PM Forum - Q3/2003: Part 1

2. Integration has been the focus of many chipset makers, especially with the advent of NVIDIA’s nForce and nForce2 chipsets. However, one of the biggest hurdles for integration has been graphics. Can integrated graphics make the move to the entry level workstation and high-end desktop market?

PM #1: It’s still up to chipset vendors, the performance has reached a certain level, but if they can bring integrated graphics to the main stream level, there will be more of a chance.

PM #2:

For high end level MBs there is more care for
a.) Upgrade ability
b.) Flexibility
c.) Performance but not Integration matches for these key factors.

PM #3: For mainstream yes, but not for high-end desktops. At least for now…

PM #4: Even with technology changes, the market does see the difference between KLE 133 and KM400, nForce and nForce 2, 810, 845GE, and 865G. Everything is possible. One thing is for sure: it doesn’t matter where the technology goes, we will be there.

PM #5: Integrated chipsets are suitable for the entry level PC instead of the high-end PC, like PC game users, who need a powerful graphic card to execute virtual 3D effects. However, all current integrated chipsets can satisfy the task requirements of most users. I believe the integration solution will become the mainstream product due to the nano-technology in the near future.

PM #6: This integration usually means the balance between cost and performance. We believe stand-alone 3D graphic cards will still occupy the mid to high-end level graphic market. Plus the 3D graphic GPU research and development is very fast, integrated graphics usually can’t catch the technology trends due to timing and cost issues.

PM #7: No that segment requires the very high-end graphics performance, even the OpenGL performance is a must. The integrated cost/schedule, due to die-size and technology adoption consideration, can’t adopt the state-of-the-art graphics technology. This limits the possibility for the move to that segment.

PM #8: Typically, integrated graphics solutions are 2 to 3 generations behind current graphics technology, so this puts the integrated graphics solutions at a disadvantage for workstation use. In addition, the integrated solutions rarely have OpenGL driver support, which is a requirement for many workstation applications.

PM #9:

Each product segment has its own characteristics. Normally the high-end desktop PC segment focuses on performance and highly expandability. And the workstation segment focuses on stability.
The key point is integrated graphic chipsets must sufficiency support the characteristics of the workstation and high-end desktop market segments, then it can move to those product segments.

PM #10: Graphics demand for high end is ever changing and can be easily obsolete. Therefore integrated graphics is more suitable for mainstream, and entry level segment users would not mind paying a few extra dollars for on-die VGA. There is also more volume in the low end segment, which gives chipset makers faster return on investment.

PM #11: I think entry-level workstations don’t need high-end graphics ability, but high-end display processing does.

It seems that the majority of product managers (69%) believe that integrated graphics isn’t going to make the cross to entry level workstations and high-end desktops any time soon. The only non “yes” or “no” response came due to the comment, “Yes for entry level WS, No for high-end desktops.”

This isn’t to say that it won’t ever happen, but it won’t be happening soon. As PM #8 stated, “Typically, integrated graphics solutions are 2 to 3 generations behind current graphics technology, so this puts integrated graphics solutions at a disadvantage for workstation use.” This plus the requirements for OpenGL support will make it hard for the entry level workstation and high-end desktop market to accept integrated graphics.

Performance is one thing, and the ability to upgrade is another, as integrated graphics does’t have the same upgrade characteristics as stand-alone graphic cards. This ability to upgrade also translates to cost, because even if integrated graphics reach the computing capacity of the R350 core, upgrades will basically require the overhaul of the motherboard. This bodes very well for ATI and NVIDIA, as the need for stand-alone graphic designs will continue to exist for the foreseeable future from a cost and performance standpoint. However, IGP solutions from ATI, Intel, and NVIDIA will still need to continue to improve, as the base market for IGP solutions and the minimal graphic computing requirements continue to rise.