AMD Confirms Kaveri APU Is a 512-GPU Core Integrated Processor 130
MojoKid writes "At APU13 today, AMD announced a full suite of new products and development tools as part of its push to improve HSA development. One of the most significant announcements to come out the sessions today-- albeit in a tacit, indirect fashion, is that Kaveri is going to pack a full 512 GPU cores. There's not much new to see on the CPU side of things — like Richland/Trinity, Steamroller is a pair of CPU modules with two cores per module. AMD also isn't talking about clock speeds yet, but the estimated 862 GFLOPS that the company is claiming for Kaveri points to GPU clock speeds between 700 — 800MHz. With 512 cores, Kaveri picks up a 33% boost over its predecessors, but memory bandwidth will be essential for the GPU to reach peak performance. For performance, AMD showed Kaveri up against the Intel 4770K running a low-end GeForce GT 630. In the intro scene to BF4's single-player campaign (1920x1080, Medium Details), the AMD Kaveri system (with no discrete GPU) consistently pushed frame rates in the 28-40 FPS range. The Intel system, in contrast, couldn't manage 15 FPS. Performance on that system was solidly in the 12-14 FPS range — meaning AMD is pulling 2x the frame rate, if not more."
Re:Cool (Score:4, Insightful)
Yes, if you spend more money you can get more performance. The whole point of the APU is that you can spend less on a single piece of silicon than you would for "a better CPU and a decent graphics card."
Re:Cool (Score:5, Insightful)
So if I buy an AMD CPU, I can play games with low frame-rates at low detail settings (yeah, I know it says 'medium', but when almost all games now go at least up to 'ultra', 'medium' is the new 'low').
Or I could just buy a better CPU and a decent graphics card and play them properly.
Yes, but could you do that in a compact HTPC cabinet (breadbox sized or smaller) and have your total system draw less than 100W or so?
I'm really excited by this news - because it allows traditional desktops to reinvent themselves.
Think Steam Machines, think HTPC that lets you do full HD and 4k in the future, think HTPC that also lets you do light-weight or mid-level gaming.
Think of a replacement to consoles - a computing device that gives you 90% of the convenience of a dedicated console, but gives you full freedom to download and play from the app store of your choice (Steam or anything else), gives you better control of your hardware, and lets you mix and match controllers (Steam Controller, keyboard and mouse, or something else that someone invents a year down the line).
I'm long on AMD for this reason. Maybe I'm a sucker. But there is a chance that desktops can find a place in your living room instead of your basement. And I'm quite excited about that.
Re:catch me up now someone? (Score:4, Insightful)
You can call the advantage "complexity", but in practice that really means price, heat, and size, all of which are critical to laptops. Additionally, putting them on the same die makes it easier to have unified memory, which can further simplify things (and be as fast or faster in some applications for the less money if designed correctly - for example, compute tasks that touch a lot of the same data on the CPU and GPU like video encoding, etc).
And it most definitely does not have to "run hotter" than *two* discrete parts (and is certainly easier to cool, anyway). Computers are *always* using a GPU these days, modern OSes do all sorts of 3D effects (even some mobile ones). If the GPU (and software/driver) is designed well, it would be a lot simpler, cheaper, and possibly even more power efficient than the dual-graphics design of Macbook Pros and some Wintel laptops...
For a desktop, this isn't anything all that exciting (except for those who want cheap PCs with reasonable performance). For a laptop/embedded system, it's a really interesting chip, even if it's not the cheapest.
Re:Yeah i don't get it (Score:2, Insightful)
Small form factor business PCs,
Don't need 3D performance. Don't need GPGPU performance in 99% of cases.
Media center PCs
Plenty fast enough already to play video at 1920x1080.
low-end Steambox
If you want your games to look like crap.
Integrating the GPU into the CPU gets the BOM cost down and raises the minimum performance standard.
Because lots of people run 3D games on servers.
Certainly we do use GPUs for some floating-point intensive tasks on servers, but this is nowhere near fast enough to be useful.