Featured Articles

Nvidia Shield 2 shows up in AnTuTu

Nvidia Shield 2 shows up in AnTuTu

Nvidia’s original Shield console launched last summer to mixed reviews. It went on sale in the US and so far Nvidia…

More...
AMD CSO John Byrne talks ARM

AMD CSO John Byrne talks ARM

We had a chance to talk about AMD’s upcoming products with John Byrne, Chief Sales Officer, AMD. We covered a number…

More...
AMD Chief Sales Officer thinks GPU leadership is critical

AMD Chief Sales Officer thinks GPU leadership is critical

We had a chance to talk to John Byrne who spent the last two years as Senior Vice President and Chief…

More...
OpenPlus One $299 5.5-inch Full HD phone

OpenPlus One $299 5.5-inch Full HD phone

OnePlus is one of the few small companies that might disrupt the Android phone market, dominated by giant outfits like Samsung.…

More...
KFA2 GTX 780 Ti Hall Of Fame reviewed

KFA2 GTX 780 Ti Hall Of Fame reviewed

KFA2 gained a lot of overclocking experience with the GTX 780 Hall of Fame (HOF), which we had a chance to…

More...
Frontpage Slideshow | Copyright © 2006-2010 orks, a business unit of Nuevvo Webware Ltd.
Monday, 06 December 2010 12:14

Cedar trail Atom hints at DX 10.1 graphics

Written by Fuad Abazovic
atomn_logo

No DirectX 11 even in 2012 Atoms
CedarTrail Atoms, both in D for Desktop and M for mobile incarnations are scheduled to appear in Q4 2011. You can count them as 2012 products as they will realistically ship in early 2012 and probably even later.

The new Atom platform from Cedar Trail D will have a DirectX 10.1 graphics core. There won’t be any DirectX 11 support, at least not for Cedar Trail D. The only hope that Intel is saving DirectX 11 announcement for the last moment, but this is highly unlikely.

The core will look similar to the one that you’ve seen in Sandy Bridge and it will be powerfull enough to do Full HD decoding including hardware acceleration for MPEG2, VC1, ACV and H.264. We are sure that Matroska MKV and DivX should also get accelerated but probably via third party solutions as Intel probably would not dare to support all the fun codecs.

Gaming performance is questionable but it should not be much worse than current Sandy Bridge entry level Pentium 32nm dual-core chips. You can just imagine what kind of performance Fusion chips and Nvidia can get in a year's time.

Oh, we almost forgot, it will support Blu-ray 2.0. The 2.0 profile brings picture-in-picture and online functionality to Blu-ray disc and it should require the two secondary decoders, 1GB of local storage for updates and content, and an Internet connection.

This new fancy Atom is only roughly a year away.



Last modified on Monday, 06 December 2010 13:33
blog comments powered by Disqus

Comments  

 
+7 #1 hellfire 2010-12-06 12:53
why would they need DX10.1?
 
 
+6 #2 Wolfdale 2010-12-06 14:22
Quoting hellfire:
why would they need DX10.1?


well even if they didnt need it,
it would be nice to say "our intel atom cpu can do more than a ps3 and xbox360"
have fun with directx 9.0b !!

specially with the bluray2.0, its bye bye


but seriously, i think the biggest reason is that dx11 is mostly used for pumping out large quantities of tesselation, and for that, you dont really want a atom anyway,

if you put dx10.1 and dx 11 side by side, i think ... for an atom.... dx11 doesnt have much more to offer than dx10.1 so why should you waste resources on development and production of a dx11 enabled chip while you wont even use it
if you want to pump out bigtime dx11 graphics, get a cheap radeon in your atom htpc :)
 
 
+3 #3 Nerdfighter 2010-12-06 16:08
Of course Nvidia had to be mentioned, otherwise it's not an article by Fudo. What the hell does Nvidia have to do with integrated graphics? It's not like new ION's are coming any time soon.

If an Intel Atom can process 1080p, that's pretty impressive. Especially if it can run fanless. Perfect for HTPC-purposes.
 
 
+1 #4 thomasg 2010-12-06 17:31
There's no point in supporting dx11 because they know it couldn't run any dx11 game at acceptable framerates. So rather than just include it as another feature they can say it "supports," they just left it out. I can't really blame them for that, but wow they can't build an IGP that supports dx11 2 and a half years after its debut?
 
 
+5 #5 ghelyar 2010-12-06 18:54
Matroska (MKV) is a container format, not a codec. There is nothing to accelerate.

It is common for a H.264 video stream to be inside a MKV container, for example, but the container itself is just how the streams are laid out in the file.
 
 
0 #6 godrilla 2010-12-07 01:25
And they they wonder why AMD is a better candidate for next gen consoles? ( dx11 all the way fuzed using 28nm chips)
 
 
0 #7 godrilla 2010-12-07 01:32
Quoting thomasg:
There's no point in supporting dx11 because they know it couldn't run any dx11 game at acceptable framerates. So rather than just include it as another feature they can say it "supports," they just left it out. I can't really blame them for that, but wow they can't build an IGP that supports dx11 2 and a half years after its debut?

directx11 brought shader 5 or compute shader that will be utilized in programs like IE9, you have to look at the whole picture not just the gaming aspect, they are trying to compete with AMD not only because of gaming, but because of the power of the GPU kills the Moore's law theory that Intel goes by! (its multiplication Vs exponential growth)
 

To be able to post comments please log-in with Disqus

 

Facebook activity

Latest Commented Articles

Recent Comments