Nvidia: CPU dead, long live the GPU
A guy from Nvidia says that its gaming-class graphics chips, not CPUs, now represent the primary component of a modern computer.
"Basically the CPU is dead. Yes, that processor you see advertised everywhere from Intel. Its run out of steam. The fact is that it no longer makes anything run faster. You don’t need a fast one anymore. This is why AMD is in trouble and its why Intel are panicking. They are panicking so much that they have started attacking us. This is because you do still [need] one chip to get faster and faster – the GPU. That GeForce chip. Yes honestly. No I am not making this up. You are my friends and so I am not selling you. This shit is just interesting as hell."
This is just part of a raving email sent to The Inquirer, apparently from Roy Taylor, nVidia's VP of content relations. The Inq just quotes the whole thing and lets it hang out there.
There is a strong element of truth to this chest-slapping, however: in lots of modern computer games, the game logic is extremely simple, with all the hard graft—calculating and rendering the graphics—palmed off on the GPU. Graphics chips, due to their architecture, are also faster than CPUs at certain kinds of calculations.
Windows Vista, for one, can't handle the truth.
the latest
latest episodes
I would agree with a lot of that. Not that the CPU is dead (wha?), but a good CPU isn't nearly as necessary as a good GPU for gaming. I have a Core 2 Duo E4300 (bottom of the line C2D), but a GeForce 7900 that works pretty well. My wife has a CELERON (oh, the humanity!) but some 8000 series GPU, and her and I play games like Team Fortress 2 and the Ship together all the time. Everything looks and plays fine; why waste several hundred on a huge CPU? Not worth it.
I find it ironic that the picture you used shows that pixie or fairy or whatever (she's nVidia's mascot and has been in many of their tech demoes, right?) with extremely divergent eyes. This makes it look like she's been lobotomized, and that most of her brain is missing.
From there, the idea of brain == CPU is not too outlandish. Plus, she's supposed to be beautiful.
And, basically, the nVidia VP is saying that we've got enough brains, we need more beauty.
Well, I for one, think we could certainly do with more brains: for AI, for physics (although GPUs are starting to deal with that, too) and for more complex game mechanics, such as procedurally-generated content.
"I find it ironic that the picture you used shows that pixie or fairy or whatever (she's nVidia's mascot and has been in many of their tech demoes, right?) with extremely divergent eyes. This makes it look like she's been lobotomized, and that most of her brain is missing."
One might even suspect that the author of the post manipulated the image in order to create this impression.
I'm going with the poster manipulation theory with the image ...
Now that the GPU does most graphics work, we can use the CPU to concentrate on things like physics and other such calculations. Also, I dare say a good CPU helps me run some of the math and engineering software I use a lot more than the GPU?
Maybe the CPU isn't a factor in gaming anymore, but it's far from gone in nonleisure tasks.
Honestly, I think Nvidia is digging itself into a massive hole with its faster and faster cards. They've over-focused on the high end, and let Intel control the low-end market. Now PC gaming has gotten so expensive the the bottom is falling out of the market, and a lot of the major American dev houses (e.g. id and Epic) have bascially given up and moved to consoles.
You never played games like Civilization if you think there is no use for the CPU anymore. Of course Yet Another Crappy First Person Shooter ain't going to tap much on the CPU..
OK Mr. VP, how about some Linux support you evangelizing freak?
My new MythTV box has a nForce 630a / 7050pv and there are no Linux- specific drivers for it.
"One might even suspect that the author of the post manipulated the image in order to create this impression."
I see what you did, there.
Having seen many much worse (and funnier) graphics bugs as a game tester, it didn't even occur to me that the image had been photoshopped.
Have you seen the rendering "bloopers" from the Shrek DVD? Terrifying.
Huh. My boss is gonna be happy. All those servers we keep buying to run VMWare ESX server have expensive Intel Xeons in them. If we stop buying those silly CPU things, we'll save buckets!
Just thought that I'd mention that there is a pretty interesting article in the 16 February issue of New Scientist magazine with the evocative title "Game Consoles Reveal Their Hidden Powers" by Mike Nagle (p.26).
It is an interesting look at how GPUs are increasingly used by the scientific community to do the heavy lifting that used to be the domain of supercomputers. For instance, the story tells of one instance in which "an array of 16 PS3s is calculating what will happen when two black holes merge".
Game on!
". Now PC gaming has gotten so expensive the the bottom is falling out of the market, and a lot of the major American dev houses (e.g. id and Epic) have bascially given up and moved to consoles."
Yes, shame that consoles don't use video cards:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xbox_360#Hardware
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PS3#Hardware
@#12
"Yes, shame that consoles don't use video cards:"
I assume you're being sarcastic. I think the point is that it's easier to target the relatively inexpensive consoles which have very capable GPUs, than to target common PCs with severely underpowered (Intel) integrated graphics, or expect those PC users to upgrade to video cards which cost nearly as much as a 360. Better low-end offerings from NVidia and ATI might have resulted in more capable low-end PCs being sold straight from the manufacturers, and more potential PC game customers. Ah well.
A VP for a company that makes graphics chips says that graphics chips are really important.
Whoda thunk?
Note to Nvidia guy:
"its" = "belonging to it"
"it's" = "it is"
#11
in reference to: It is an interesting look at how GPUs are increasingly used by the scientioe the domain of supercomputers. For instance, the story tells of one instance in which "an array of 16 PS3s is calculating what will happen when two black holes merge".
It is true that scientists are starting to use powerful GPUs for computational science and scientific simulations (see Nvidia's "CUDA").
However, in the case of the playstation 3, they are taking advantage of the powerful, highly-parallel IBM/Sony "Cell" CPU in the console, not the nVidia GPU.
@#16
I stand corrected for being too specific in saying that it was the GPUs that were being used.
I suppose that I should have just generally said game consoles were doing the heavy lifting.
My bad.