Sunday, January 14th 2018

Intel Could Ditch AMD dGPU Die on Future Core G-series MCMs with "Arctic Sound"

Intel did the impossible in 2017, by collaborating with rival AMD after decades, on a product. The new Core i7-8000G series processors are multi-chip modules that combine quad-core "Kaby Lake" CPU dies with discrete AMD Radeon Vega GPU dies that have their own dedicated HBM2 stacks. With performance-segment notebooks and sleek AIO desktops building momentum for such products, Intel sees a future in building its own discrete GPUs, at least dies that can replace the AMD Radeon IP from its Core G-series processors.

With former AMD Graphics head Raja Koduri switching to Intel amidst rumors of the company investing in discrete GPUs of its own, details emerge of the company's future "Arctic Sound" and "Jupiter Sound" graphics IP, which point to the possibility of them being discrete GPU dies based on the Gen 12 and Gen 13 graphics architectures, respectively. According to Ashraf Eassa, a technology stock commentator with "The Motley Fool," both "Arctic Sound" and "Jupiter Sound" are discrete GPU dies that connect with Intel processor dies over EMIB, the company's proprietary high-density interconnect for multi-chip modules. It could be a long wait leading up to the two, since the company is still monetizing its Gen 9.5 architecture on 8th generation Core processors.
Add your own comment

45 Comments on Intel Could Ditch AMD dGPU Die on Future Core G-series MCMs with "Arctic Sound"

#1
Steevo
I wonder how much they will pay AMD for technology, or how much they will get sued for.
Posted on Reply
#2
GoldenX
I wonder if their High End GPU will have proper drivers.
Posted on Reply
#3
Midland Dog
"GoldenX said:
I wonder if their High End GPU will have proper drivers.
It would be a good start to overhaul drivers for the older igps, i want to see them take an intel hd 3000 and squeeze as much perf as possible out of it through driver improvements, it would be a fun exercise for the software devs and would be good practise
Posted on Reply
#4
notb
"Steevo said:
I wonder how much they will pay AMD for technology, or how much they will get sued for.
Surely less than a few billion, since that's what AMD GPU division is worth. Which isn't that much, when you consider they lost 20 bln of capitalization because of Meltdown.
Generally speaking, don't worry. Intel knows how to make money. Their dGPU will earn more than it will cost.
Posted on Reply
#5
Useful Idiot
Man, that's kinda thin. Going off what one dude says?
Posted on Reply
#6
RejZoR
I mean, you don't need a crystal ball to figure that out. Intel doesn't want to rely on AMD. "On-die" RX Vega is just a middle step, a testing ground. Considering they hired a GPU chief architect from AMD, it would be kinda silly not to use his knowledge. They have millions to piss at R&D so it won't take 5 years to make, but maybe 2 at most.
Posted on Reply
#7
csgabe
Arctic Vision sounds more appropriate than Arctic Sound or maybe sound means "free from damage, defect; in good condition; robust".
Posted on Reply
#8
Xzibit
"Useful Idiot said:
Man, that's kinda thin. Going off what one dude says?
Ashraf Eassa owns shares of Intel. The Motley Fool recommends Intel. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy.
Posted on Reply
#9
dj-electric
Intel's own GPU? i thought they hired Raja just to keep company and tell funny stories all day.

/s
Posted on Reply
#10
seronx
Gen 12 and Gen 13 will most likely be Gen 10D and Gen 11D irl.
Posted on Reply
#11
Xajel
I wonder if these dGPU's will do good for miners, then a $200 one will be sold for $600..

seriously, if these will only be for pGPU on the MCM is okay, but not a separate GPU card, they will need serious shit to go this high. Raja will have a great FineWine(tm) by then.
Posted on Reply
#12
notb
"Xzibit said:
Ashraf Eassa owns shares of Intel. The Motley Fool recommends Intel. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy.
You meant something specific...?

For your information: Motley Fool became a household name in investing. These online articles are just a tiny part of their work (pretty much marketing). They're consulting on investing, they run their own mutual fund. So if you're trying to undermine their credibility, you have to try harder. :-)

BTW: yeah, it's a shock that an investor specialized in technology both owns and writes about Intel stock. They should find an agriculture specialist for that, right? :-)
Man... this is what disclosure policy is all about.

"Xajel said:
I wonder if these dGPU's will do good for miners, then a $200 one will be sold for $600..
A fine question, but relevant already with the Vega MCM. If it's half of Vega 56, it'll mine like a 1050 Ti (if not slightly better).
But does it make sense, i.e. will mining potential increase the price? Doubtful. Mining with GPUs makes sense because of how you can mitigate costs of other equipment (mobo, CPU, cases etc) and work (less systems and mining software to attend).
Even if Intel+Vega MCM offerts great hashrate, you still have to buy the whole package per each GPU.
Posted on Reply
#13
john_
Ashraf Eassa's articles where always totally biased, promoting Intel, attacking AMD. And most times his articles where correct in the end, because it's easy to bet on the fact that a 200 billions company will get what it wants in the end, against a 10 billion company. That being said, and also considering that Motley Fool heavily promotes Intel and Nvidia in the stock market, probably gives them some aceess to inside info.

Anyway, it will be interesting to see what Intel will bring to the GPU market.
Posted on Reply
#14
Assimilator
"Useful Idiot said:
Man, that's kinda thin. Going off what one dude says?
Welcome to techPowerUp!, where entire "news" articles are written off the back of one guy's unsourced tweets.
Posted on Reply
#16
theoneandonlymrk
"notb said:
You meant something specific...?

For your information: Motley Fool became a household name in investing. These online articles are just a tiny part of their work (pretty much marketing). They're consulting on investing, they run their own mutual fund. So if you're trying to undermine their credibility, you have to try harder. :)

BTW: yeah, it's a shock that an investor specialized in technology both owns and writes about Intel stock. They should find an agriculture specialist for that, right? :)
Man... this is what disclosure policy is all about.


A fine question, but relevant already with the Vega MCM. If it's half of Vega 56, it'll mine like a 1050 Ti (if not slightly better).
But does it make sense, i.e. will mining potential increase the price? Doubtful. Mining with GPUs makes sense because of how you can mitigate costs of other equipment (mobo, CPU, cases etc) and work (less systems and mining software to attend).
Even if Intel+Vega MCM offerts great hashrate, you still have to buy the whole package per each GPU.
So the motley fools and you have plenty to gain from pissing on Amds chip's then yes , this is year's out and irrelevant at this time , your looking at 2020-2022 even depending on node and ramp issues and 10-7nm, Raja's got some money to earn yet.
Posted on Reply
#17
plåtburken
"Assimilator said:
Welcome to techPowerUp!, where entire "news" articles are written off the back of one guy's unsourced tweets.
Woops I guess.
Posted on Reply
#18
RejZoR
Again, big corporations don't like being dependent on others. It's why Samsung basically makes everything themselves for phones, from chipsets, CPU's, batteries, screens, hell, Samsung even has foundries for light and heavy metallurgy, they probably even create aluminium frames themselves for the phones and devices. Same for Apple, more and more internal parts are made by them because they don't want to rely on Samsung for it. Intel is no different. Collaborations are not uncommon, but they are usually short term stuff that usually ends up in internal production with same capabilities as the outsourced part. And when they do it, they prefer to keep it for themselves and not outsource it, which is why AMD's decision to sell stuff to Intel felt kinda weird. GPU's were one of huge things that made Intel offerings look like a joke. It's a short term money, but long term it's a very bad investment if you ask me. Unless you're fabless company like ARM where all your R&D has to be sold to others. Then it's all about selling stuff to "competition".
Posted on Reply
#19
notb
"RejZoR said:
Again, big corporations don't like being dependent on others. It's why Samsung basically makes everything themselves for phones, from chipsets, CPU's, batteries, screens, hell, Samsung even has foundries for light and heavy metallurgy, they probably even create aluminium frames themselves for the phones and devices.
Not exactly. Samsung is something the Japanese would call zaibatsu.
It's not like they built foundries to make their smartphone production more independent from other companies. They simply have foundries - it's part of their business. They needed metal for their smartphones and it could simply turn out that their own supplier is the cheapest (or the only one around ;)).
At this point Samsung either makes something or is able to do it, but doesn't (because it's not profitable enough for their targets). And whatever they do is usually very good, often leading the market.

By comparison, Intel is still a simple semiconductor company. They've been trying new things lately to support growth, but it's all about electronics - they're not building ships or selling you insurance. They're not trying to make an AI car (unlike Apple) - they partner with car makers and supply the "brain".
"theoneandonlymrk said:
So the motley fools and you have plenty to gain from pissing on Amds chip's then yes
You're overestimating such articles' importance for the market. In short term there's practically zero significance and it would still be very tiny, if the text was in something mainstream like Financial Times.
In long term such texts have no measurable impact.

Also, I just don't see how any of this could be called "pissing on AMD's chips". You're taking all of this way to personally.
Posted on Reply
#20
DRDNA
I BLOCKED The Motley Fool years ago from all my browsers! They report FAKE news and they are a sheisty website and probably side more on the side of lies than not! I'm not saying that is the issue here but I'm saying non the less!:toast:
Posted on Reply
#21
RejZoR
"notb said:
Not exactly. Samsung is something the Japanese would call zaibatsu.
It's not like they built foundries to make their smartphone production more independent from other companies. They simply have foundries - it's part of their business. They needed metal for their smartphones and it could simply turn out that their own supplier is the cheapest (or the only one around ;)).
At this point Samsung either makes something or is able to do it, but doesn't (because it's not profitable enough for their targets). And whatever they do is usually very good, often leading the market.

By comparison, Intel is still a simple semiconductor company. They've been trying new things lately to support growth, but it's all about electronics - they're not building ships or selling you insurance. They're not trying to make an AI car (unlike Apple) - they partner with car makers and supply the "brain".

You're overestimating such articles' importance for the market. In short term there's practically zero significance and it would still be very tiny, if the text was in something mainstream like Financial Times.
In long term such texts have no measurable impact.

Also, I just don't see how any of this could be called "pissing on AMD's chips". You're taking all of this way to personally.
They have foundries because they expanded in so many fields. But they ultimately did that to be self sustaining. Samsung, Hyundai, Mitsubishi, they all operate in a similar way and are a blend of traditional heavy industry and fine high tech one. If you make it, you can have higher margins because no one can ever adapt to you as much as yourself. And higher margines is ultimately what drives mega corporations. Profit.
Posted on Reply
#22
Aquinus
Resident Wat-man
"RejZoR said:
They have foundries because they expanded in so many fields. But they ultimately did that to be self sustaining. Samsung, Hyundai, Mitsubishi, they all operate in a similar way and are a blend of traditional heavy industry and fine high tech one. If you make it, you can have higher margins because no one can ever adapt to you as much as yourself. And higher margines is ultimately what drives mega corporations. Profit.
Technically those aren't corporations (Samsung, Hyundai, and Mitsubishi,) those are conglomerates that have a bunch of corporations under them due to their voting power through something like a board of directors within each company. Intel is a mega corporation but, the other 3 aren't, they're conglomerates. In fact, you probably could call Samsung Electronics itself a mega corporation despite being a subsidiary.
Posted on Reply
#24
qubit
Overclocked quantum bit
It was obvious that Intel would eventually dabble in discrete graphics in a meaningful way. I could see them going head-to-head with NVIDIA in a few years and giving us the great competition that AMD so sorely lacked. If anyone can beat NVIDIA at its own game, it's Intel.
Posted on Reply
#25
_JP_
Sure, but keep making incredibly smart decisions (/s) like SKUs with the most advanced features at insane price points for which no consumer product will reach production. Case in point, eDRAM-equipped Iris on obscure BGA-only SKUs for low-power platforms.
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment