Intel aims for lower-power GPUs as Nvidia pushes pricey energy guzzlers

While Nvidia and AMD put out high-end graphics cards for those with plenty of money to spend, Intel is doubling down on the mainstream GPU market with lower-power discrete products and CPUs with upgraded integrated graphics. Raja Koduri, head of Intel's Accelerated Computing Systems and Graphics Group, said in a recent …

[Steve Jackson]

£1500+ for a power hungry graphics card just continues to place tech as bad guys in this age of responsibility, as did BTC proof of work.

When you consider the computational power afforded assembling a system at equal monetary value, whilst it's clear said machine to run such a card is not a simple side show, it's a disproportionate amount of expenditure on one item.

Intel I'm not so sure (vis a vis power requirements for latest processors versus the competition) share the "correct" world view but it's difficult to see how they could otherwise achieve any market inroads; except in the 'forgotten' market segment (which is where I'm sure the majority of users would prefer to exist).

But yeah, (low) power to them. Plus a third way is always a nice 'to have'.

[steviesteveo]

I see it as really short termist. They've basically given up on the next generation of IT growing up with geforce. It might even reverse the mindshare as kids come through who never even saw a 1.5k GPU growing up but remember the AMD graphics in their Xbox

[Anonymous Coward]

The lack of a TNT2 equivalent is shortsighted. Amazing power/price combo for their day. Also, possibly the widest possible driver set ever written - I still keep one of those cards around for legacy cruft that needs to run on real metal. Win 3.1, 95/98, NT, OS2, Linux all well supported across the board.

Of course that end of the market is possibly better served by the on-CPU graphics now rather than discrete GPU.

[Anonymous Coward]

I think Intel are onto something with this. The lack of a mid-range option in current product lineups screams opportunity. You will never, ever persuade me (or a lot of others) to pick up a GPU for £1000+.

Recent Nvidia and AMD offerings are decidedly power-thirsty. It wasn't all that long ago that a 300W PSU was adequate. Now, 850W+ is not unusual; and the graphics make a large part of that budget. On boring desktop stuff, my UPS indicates my (entire) PC setup as using around 400W. Firing up a vaguely GPU intensive title it will go north of 600. That's on what I would consider probably the last of the Mid-range graphics cards to be available (5700XT).

Noise/Thermals/Running costs are valid concerns, Nvidia coil whine is a constant nuisance too (once you hear it, you can't unhear it and will never want to touch their stuff again).

[Piro]

NVIDIA overpriced by around $400

AMD saw that, and thought "OK, we'll overprice by around $200, and we'll look like great value".

Ugh. Last time there was a compelling release was the 1080 Ti.

[cb7]

Whilst Intel's goal is laudable, I fail to see how they're going to deliver given their apparent inability to move manufacturing onto more efficient nodes.

Current nVidia GPUs are on 4nm already

AMD are on 5nm.

Intel are peddling Intel 7 which which is basically 10nm renamed. Yes, yes I know it's equivalent to TSMC's 7nm, but TSMC are shipping volume on 4nm already.

Meanwhile, as an aside, Apple will gain some desktop / laptop market share with their M1/M2 powered machines also at 5nm.