Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

blackout8

macrumors member
May 24, 2006
32
0
LoveMacMini said:
Source: http://www.intel.com/design/chipsets/applnots/313343.htm

Just download the PDF, the second to last page is the one you should care about.

This baby is screaming, and I bet Apple will use the X3000 version in the Mini since it supports HDMI output.


This is great, I'm already satisfied with my 950 (even though it has glaring shortcomings *cough*iwannaplayfarcry*cough*).

Any advancements in IG is good news in my books, heres to having IG that can rival mid range dedicated chips in 2-3 years when i'm in the market for a new notebook!:D

Can't help but wish I had one in my MB now tho:( :eek: :D :D

EDIT: Hey that was post 30! *cue Fable reference* "you have reached, 'Member' status
 

Megatron

macrumors regular
Nov 19, 2005
235
4
When is this chipset supposed to be out? When will it be found in notebooks? Do they say in the pdf?
 

giganten

macrumors 6502a
Jan 23, 2006
602
0
Megatron said:
When is this chipset supposed to be out? When will it be found in notebooks? Do they say in the pdf?


http://www.guru3d.com/newsitem.php?id=4079
Maybe soon?

The upcoming boards will be based on Broadwater G965, Q963 and Q965 chipsets scheduled to launch the last week of July.
A microATX G965 based motherboard named DG965SS Shrewsbury will be the first Intel branded motherboard released.

And this DG965SS will use GMA X3000.

http://www.intel.com/cd/channel/reseller/asmo-na/eng/products/desktop/bdb/dg965ss/feature/index.htm
 

MacSA

macrumors 68000
Jun 4, 2003
1,803
5
UK
End of July eh? Today is the end of July lol....Cool, maybe we will see these go into the mini and macbook soon. :D
 

vv-tim

macrumors 6502
May 24, 2006
366
0
Integrated graphics will never rival off-board solutions. It's just not practical. They're aimed at different segments of the market.
 

QCassidy352

macrumors G5
Mar 20, 2003
12,066
6,107
Bay Area
very exciting. I imagine I'll get a rev. C macbook next summer, and it's good to see that integrated graphics are coming along well. :)
 

Eidorian

macrumors Penryn
Mar 23, 2005
29,190
386
Indianapolis
MacSA said:
End of July eh? Today is the end of July lol....Cool, maybe we will see these go into the mini and macbook soon. :D
Those would more then likely be mobile and not desktop variants. So see you in Santa Rosa.
 

BlizzardBomb

macrumors 68030
Jun 15, 2005
2,537
0
England
vv-tim said:
Integrated graphics will never rival off-board solutions. It's just not practical. They're aimed at different segments of the market.

GMA X3000 has 8 Unified pipelines, not even the Radeon X1300 has that many. It's also clocked higher (well the non-mobile one is).
 

mkrishnan

Moderator emeritus
Jan 9, 2004
29,776
15
Grand Rapids, MI, USA
vv-tim said:
Integrated graphics will never rival off-board solutions. It's just not practical. They're aimed at different segments of the market.

Things go back and forth. It all depends on design priorities. AMD is buying ATI, right? They can take an advanced ATI chipset, minimally modify it, drop it on the motherboard, and in principle call it integrated, in the sense that it's sold as part of the AMD chipset. Granted that this is not what integrated graphics really means right now in practice. But if AMD and Intel are both serious about a broad range of integrated solutions, and use their market vision rather than the immediate profitability to make decisions, there really isn't an obvious reason why an integrated graphics set can't go toe-to-toe with a better-than-average off-board chipset. When you pair that with the savings in system design (for laptop and laptop-like designs) and cost-savings in terms of not needing to build two boards (mobo and the card), it's a really compelling thing for OEMs.

Things could turn around again, but the way things seem to be moving for the market, for the next 4-7 years, we can argue all we want about not wanting integrated graphics, but their market share is going to keep increasing, and keep swallowing up share of the system portfolios of most OEMs from the bottom up over time....
 

Eidorian

macrumors Penryn
Mar 23, 2005
29,190
386
Indianapolis
Things go back and forth. It all depends on design priorities. AMD is buying ATI, right? They can take an advanced ATI chipset, minimally modify it, drop it on the motherboard, and in principle call it integrated, in the sense that it's sold as part of the AMD chipset.
You are correct. AMD bought ATI for integrated solutions. Now AMD can field an integrated desktop/mobile solution just like Intel fields its integrated graphics and Centrino.

In defense of Intel's X3000. It's actually quite comparable to the X1300 and 7300.
 

vv-tim

macrumors 6502
May 24, 2006
366
0
BlizzardBomb said:
GMA X3000 has 8 Unified pipelines, not even the Radeon X1300 has that many. It's also clocked higher (well the non-mobile one is).

You're comparing today's lowest end external card to tomorrow's best internal.

I'm fairly sure GMA950 beats out a Geforce MX 4200 as well.
 

DavidC1

macrumors member
Jul 26, 2006
75
0
there really isn't an obvious reason why an integrated graphics set can't go toe-to-toe with a better-than-average off-board chipset.

Of course there is a reason. It's called cost. Cost is very important, if not #1 factor, and integrated graphics increases die size substantially. Its said 90% of the die is integrated graphics for Radeon Xpress 200(Anandtech). Intel charges $7 extra for integrated graphics. $7 can't compete with discrete. When chipsets used to have 7-10 milliont transistors back in Pentium 4 Northwood days, and graphics nowadays have 100+ million(http://www.hardwarezone.com/articles/view.php?cid=3&id=1752) for budget graphics cards....

You're comparing today's lowest end external card to tomorrow's best internal.

I'm fairly sure GMA950 beats out a Geforce MX 4200 as well.

Hmm. GMA900 is pretty slow, GF4MX 420 is actually faster than GMA900, but GMA950 got nice driver changes and much better support for games, so I am not sure.

http://www.anandtech.com/showdoc.aspx?i=2427&p=1




That aside, here are the specs of GMA X3000 for desktop, with GMA 950 in brackets

667MHz core clock(400MHz)
Pixel Shader 3.0(2.0)*
Vertex Shader 3.0 Hardware support(3.0 software)*
G965/Q965/Q963 datasheets show 4 pixel pipeline fill rate(4 pixel pipeline)'
Hardware Transform & Lighting(Software, by CPU)*
32-bit Full Precision FP(24-bit)
256MB DVMT(128MB)*
Unified pipelines for Video and 3D**


*Means it will be supported when the drivers are ready, current driver versions support NONE of the features listed by the *. Even though GMA950's DVMT is said to be 128MB, datasheets say maximum DVMT is actually 224MB, not 128MB. There are talks for 384MB DVMT, so could that be it for GMA X3000??

**DirectX 10 features will be enabled by driver when DirectX 10 is finalized. That includes Shader Model 4.0 for both Pixel and Vertex shaders. Some Intel documents leaked also indicated OpenGL 2.0, perhaps near DX10 time, now its OGL 1.5.


I am hoping they'll pull a miracle out, but I guess I might be expecting too much. Expecting previous-gen budget graphics card performance card is too much for integrated. Rumors are Intel wants piece of discrete graphics anyway.
 

gnasher729

Suspended
Nov 25, 2005
17,980
5,566
BlizzardBomb said:
GMA X3000 has 8 Unified pipelines, not even the Radeon X1300 has that many. It's also clocked higher (well the non-mobile one is).

Number of pipelines means nothing. How many pixels can be processed in each pipeline in parallel? 1, 2, 4, 8, 16 or more? Or lets just ask, how many programmable 32 bit floating point operations per second max and average?
 

BlizzardBomb

macrumors 68030
Jun 15, 2005
2,537
0
England
vv-tim said:
You're comparing today's lowest end external card to tomorrow's best internal.

I'm fairly sure GMA950 beats out a Geforce MX 4200 as well.

So what do you want me to do? Say it beats a ATI X1900 and will go in a Power Mac? Integrated is all about cheap and affordable. The GMA X3000 will be a fair bit cheaper, cooler and more efficient than an X1300 too. :)

gnasher729 said:
Number of pipelines means nothing. How many pixels can be processed in each pipeline in parallel? 1, 2, 4, 8, 16 or more? Or lets just ask, how many programmable 32 bit floating point operations per second max and average?

No website I know of have listed that information, but since when does number of pipelines mean nothing? Would you really want a one pipeline graphics card?
 

manic

macrumors regular
May 29, 2006
103
0
MacSA said:
End of July eh? Today is the end of July lol....Cool, maybe we will see these go into the mini and macbook soon. :D

The mobile 3000 integrated video chipset is only coming out next spring!! only the desktops are being refreshed now!
 

Ryan T.

macrumors 6502a
Jun 13, 2005
599
27
Rochester, NY
This will definately be a step up for the Mini's and Macbooks. Still wouldn't entirely surprise me to see them both get discrete graphics at some point.
 

DavidC1

macrumors member
Jul 26, 2006
75
0
Number of pipelines means nothing. How many pixels can be processed in each pipeline in parallel? 1, 2, 4, 8, 16 or more? Or lets just ask, how many programmable 32 bit floating point operations per second max and average?

F-O-U-R pixel pipelines according to G965/Q965/Q963 datasheet. EIGHT unified video/3D pipelines, supporting DX10 on LATER driver revisions.

It probably means its like a 4 pixel pipeline now, and compliant with unified shader for DX10 later.

Sheesh, am I being ignored here?? I just posted everything about it above.

Of course nobody knows about performance when NONE of the features is enabled by driver yet.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.