Keith E. Whisman

May 26, 2010 at 8:08am

I kinda figured we weren't going to see Larabe because it was supposed to come out early last year and it was going to be slower then any of it's competition. Intel just isn't capable of competing in the fast paced world of GPU's. They are used to their CPU's lasting a year or two on the market while GPU's will live for about six months or so before the competition buries it. Besides games also help GPU's sell because new games will always be released that make that new high end graphics card in your machine turn out frame rates in the single digit range making you beg the GPU suppliers for faster graphics cards. The CPU just doesn't have that kind of problem. So Intel just isn't used to it and probably doesn't have it's money setup for that kind of high speed RnD and production schedule. But I was really hoping Intel would come to compete in the graphics market beyond that crappy excuse of a GPU known as an Intel Graphics Accelerator.

MrHorspwer

May 25, 2010 at 7:03pm

Smug reply from Jen-Hsun Huang in 3... 2... 1

Slugbait

May 25, 2010 at 4:39pm

If you press your nose up against your monitor, and squint your eyes just right to see across the Interwebs, you'll be able to see the shocked look on my face...

I Jedi

May 25, 2010 at 3:20pm

I am actually fairly surprised by this move from Intel. Intel and Nvidia have a long history (not nice) together in the GPU/CPU market. Intel wants Nvidia's head on a platter and vice versa. Anyways, it's interesting to see that Intel finally decided that they were way too far behind to make any real dent in Nvidia's sharehold of the GPU market. I think Intel did the right move and decided to stick with what it does best: CPU

Neufeldt2002

May 25, 2010 at 1:17pm

I'm actually a little disappointed in this. I was hoping for a comparable product that could further increase competative products in this field. The same needs to happen the cpu market as well. IMHO