In my opinion there is a lot of negotiations and hard pushing going on behind the stage. At the moment AMD is the only company working in the both sectors - GPUs and CPUs. They need some cash, but other than that they are on the right track. The problem with Intel entering the market is that they have to come up with something really good and DirectX compactible.
I am thinking in a 5 year period CPU and GPU will be a sold pretty much the same way as the CPUs today. Probably the technology would share system memory and be verstile(upgrade the memory timings/mhzs, you upgrade overall speed). So the main component to work over is the motherboard layout and technology. It must host both a CPU and a GPU processor or one chip with multiple cores (but IMO the first one is more alike). If Intel goes their way and close their platform for others will they have enough GFX speed. Would the new Larrabee work? Or would they open the platform for an nVidia GPU at the end? And how would AMD react? Keep their business prioritis and close the technology or act for popularization of their platform first?
I think it is pretty much about what GPU or something else nVidia has to offer. What functions could it process and how fast. Also in what cost can they do it of course. If they really progress in physics and graphics, keep a healthy advantage and minimize cost of their GPUs (or whatever you might call them), both ATI and Intel would open eventually for nVidia. Because simply customers would require it and if they don't and actually slow down their platforms by doing so there is no saying who else can enter the market and join nVidia. And both VIA and IBM might take the option and build up a platform with nVidia. And i think that while Intel might keep the advantage in terms of CPUs (very hard to predict though in 5 years) graphics and physics of nvidia would be top of the branch.
I am thinking in a 5 year period CPU and GPU will be a sold pretty much the same way as the CPUs today. Probably the technology would share system memory and be verstile(upgrade the memory timings/mhzs, you upgrade overall speed). So the main component to work over is the motherboard layout and technology. It must host both a CPU and a GPU processor or one chip with multiple cores (but IMO the first one is more alike). If Intel goes their way and close their platform for others will they have enough GFX speed. Would the new Larrabee work? Or would they open the platform for an nVidia GPU at the end? And how would AMD react? Keep their business prioritis and close the technology or act for popularization of their platform first?
I think it is pretty much about what GPU or something else nVidia has to offer. What functions could it process and how fast. Also in what cost can they do it of course. If they really progress in physics and graphics, keep a healthy advantage and minimize cost of their GPUs (or whatever you might call them), both ATI and Intel would open eventually for nVidia. Because simply customers would require it and if they don't and actually slow down their platforms by doing so there is no saying who else can enter the market and join nVidia. And both VIA and IBM might take the option and build up a platform with nVidia. And i think that while Intel might keep the advantage in terms of CPUs (very hard to predict though in 5 years) graphics and physics of nvidia would be top of the branch.
Facebook
Twitter