• Welcome to TechPowerUp Forums, Guest! Please check out our forum guidelines for info related to our community.
  • The forums have been upgraded with support for dark mode. By default it will follow the setting on your system/browser. You may override it by scrolling to the end of the page and clicking the gears icon.

AMD Delivers the World's First and Only APU for Embedded Systems

JF-AMD said:
And atom does not have a DX-11 GPU in it. That is where we are getting all of the design wins - people are seeing that atom does not have the features that they need
Click to expand...

since when do people who run atom procs need dx11 ?
 
Thatguy said:
Direct Compute is a huge performance booster in alot of CPU heavy applications. DX support brings direct compute.
Click to expand...

IIRC DirectCompute can run on DX10 perfectly fine
 
My only complaint is when I buy one of these suckers to build an HTPC for my mom how is she not going to think it's just an oddly shapen rock?

Can't they make these things bigger? :roll:
 
Easy Rhino said:
since when do people who run atom procs need dx11 ?
Click to expand...

There are a lot of embedded applications that benefit from richer graphics. Gaming devices, medical imaging, set top boxes, kiosks with interactive media, things along those lines.

Embedded platforms are often built with an expectation of 5 or more years of life. So, in that sense, by the time these things are halfway through their life, there is still a need for future graphics.

If you were a cable company building an IPTV set top box that needed to stream content from 2011 through 2016, would you want DX10 or DX11?
 
JF-AMD said:
There are a lot of embedded applications that benefit from richer graphics. Gaming devices, medical imaging, set top boxes, kiosks with interactive media, things along those lines.

Embedded platforms are often built with an expectation of 5 or more years of life. So, in that sense, by the time these things are halfway through their life, there is still a need for future graphics.

If you were a cable company building an IPTV set top box that needed to stream content from 2011 through 2016, would you want DX10 or DX11?
Click to expand...


I am waiting for the 28nm ARM competitor annoucements. I know you guys are building a arm killer for phones with the APU tech.

I would love to see a world of just one damn instruction set.
 
JF-AMD said:
There are a lot of embedded applications that benefit from richer graphics. Gaming devices, medical imaging, set top boxes, kiosks with interactive media, things along those lines.

Embedded platforms are often built with an expectation of 5 or more years of life. So, in that sense, by the time these things are halfway through their life, there is still a need for future graphics.

If you were a cable company building an IPTV set top box that needed to stream content from 2011 through 2016, would you want DX10 or DX11?
Click to expand...

well i certainly wouldn't use something that calls itself, "the world's first." they are always fraught with problems. i would wait to see it out in the wild for several months unless of course the guy selling them to me is willing to massively discount them. and by the time the product gets all of its bugs worked out i will have settled with trusty dx10 for all of my embedded needs.
 
Easy Rhino said:
well i certainly wouldn't use something that calls itself, "the world's first." they are always fraught with problems. i would wait to see it out in the wild for several months unless of course the guy selling them to me is willing to massively discount them. and by the time the product gets all of its bugs worked out i will have settled with trusty dx10 for all of my embedded needs.
Click to expand...

what ??? you can still use your "trusty" DX 10 code on it :rolleyes:

btw its for embedded entertainment thing, like karaoke box or even arcade machine, so its need latest visual enchantment
 
wahdangun said:
what ??? you can still use your "trusty" DX 10 code on it :rolleyes:

btw its for embedded entertainment thing, like karaoke box or even arcade machine, so its need latest visual enchantment
Click to expand...

my point is if you resell products that use embedded systems you go with a proven product, not with "the world's first." yea, dx11 has a couple of nice features of dx10 but the difference is negligible on these tiny chips. the headache and customer service overhead isnt worth it IMO. i would just go with something Intel or VIA was offering.
 
Easy Rhino said:
my point is if you resell products that use embedded systems you go with a proven product, not with "the world's first." yea, dx11 has a couple of nice features of dx10 but the difference is negligible on these tiny chips. the headache and customer service overhead isnt worth it IMO. i would just go with something Intel or VIA was offering.
Click to expand...

I keep forgetting the AMD has never made the stars core or a dx 11 gpu before.

silly me.
 
pr0n Inspector said:
Yes, because "it just works". Testing is for sissies.
Click to expand...

all they did for the most part was shrunk and integrated the pcie bus and associated hardware and stuck it on a die. I am sure they tested its performance we saw working silicon like 10 months ago popping up at a tech demo or investors day. Maybe it was hotchips.

Either way, this thing is likely solid as can be.

However silly comments like this one and the one above it, are that silly. AMD knows how to make chips.
 
Thatguy said:
all they did for the most part was shrunk and integrated the pcie bus and associated hardware and stuck it on a die. I am sure they tested its performance we saw working silicon like 10 months ago popping up at a tech demo or investors day. Maybe it was hotchips.

Either way, this thing is likely solid as can be.

However silly comments like this one and the one above it, are that silly. AMD knows how to make chips.
Click to expand...

it's not the chips. it's the software that makes the chip work that is untested...
 
Thatguy said:
Its going to basically be the same software. Same hardware " for all intensive purposes".
Click to expand...

it can't possible be the same software as it is a brand new chip.
 
AMD isn't a completely new company, why would you think they'd screw it up? AMD know what they are doing, sure there is a chance that they MIGHT perhaps possibly maybe screw something up, doesn't means that they will. Innovation and something new doesn't mean it is bad. Hell, the world would be nowhere if everyone was scared to try something a little bit newer.
 
n-ster said:
AMD isn't a completely new company, why would you think they'd screw it up? AMD know what they are doing, sure there is a chance that they MIGHT perhaps possibly maybe screw something up, doesn't means that they will. Innovation and something new doesn't mean it is bad. Hell, the world would be nowhere if everyone was scared to try something a little bit newer.
Click to expand...

im not saying they would screw it up. i am saying most companies go with proven tech rather than invest millions in something that is "the world's first."
 
they spend millions to innovate and make that new thing proven tech. How do you thing the current proven tech was made? It was first the world's first at some point before becoming proven tech.

Give the "world's first" a chance.
 
Easy Rhino said:
im not saying they would screw it up. i am saying most companies go with proven tech rather than invest millions in something that is "the world's first."
Click to expand...

I'm not really seeing alot of firsts outside of the packaging and integration. the software ecosystem will be just fine.

mole hill meet mountain.
 
n-ster said:
they spend millions to innovate and make that new thing proven tech. How do you thing the current proven tech was made? It was first the world's first at some point before becoming proven tech.

Give the "world's first" a chance.
Click to expand...

They will. After a year, or two.
 
Easy Rhino said:
it can't possible be the same software as it is a brand new chip.
Click to expand...

didn't embedded system develop their own software ??? and because its X86 so they can use windows based system (wich are a "proven" software) and tbh, usually embedded system just run one specific software like karaoke, games and etc. so if they can't iron out the bug then it was their problem and not AMD because this APU is just a graphic card on CPU die.


and btw if you mean world first is unproven and unreliable, then why the hell AMD gain market share with their opeteron64, i mean isn't server need more reliability than embedded system ??
 
JF-AMD said:
That market is not about benchmarks. It's about cost, size, board size, power/heat and the level of component integration.

In those areas we rock.
Click to expand...

so why isn't this passive? most embedded systems try to do without fans mostly due to location and lack of well cleaning
 
wahdangun said:
didn't embedded system develop their own software ??? and because its X86 so they can use windows based system (wich are a "proven" software) and tbh, usually embedded system just run one specific software like karaoke, games and etc. so if they can't iron out the bug then it was their problem and not AMD because this APU is just a graphic card on CPU die.


and btw if you mean world first is unproven and unreliable, then why the hell AMD gain market share with their opeteron64, i mean isn't server need more reliability than embedded system ??
Click to expand...

There is lots of embedded x86 sw (linux/windows based). Proprietary OS's still exist but the growth is in standard OS's.

cdawall said:
so why isn't this passive? most embedded systems try to do without fans mostly due to location and lack of well cleaning
Click to expand...

There are plenty of passive designs.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top