. Think $10K price range, not $1-2K. The 160GB of LPDDR5X chips alone is expensive enough that they couldn’t release this at the $2K price point unless they felt like giving it away (which they don’t)
- minraws 1y agoIt's probably spark dgx competition. So around 3-5k would be ideally it. Any higher and its not really a disruption
- Sweepi 1y agoIn the back of my head floats $200 - $300 for the 64 GiB GDDR7 that you get for spending 7k-10k on an ADA 6000 96 GiB instead of 2k for a 5090 32 GiB. Am I off? Is LPDDR5X more expensive?
- Sweepi 1y agoNote for myself: each 3 GiB GDDR7 IC costs $10-$15, x32 sums up to $320-$480, https://www.techpowerup.com/337853/samsung-3-gb-gddr7-chips-sold-in-chinese-retail-attracts-memory-modders https://www.techpowerup.com/337853/samsung-3-gb-gddr7-chips-...
- nullsmack 1y agoThey better watch the price because you can get a 128GB AMD Strix Halo mini pc for ~1700-2000 today, and those will be even cheaper a year from now. If they're trying to be competitive then it really needs to be more in that ballpark than the massively overpriced Nvidia range.
- conradev 1y agoThe GDDR7 found next to most Blackwell chips is more expensive than the LPDDR5X next to this or an M-series/Strix Halo chip.