Official - Project Offset PC exclusive - will be Intel Larabee launch title

To demonstrate its horsepower, Intel will have to have at least one compelling launch title – and to make sure that it will exploit everything Larrabee has to offer, the company purchased Offset Software in early 2008. There have been a few screens available so far and today we received two more that showcase the direction Offset is thinking. Still images can't tell the whole story and we are careful voicing any opinion how capable Project Offset will be.

Link to the whole article - here.

cool

how much will larrabee cost?footfoe2

There is a model planned to be used as an onboard card, so Im sure they will have many differnt variations.

YES!. And the new pictures look great. If they pack PO in for free with one of those cards maybe i will buy one...probably not though.

[QUOTE="footfoe2"]how much will larrabee cost?cobrax75

There is a model planned to be used as an onboard card, so Im sure they will have many differnt variations.

primary skew which is the 32 Core version has a proposed launch price of either $249.99 or $299.99

So its now not going to the PS3 or the 360? Intresting...Wasdie

Seriously, i would not want Intel to ever compete in the graphics market, its hard enough as it is keeping up with current techonlogy, what happens when you put Intels totally different architecture into the equation

If nVidia and ATi get killed off because of this, consider gaming deadFirstDiscovery

only nvidia would die, since ati would just launch their own onboard chipset with amd. Personally, I see this as a nice foward move, graphic card are expensive and are slowing down pc gaming growth

so no consoles verion? mmm

may get for PC if it is really good

[QUOTE="FirstDiscovery"]If nVidia and ATi get killed off because of this, consider gaming deadFranko_3

only nvidia would die, since ati would just launch their own onboard chipset with amd. Personally, I see this as a nice foward move, graphic card are expensive and are slowing down pc gaming growth

I agree with this post. I am an Nvidia fanboy and I don't want to see Nvidia suffer but something has to be done from a hardware standpoint to improve what is there now. Introducing a new card every 3 months that is slightly better than the old one is getting rather tired and I welcome any change my friends (lol Aenima Lyrics for you tool fans) that might see an evolution in pc gaming

[QUOTE="FirstDiscovery"]If nVidia and ATi get killed off because of this, consider gaming deadFranko_3

only nvidia would die, since ati would just launch their own onboard chipset with amd. Personally, I see this as a nice foward move, graphic card are expensive and are slowing down pc gaming growth

Unfortunately, AMD arent in a great position and ATi is what is keeping them affloat

also from the article:

"The other piece of news Offset and Intel will announce on Monday is the relaunch of Offset's community forum at 10 AM PST. We hear the Offset team is "excited" to be back online and touch base with users again. That is, of course, because Offset hopes to get user feedback on the game title it is developing. "

YES! finally! i hope this means they'll be updating their site moar too.

Also, will the game and the GPU actually launch on the same day I wonder?

nVidia dead?

Weren't they called by Forbes the best company of 07? Everybody is blowing hot air just because they made a mistake with G92 and G94.

Christ, they are far from it.

nVidia dead?

Weren't they called by Forbes the best company of 07? Everybody is blowing hot air just because they made a mistake with G92 and G94.

Christ, they are far from it.

elbow2k

If Intel succeeds with Larrabee, nVidia is effectively dead.

AMD/ATi are already working on their own "answer" to Larrabee but nVidia's only answer is CUDA. And after that, they are sweating what could happen.

Look at NVISION 2008. They spent 4 days putting down Larrabee calling it "marketing puff" and "only equal to GPU's from 2006"

Truth is they are scared sh*tless at the thought of x86 taking over the GPU industry in addition to the CPU industry....

nVidia doesn't have any expertise with anything other than Hardware Rendering. The idea of a Software Rendering based GPU matching or beating them is unbelievable and scary. They can't honestly hope to compete with that....

AMD/ATi on the other hand isn't sweating it. They are just scaling back their push for the high end GPU's and matching nVidia, waiting until their own answer to Larrabee is ready or needed(if Larrabee fails they will likely redesign it as a server CPU or something.).

Intel is all hot air. Iets see them make a good GPU since they haven't ever.

interesting. hope it turns out well.

just one thing...will it only work on larabee and intel hardware? or will it support other hardware also? if its an intel hardware exclusive then its doomed to failure.

Intel is all hot air. Iets see them make a good GPU since they haven't ever.

PS3_3DO

.... have you seen the thought put into the architecture? It is very well planned out.

And ultimately, anyone dissing Larrabee doesn't fully understand what it could mean for the industry as a whole.

Larrabee could be the single best tech shift in the last 10 years... It could mean a LOT to the industry if it succeeds.

And by a LOT, I mean technological advancement and experimentations not seen since the early '90s....

Great programmers could theoretically redefine the way we look at graphics. None of that will happen in the current state with hardware rendering and everything being tied to the current version of DX or the current shader model version...

Larrabee could do away with all those technicalities and just let the programmers make fantastic engines with whatever they want.... I could mean more improvements in a single generation of GPU's than we have seen in 3-4 generations of GPU's in the current system.

Philosophically, any true gamer should want Intel to succeed. Because it they do, the industry will change for the better.

interesting. hope it turns out well.

just one thing...will it only work on larabee and intel hardware? or will it support other hardware also? if its an intel hardware exclusive then its doomed to failure.

osan0

it will support other hardware.

Chances are it will have Larrabee specific features though because Larrabee is more capable than other GPU's to do certain things and in some cases is the only one able to do certain things....

[QUOTE="osan0"]

interesting. hope it turns out well.

just one thing...will it only work on larabee and intel hardware? or will it support other hardware also? if its an intel hardware exclusive then its doomed to failure.

horrowhip

it will support other hardware.

Chances are it will have Larrabee specific features though because Larrabee is more capable than other GPU's to do certain things and in some cases is the only one able to do certain things....

[QUOTE="horrowhip"][QUOTE="osan0"]

interesting. hope it turns out well.

just one thing...will it only work on larabee and intel hardware? or will it support other hardware also? if its an intel hardware exclusive then its doomed to failure.

Vaasman

it will support other hardware.

Chances are it will have Larrabee specific features though because Larrabee is more capable than other GPU's to do certain things and in some cases is the only one able to do certain things....

I will just explain WHY Larrabee can technically do that rather than giving BS example that I have no support for...

Traditional GPU's are defined by their hardware and feature-set.

DX version, Shader Model, Shader Architecture, etc. Those features define and limit what GPU's can do.

For example, a DX9 GPU can't do Geometry Shaders or Shader Model 4 functions. It also can't do any DX10 specific features. What this means is there is a clear limit on what it can do based upon hardware.

The difference is that Larrabee is based off of software renderers rather than hardware renderers. What that means is that any code that is written can be performed, it is just a matter of how fast it can run... What that means is that DX10 features can be done, without having the specific hardware related to those features. What that also means is that features outside of the DX10 feature-set can also be done. Larrabee can technically do things that may end up being DX11, DX12, or even DX13 features without any need for that specific hardware. It can just run the code. That also means you have flexibility to mix and match features and code. DX10 features can be mixed with DX9 features and features from OpenGL 2.1, all seamlessly. The GPU has the flexibility to handle everything.

As such, it can be recoded to adapt to and do whatever you could possibly want it to do.

Now, Offset Software may or may not take advantage of that flexibility and add in features that aren't possible in DX10 or OpenGL2.1 or whatever... I can't tell the future. But what I can tell, is the possibility and opportunity is there.

The games look cool.

But the gameplay looks a bit 'meh'.

Its still in development though, so fair enough I guess.

this isn't coming out anytime soon is it? i just bout a geforce 9800gtx+....Zero5000X

I doubt it...Intel's GPU is schedualed to launch between the end of 2009 and 2010...but will probably get delayed.

Project Offset will be a launch title? That doesn't make since to me. Is Intel planning to come out with their own console or something?-Renegade

no, they are planning on launching their own GPU.

Project Offset will be a launch title? That doesn't make since to me. Is Intel planning to come out with their own console or something?-Renegade

No, it will be the first ever official launch title for a GPU.

Intel is all hot air. Iets see them make a good GPU since they haven't ever.

PS3_3DO

It's true they don't have nearly as much experience in the area as Nvidia or ATI, but I wouldn't underestimate them. They have some of the best engineers in the field and by far the best manufacturing facilities.

[QUOTE="FirstDiscovery"]If nVidia and ATi get killed off because of this, consider gaming deadFranko_3

only nvidia would die, since ati would just launch their own onboard chipset with amd. Personally, I see this as a nice foward move, graphic card are expensive and are slowing down pc gaming growth

well ati is amd and there are already plenty of intergrated ati chips on amd boards

so my understanding is that the larabee will require devs to learn a new architecture? ms isn't interested in incorporating it into their next console and sony already has the cell...

i can see the larabee flopping pretty badly..

so my understanding is that the larabee will require devs to learn a new architecture? ms isn't interested in incorporating it into their next console and sony already has the cell...

i can see the larabee flopping pretty badly..

mephisto_11

[QUOTE="mephisto_11"]

so my understanding is that the larabee will require devs to learn a new architecture? ms isn't interested in incorporating it into their next console and sony already has the cell...

i can see the larabee flopping pretty badly..

blackdreamhunk

well they need to convince consumers to buy the larabee and devs to develop for it. using the next xbox/ps as a launching platform is the best way to do so.

[QUOTE="blackdreamhunk"][QUOTE="mephisto_11"]

so my understanding is that the larabee will require devs to learn a new architecture? ms isn't interested in incorporating it into their next console and sony already has the cell...

i can see the larabee flopping pretty badly..

mephisto_11

well they need to convince consumers to buy the larabee and devs to develop for it. using the next xbox/ps as a launching platform is the best way to do so.

http://blogs.intel.com/technology/2008/02/pc_game_alliance_rallies_frien.php

[QUOTE="PS3_3DO"]

Intel is all hot air. Iets see them make a good GPU since they haven't ever.

horrowhip

.... have you seen the thought put into the architecture? It is very well planned out.

And ultimately, anyone dissing Larrabee doesn't fully understand what it could mean for the industry as a whole.

Larrabee could be the single best tech shift in the last 10 years... It could mean a LOT to the industry if it succeeds.

And by a LOT, I mean technological advancement and experimentations not seen since the early '90s....

Great programmers could theoretically redefine the way we look at graphics. None of that will happen in the current state with hardware rendering and everything being tied to the current version of DX or the current shader model version...

Larrabee could do away with all those technicalities and just let the programmers make fantastic engines with whatever they want.... I could mean more improvements in a single generation of GPU's than we have seen in 3-4 generations of GPU's in the current system.

Philosophically, any true gamer should want Intel to succeed. Because it they do, the industry will change for the better.

[QUOTE="mephisto_11"][QUOTE="blackdreamhunk"][QUOTE="mephisto_11"]

so my understanding is that the larabee will require devs to learn a new architecture? ms isn't interested in incorporating it into their next console and sony already has the cell...

i can see the larabee flopping pretty badly..

blackdreamhunk

well they need to convince consumers to buy the larabee and devs to develop for it. using the next xbox/ps as a launching platform is the best way to do so.

http://blogs.intel.com/technology/2008/02/pc_game_alliance_rallies_frien.php

[QUOTE="blackdreamhunk"][QUOTE="mephisto_11"][QUOTE="blackdreamhunk"][QUOTE="mephisto_11"]

so my understanding is that the larabee will require devs to learn a new architecture? ms isn't interested in incorporating it into their next console and sony already has the cell...

i can see the larabee flopping pretty badly..

HuusAsking

well they need to convince consumers to buy the larabee and devs to develop for it. using the next xbox/ps as a launching platform is the best way to do so.

http://blogs.intel.com/technology/2008/02/pc_game_alliance_rallies_frien.php

[QUOTE="HuusAsking"][QUOTE="blackdreamhunk"]

agin hardware companies don't need ms or sony or nintendo! However sony and Ms need the hardware companies. Don't kid your self hardware fights are coming and console are not going to win.

http://blogs.intel.com/technology/2008/02/pc_game_alliance_rallies_frien.php

blackdreamhunk

[QUOTE="blackdreamhunk"][QUOTE="HuusAsking"][QUOTE="blackdreamhunk"]

agin hardware companies don't need ms or sony or nintendo! However sony and Ms need the hardware companies. Don't kid your self hardware fights are coming and console are not going to win.

http://blogs.intel.com/technology/2008/02/pc_game_alliance_rallies_frien.php

HuusAsking

any way I am looking forward to the hardware wars coming :) I'm pretty sure there will be alot of bankrupt companies

[QUOTE="HuusAsking"][QUOTE="blackdreamhunk"][QUOTE="HuusAsking"][QUOTE="blackdreamhunk"]

agin hardware companies don't need ms or sony or nintendo! However sony and Ms need the hardware companies. Don't kid your self hardware fights are coming and console are not going to win.

http://blogs.intel.com/technology/2008/02/pc_game_alliance_rallies_frien.php

blackdreamhunk

any way I am looking forward to the hardware wars coming :) I'm pretty sure there will be alot of bankrupt companies

But doesn't generality tend to have problems when it comes up against specialists? It's one reason hardware rendering is king of the hill right now. I would think that any technique you could come up with with Larabee could be reproduced--only in hardware--and net you a better result. And with ATI and nVidia playing a continual game of "Can You Top This?", I would think they'll be cranking out more and better hardware the whole time. Look at ATI, who recently found a formula that works to steal a good chunk of market share out of nVidia.HuusAsking

not necessarily.

That is only so far as the hardware GPU has more processing power.

And it was much easier to ramp up processing power in a GPU than a CPU before the advent of multi-core.

That is why GPU's reigned supreme, not because they are any better per-se.

But now that we are approach the era of many-core CPU's, you will again see a shift towards the much more flexible and natural software rendering. Many-core allows the once very rigid and structured CPU to be much, MUCH more scalable. Rather than having a GHz race to see how many GHz they could push in the single-core era or waiting 4-5 years to see the next rather complicated architectural jump before things reall push forward in the CPU industry, many-core allows them to really scale a CPU-like design to constantly match or beat GPU designs with much less architectural planning and much less cost.

the strengths of Software Rendering outweight the strengths of Hardware Rendering, and ultimately, we have reached a point where Hardware Rendering is now reaching an almost grind.

Look at how things have been for the past 12 years in PC gaming. It has always been a race and a push to constantly get the next shader model or the next DX iteration. Once a new one comes out it leaves all the previous cards in the cold and really outdates the market. That is not an issue with Software Rendering and you can achieve relatively similar or possibly even better framerates now that we are in the many-core era.

Not just that but being able to use a GPU for everything from AI to Physics to graphics to ray-tracing to WHATEVER you could possible want it to do and to have it able to do that with relative reliability compared to traditional GPU's, and you start to see the many reasons behind it.

[QUOTE="Franko_3"]

[QUOTE="FirstDiscovery"]If nVidia and ATi get killed off because of this, consider gaming deadimprezawrx500

only nvidia would die, since ati would just launch their own onboard chipset with amd. Personally, I see this as a nice foward move, graphic card are expensive and are slowing down pc gaming growth

well ati is amd and there are already plenty of intergrated ati chips on amd boards