• Some users have recently had their accounts hijacked. It seems that the now defunct EVGA forums might have compromised your password there and seems many are using the same PW here. We would suggest you UPDATE YOUR PASSWORD and TURN ON 2FA for your account here to further secure it. None of the compromised accounts had 2FA turned on.
    Once you have enabled 2FA, your account will be updated soon to show a badge, letting other members know that you use 2FA to protect your account. This should be beneficial for everyone that uses FSFT.

nvidia is making a desktop cpu

B

bdavis24

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Oct 31, 2002
Messages
1,667
http://www.engadget.com/2011/01/05/nvidia-announces-project-denver-arm-cpu-for-the-desktop/

http://www.hexus.net/content/item.php?item=28262

A full custom processor, designed by NVIDIA in partnership with ARM. World's first ARM processor targeted at high performance computing. NVIDIA really sprung this as a major surprise at the end of its CES press conference here. This chip is "in development" and seems intent to conquer the desktop scene that is currently wholly owned by the x86 duo of AMD and Intel. It's true folks, NVIDIA's building a CPU! Madness!

what do you guys think.. will it rock or will it flop..either way may be good for consumers.
 
Prsonally I think Green needs to stuck with video cards, but more power to em if they can pull it off.
 
Assuming the market keeps going the way its going I think they are smart, the amount of ARM devices showing up mean more programmers for it.

really all it will take is ARM support from Linux/MS for this to take off
 
LibertySyclone said:
Assuming the market keeps going the way its going I think they are smart, the amount of ARM devices showing up mean more programmers for it.

really all it will take is ARM support from Linux/MS for this to take off
Click to expand...

Based on the conference, it's all but confirmed that MS is going to release Windows for ARM.

That right there is going to be intense. I'd love to see some more competition in the game.
 
Interesting, but not for consumers any time in the near future unless someone can write a x86 to ARM translator and it runs at least as fast as the latest from Intel and AMD.

Unless you don't care about backward compatibility and your massive Steam backlog.

As the slide says, it's aimed at the HPC crowd, where most of the software is written in house to run on your custom cluster.
 
Decibel said:
Interesting, but not for consumers any time in the near future unless someone can write a x86 to ARM translator and it runs at least as fast as the latest from Intel and AMD.

Unless you don't care about backward compatibility and your massive Steam backlog.

As the slide says, it's aimed at the HPC crowd, where most of the software is written in house to run on your custom cluster.
Click to expand...

Windows 8 will support ARM core. According to the slide they were saying a powerful cpu, o well, we shall see a few years from now.
 
Ugh... there are benefits to having almost all desktop processors standardized on x86. I mean, even Apple is x86 these days.

I can't really say I'm very eager to have the desktop market fragmented like that. It's a shame they are unable to build x86 chips instead.
 
NKD said:
Windows 8 will support ARM core. According to the slide they were saying a powerful cpu, o well, we shall see a few years from now.
Click to expand...

I've seen that, but you're still going to have that backward compatibility problem without a translator. It will be awesome if MS includes one in Windows 8, but I'm not going to hold my breath.
 
Decibel said:
Interesting, but not for consumers any time in the near future unless someone can write a x86 to ARM translator and it runs at least as fast as the latest from Intel and AMD.

Unless you don't care about backward compatibility and your massive Steam backlog.
Click to expand...

Will it matter? Isn't Windows software written to run on Windows, and will run on Windows regardless of what platform Windows is running on?

We used to have Windows NT4 for RISC when it was running on the DEC Alpha CPUs. They ran everything that ran on x86 NT4 didn't they?
 
next thing you know we will see intel releasing a desktop gpu card to rival amd and nvidia.
 
Met-AL said:
Will it matter? Isn't Windows software written to run on Windows, and will run on Windows regardless of what platform Windows is running on?

We used to have Windows NT4 for RISC when it was running on the DEC Alpha CPUs. They ran everything that ran on x86 NT4 didn't they?
Click to expand...

No, you'll need new bianaries but a lot of it should be a simple recompile.
 
I just don't see them outdoing intel or amd in the desktop space. An ARM based tablet or net book or cell phone, or even a console, sure I can see that. But desktops, let alone gaming desktops, I just have a hard time believing anything good will come of it.
 
GORANKAR said:
I just don't see them outdoing intel or amd in the desktop space. An ARM based tablet or net book or cell phone, or even a console, sure I can see that. But desktops, let alone gaming desktops, I just have a hard time believing anything good will come of it.
Click to expand...

Then keep having a hard time then.. :rolleyes:

Nvidia's CPU is their own arch based on the ARM CPU. Also they have the genius CPU architect and IEEE fellow Bill Dally who I am sure is working on the CPU. The CPU is aimed at high end so I see no reason why it will not be able to compete with Intel.

Nvidia have access to TSMC so they can keep process parity with Intel. A lot of you guys need to open your eyes and accept the change that is happening in the PC landscape...
 
Wasn\t NVIDIA saying not too long ago the CPU is dead, it is all about gpu's ?
 
Let this sink in for minute: Majority, if not all, smartphones and tablets on the market TODAY are on an ARM-based CPU, from Android-run smartphones to iPhones and iPads and Blackberry Playbooks, etc.

Ok, now think about this: Tegra 2-- ARM plus Nvidia GPU meant for smartphones (maybe), netbooks, and tablets.

Now combine both with Microsoft's announcement of an ARM-compatible version of Windows 8 with better tablet and multi-touch features.

Nvidia is pretty much attacking AMD (Fusion APU) and Intel (Atom) from both ends of the mobile and portable market-- CPU and GPU for smartphones and tablets. It's going to be interesting to see what develops out of this.
 
tejas said:
Then keep having a hard time then.. :rolleyes:

Nvidia's CPU is their own arch based on the ARM CPU. Also they have the genius CPU architect and IEEE fellow Bill Dally who I am sure is working on the CPU. The CPU is aimed at high end so I see no reason why it will not be able to compete with Intel.

Nvidia have access to TSMC so they can keep process parity with Intel. A lot of you guys need to open your eyes and accept the change that is happening in the PC landscape...
Click to expand...


Meaningless if today's software can not run on it without emulation. It will not compete on speed regardless how genius the architect is. If a good number of software devs get on board, yeah there is a chance your vision is correct. If not, well, you will have to show me that an ARM based processor can keep up with the x86 ones with emulation.
It will be a couple years b4 we see anything anyway. So I guess we will have to wait and see.
 
Sweet! It's about damn time RISC got some desktop action. I haven't seen anything like this since 2005 with the G5 Motorola processors.
 
Last edited:
x86 gets less and less relevant with each passing year. Even Microsoft is fully aware of this. This situation has been creeping up on us and now it's actually happening!

I think the chip will be a success, and that AMD and Intel need to start preparing for a future without x86, and they need to start getting ready right now.
 
fattypants said:
x86 gets less and less relevant with each passing year. Even Microsoft is fully aware of this. This situation has been creeping up on us and now it's actually happening!

I think the chip will be a success, and that AMD and Intel need to start preparing for a future without x86, and they need to start getting ready right now.
Click to expand...

I don't think that it's some much that x86 is less relevent, it's simply got competition now. There's simply too much invested in x86, it's not going away anytime soon. Really, you just don't count Intel out, they are still the masters of CPUs by a LONG shot and if x86 get's close to ARM in power efficiency I think ARMs might have their own issues.
 
I doubt x86 and x64 are going anywhere anytime soon. There is a reason RISC processors went down the drain with desktop/server computing. RISC is great for mobile devices and other portable devices due to their great functionality. Why do you think Apple switched to Intel completely by 2006? It's because the RISC Motorola processors just weren't cutting it and x86 had become more efficient and was far superior.
 
Red Falcon said:
I doubt x86 and x64 are going anywhere anytime soon. There is a reason RISC processors went down the drain with desktop/server computing. RISC is great for mobile devices and other portable devices due to their great functionality. Why do you think Apple switched to Intel completely by 2006? It's because the RISC Motorola processors just weren't cutting it and x86 had become more efficient and was far superior.
Click to expand...

Yes, Intel had superior desktop processors, but mostly because of the money they could spend on development, and their superior manufacturing ability.

We're in 2011 now. Notebooks outsell desktops, and smartphones will soon outsell notebooks. The typical use of a computer isn't productivity anymore, it's web surfing, e-mail, phone, GPS, movies, etc. A powerful desktop CPU isn't needed for these.

So x86 and x64 aren't going anywhere anytime soon, but their growth is very limited. They will still dominate the office space, where a fast CPU is needed for productivity work, but what about computing elsewhere?
 
superbooga said:
So x86 and x64 aren't going anywhere anytime soon, but their growth is very limited. They will still dominate the office space, where a fast CPU is needed for productivity work, but what about computing elsewhere?
Click to expand...

But there will be the next big thing. Home automation, voice control and recognition, super-hi res displays, holography and so forth. Something will come along and eatup CPU cycles, it just a matter of time.
 
heatlesssun said:
But there will be the next big thing. Home automation, voice control and recognition, super-hi res displays, holography and so forth. Something will come along and eatup CPU cycles, it just a matter of time.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure if you understand where the CPU's strengths and weaknesses are. CPU is flexible, but it's not efficient at doing most things. Compared to dedicated hardware, a CPU is really only efficient for things like parsing data, compiling, and AI.

Those applications you mentioned may be so computationally expensive that hardware acceleration is required. CPU runs a bunch of mostly serial instructions (aka software). Hardware is more suited handle massively parallel tasks.

When you combine Moore's law, and the characteristics of CPUs vs dedicated hardware, you'll see a trend: New application comes out, and requires large, expensive, dedicated ASIC (or FPGA) to run. After a while, CPUs become powerful enough to run the application. Then after a while, the hardware can be shrunk enough to be put into an SoC.
 
Last edited:
superbooga said:
I'm not sure if you understand where the CPU's strengths and weaknesses are. CPU is flexible, but it's not efficient at doing most things. Compared to dedicated hardware, a CPU is really only efficient for things like parsing data, compiling, and AI.

Those applications you mentioned may be so computationally expensive that hardware acceleration is required. CPU runs a bunch of mostly serial instructions (aka software). Hardware is more suited handle massively parallel tasks. Once a CPU becomes powerful enough for those tasks, it won't take long (1-2 years) before the hardware can be shrunk to be put into an SoC.
Click to expand...

But SoC is just a hybrid chip, CPU, GPU, media controlers, etc. correct? Intel, AMD, nVidia are all doing the same thing, just Intel and AMD is doing it with x86 and everyone else with ARM. x86 is simply a lot more powerful than ARM clock for clock and I think that there will simply be other applications for this power.
 
heatlesssun said:
But SoC is just a hybrid chip, CPU, GPU, media controlers, etc. correct? Intel, AMD, nVidia are all doing the same thing, just Intel and AMD is doing it with x86 and everyone else with ARM. x86 is simply a lot more powerful than ARM clock for clock and I think that there will simply be other applications for this power.
Click to expand...

I edited my earlier post, might want to check it again.

One difference between an SoC and CPU is that an SoC often includes dedicated hardware for performing tasks that a CPU is traditionally very poor at, such as anything related to audio, video, and image processing. A 1 GHz SoC can easily decode 1080p H.264 video, but a 1 GHz CPU will struggle.

It should be noted that modern x86 CPUs do contain SIMD instructions for performing these tasks better, but it's still not as power or size efficient as dedicated hardware.
 
Red Falcon said:
I doubt x86 and x64 are going anywhere anytime soon. There is a reason RISC processors went down the drain with desktop/server computing.
Click to expand...
Internally, all the scheduling and execution in a modern x86 processor revolves around micro-ops; everything on the other side of the decoder is very RISC-like.

RISC ISAs may have gone down the drain in the desktop market, but even Intel has long ago acknowledged that it's a better way to design a processor.
 
once this cpu is developed, i can see nvidia taking it alongside any one of their gpu's and bringing you your next gen console
 
superbooga said:
I edited my earlier post, might want to check it again.

One difference between an SoC and CPU is that an SoC often includes dedicated hardware for performing tasks that a CPU is traditionally very poor at, such as anything related to audio, video, and image processing. A 1 GHz SoC can easily decode 1080p H.264 video, but a 1 GHz CPU will struggle.

It should be noted that modern x86 CPUs do contain SIMD instructions for performing these tasks better, but it's still not as power or size efficient as dedicated hardware.
Click to expand...

I get that and totally agree. But you still need CPUs to coordinate all these parts. Sure a 1 GHz ARM with a hardware decoder can handle 1080P playback but don't think it would be able to drive 3x SLI. CPUs are good at running procedural code and most applications are still built with procedural languages like C, C++, C#, Java, etc.
 
NIVO said:
once this cpu is developed, i can see nvidia taking it alongside any one of their gpu's and bringing you your next gen console
Click to expand...

I hope not. Too risky. It takes a whole lotta cash that you don't start getting back for 2-3 years. Also, MS or Sony can afford a flop console, I don't think Nv could. If Nv ended up bankrupting themselves, we would be stuck $600, 6970's. Not saying the console would flop, just that the risk is simply unreasonable in a market owned by companies 10 or more times Nv's size.

A hand held would be a different matter. But even there, competing with the PSP and Nintendo's offerings would be tough. They are extremely entrenched in the market.
 
GotNoRice said:
I can't really say I'm very eager to have the desktop market fragmented like that. It's a shame they are unable to build x86 chips instead.
Click to expand...


I believe Intel has the rights to X86 architect and they have not let anyone else get rights to make X86 chips. The only reason Via can make X86 chips is due they bought out Cyrix which had the rights to make X86 chips.
 
I love Nvidia's card but hate their hype / PR machine. A wait and see attitude is best here.

More competition in CPUs is great, as long as it does not end up bankrupting green and leaving us with less competition in the GPU space (extremely unlikely).
 
So if Windows 8 will support arm too would it be possible in future for todays software to be run on such cpus?
 
Michaelius said:
So if Windows 8 will support arm too would it be possible in future for todays software to be run on such cpus?
Click to expand...
No. If it's compiled to x86 machine instructions, it's never going to run on a non-x86 machine (without an emulator, at least).
 
LuminaryJanitor said:
No. If it's compiled to x86 machine instructions, it's never going to run on a non-x86 machine (without an emulator, at least).
Click to expand...

Or recompile it for ARM.

Overall I'm pretty excited about this. It has a potential of failing hard, no doubt, but I haven't seen better timing in my lifetime to challenge x86 on the desktop.

With all of the growth and R&D dollars flowing into ARM, there might just be enough behind a new architecture to challenge x86 this time around.
 
Michaelius said:
So if Windows 8 will support arm too would it be possible in future for todays software to be run on such cpus?
Click to expand...
There are a few items being tossed around right now by some of the better technical sites. In general, not really if speed is a concern, but some types of apps should run OK even in binary emulation.

.NET is platform independent, as it's compiled down to bytecode like Java is, then JIT compiled (only once) as code is about to be executed. The problem with that is even commercial .NET software often calls down to native code. If Windows 8 starts to adopt an App type of concept (of course not throwing away backwards compatibility that makes it popular), more strict .NET only use could make an application compatible with both x86 (32-bit and 64-bit) and ARM (32-bit and in 2 years likely also 64-bit). MS *is* making a Windows app store, so the idea is not far fetched. Then there's the possibility that developers may just compile native apps, making ARM apps incompatible with x86 and vice versa.

Then there could also be a Rosetta-type binary translator, or possibly done in hardware a la Transmeta Crusoe (x86 to native decoder). I believe the Dragon/Loongson/Godson MIPS-based processors created in China have binary translators in the processor itself. It will not have great x86 execution speed, but would be much, much faster than pure binary software emulation.

I see this as a fire being lit to force x86 to become much more power efficient. ARM is an insurance policy in the meantime.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top