Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Hardware

NVIDIA Unveils Lineup of GeForce 800M Series Mobile GPUs, Many With Maxwell 83

Posted by samzenpus
from the brand-new dept.
MojoKid writes "The power efficiency of NVIDA's Maxwell architecture make it ideal for mobile applications, so today's announcement by NVIDIA of a new top-to-bottom line-up of mobile GPUs—most of them featuring the Maxwell architecture—should come as no surprise. Though a couple of Kepler and even Fermi-based GPUs still exist in NVIDIA's new line-up, the heart of the product stack leverages Maxwell. The entry-level parts in the GeForce 800M series consist of the GeForce GT 820M, 830M, and 840M. The 820M is a Fermi-based GPU, but the 830M and 840M are new chips that leverage Maxwell. The meat of the GeForce GTX 800M series consist of Kepler-based GPUs, though Maxwell is employed in the more mainstream parts. NVIDIA is claiming the GeForce GTX 880M will be fastest mobile GPU available, but the entire GTX line-up will offer significantly higher performance then any integrated graphics solution. The GeForce GTX 860M and 850M are essentially identical to the desktop GeForce GTX 750 Ti, save for different frequencies and memory configurations. There are a number of notebooks featuring NVIDIA's GeForce 800M series GPUs coming down the pipeline from companies like Alienware, Asus, Gigabyte, Lenovo, MSI and Razer, though others are sure the follow suit. Some of the machines will be available immediately."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

NVIDIA Unveils Lineup of GeForce 800M Series Mobile GPUs, Many With Maxwell

Comments Filter:
  • That's the second biggest GPU I've ever seen.

  • by bloodhawk (813939) on Wednesday March 12, 2014 @07:42PM (#46469585)
    I thought I would always want discrete graphics. But nowadays the majority of laptops really have no need of it, The AMD and Intel integrated offerings while not amazing are more than adequate for the vast majority of purposes. my latest 2 laptops both use integrated Intel 4th gen and handle laptop needs completely for both my work and the limited gaming I do on a laptop. I would imagine Nvidia are very uncomfortable with the way their market has been contracting over the last couple of years.
    • by epyT-R (613989)

      Those of us doing more with computers than editing text documents and refreshing facebook still need descrete GPUs.

      • by Kjella (173770)

        According to the latest market statistics 66% of PCs overall use embedded graphics. Even Steam has a 16% Intel share and probably some AMD APUs that aren't separated out. I don't know about you but anything "serious" I do like work doesn't push the GPU one bit, the only thing that does is gaming. And not everybody is a gamer or their idea of gaming is more like Candy Crush. On that note, I loved The Walking Dead, here's the system requirements:

        Windows Operating system: Windows XP / Vista / Windows 7
        Processo

      • by bloodhawk (813939)
        I only do software development, some gaming and photo editing on my laptop, yes I am more than aware their are a lot of areas that still need discrete graphics for laptops, but it is a rapidly shrinking market. Even desktops now the integrated option is taking an increasingly large share.
      • Other than professionally modeling or doing video editing, or playing #D games - what use does a average person have for discrete graphics today?

        • Other than professionally modeling...

          Look, this is Slashdot. You're not going to find professional models here.

    • by WiPEOUT (20036)

      The AMD and Intel integrated offerings while not amazing are more than adequate for the vast majority of purposes

      Not only that, but the discrete graphics cards consume substantial amounts of power and generate more heat than the rest of the device combined.

    • Intel's refusal to properly support HDMI/DisplayPort to a TV without clipping the black levels makes their integrated GPUs worthless to me. I'm selling my newer laptop in favor of keeping my old one that has ATI graphics for this reason alone.
    • by guises (2423402) on Thursday March 13, 2014 @04:47AM (#46471459)
      No personal experience with this, but according to Anandtech Intel's Iris Pro graphics are reasonably fast but don't provide any power consumption advantage over discrete offerings. In fact they're worse, and with the power benefits in the new chips mentioned above they should be a lot worse in the future. Seeing as power consumption and cost are the only compelling reasons to be using integrated graphics, discrete chips still seem to have a fair amount of life in them.
    • I would imagine Nvidia are very uncomfortable with the way their market has been contracting over the last couple of years.

      At some point enough x86/x64 patents will expire that Nvidia will be able license the remaining ones and so an x64 chip of their own.

      Or alternatively they could sell Arm+GPU SOCs instead - arguably Arm+GPU is a better bet than x64+GPU because the sales of phones and tablets will exceed the sales of x64 PCs. Of course the margins are likely to be thinner because there's a lot of competition in the Arm SOC market - Apple and Samsung have their own in house designs and outside that it looks like Qualcomm have

      • At some point enough x86/x64 patents will expire that Nvidia will be able license the remaining ones and so an x64 chip of their own.

        But after x64 there were SSE3, SSE 4.x, AVX, AVX2, now AVX512 coming soon. Those are the wide SIMD instructions. This stuff isn't strictly needed - yet, already SSE2 gets needed to run some 32bit code like some flash versions and codecs, this annoys some current Athlon XP users. Maybe some other stuff like hardware encryption is "protected".

        So the fullest x86/x64 support will be left to AMD and Intel only for the foreseeable future.
        Nvidia is betting on ARMv8, with an ARMv8 + Kepler (of the GK208 variant) ch

    • by chrish (4714)

      Given the ridiculous prevalence of laptops with absolutely pathetic displays (1366x768 on a 15"? really?), "most" users aren't even going to need the integrated Intel 4th gen video. A dumb frame buffer would probably fit their needs.

    • by tlhIngan (30335)

      I thought I would always want discrete graphics. But nowadays the majority of laptops really have no need of it, The AMD and Intel integrated offerings while not amazing are more than adequate for the vast majority of purposes. my latest 2 laptops both use integrated Intel 4th gen and handle laptop needs completely for both my work and the limited gaming I do on a laptop. I would imagine Nvidia are very uncomfortable with the way their market has been contracting over the last couple of years.

      Heck, we just

      • By ordering low-end GPU, you annoy everyone -- the users have to put up with crappy chips, IT has to support more complex systems, and budgeting has to pay for chips noone wants. So instead, order most of the laptops without discrete GPU to save a few bucks. Then order a few with high-end GPU for the few people who want them.

  • This takes the cake. I've never complained once about an obvious advert disguised as a story.

    But to pimp this, this CRAP company that has been so incredibly hostile to the free and open source community is such bad judgement.
    The new slashdot management seems determined to undermine the loyalty of their userbase. What a disgrace.

  • I've toasted two laptop monitors because of trying to play too many high-needs video games on them. Both of the monitors theoretically were good enough for the games by specs, but both of them burnt out within two years of when I bought them (admitedly, they were both a couple years old when I purchased them). With the first laptop, I just thought it was an age thing and didn't think enough of it, but with the second one, I realized the sad pattern. Now, I play my games with an external fan running, blowing

    • Monitors?
    • I'm with the others not understanding what you're on about with monitors, but indeed additional cooling is useful. The thing is no matter how efficient the CPU and GPU are, it's a product of the watt budget and how the laptop is designed. Depends on the thickness/thinness, heatsinks and fans, build quality etc. so it's really on a laptop per laptop basis.

      Modern stuff also throttles, it gets slower when needed so the laptop won't melt itself, that plays in both sides.. Less chance of failure, but additional

      • My appologies for not being very clear. I don't have my tools here, nor do I have random spare parts to change out and test which components have problems with my system at the moment. The two laptops could have had different problems, but the net result was that the screens on both were no longer functional. It was my presumption (as I said, I don't have my tools to verify) that excess heat was the cause of my computer issues. For that reason, I would prefer to have a cooler-running laptop, so I don't feel

        • No problem. Also my above reply was pessimistic, better to check some reviews after finding a nice model.
          The new GTX 850M and GT840M feel nice (the latter being rather slow if you're into demanding games)

"Don't talk to me about disclaimers! I invented disclaimers!" -- The Censored Hacker

Working...