Nvidia is proposing a beast of a CPU system for Windows PCs

Post by marcosdumay » Sun, Jun 07, 2026, 4:17 PM UTC

ssivark wrote: post #504

AnthonyMouse wrote: post #439

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Lets systems optimize utilization based on need, rather than be confined to specific pools The trouble with this is that the different types of memory have different characteristics. Latency for ordinary system memory is actually better than it is for GDDR, because GDDR is optimized for bandwidth. RTX 5090 has 1.8TB/s of memory bandwidth with a 512-bit memory bus. The same bus width for DDR5-9600 would have better…

How about having a large pool of unified memory and expanding the next layer (L3?) of cache to accommodate more of the CPU's the low-latency RAM usage?

Post by jayd16 » Sun, Jun 07, 2026, 4:47 PM UTC

rustystump wrote: post #483

Rohansi wrote: post #458

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's only so high you can go because the game assets have a maximum quality. Maybe you'll be able to max out the 5090 but what about the next flagship GPU? You're also likely not going to maximize all of bandwidth, compute, etc. because one of them will likely be your bottleneck. And it might be different depending on the GPU, too.

Most games are strictly scaled on resolution due to how deferred pipelines run. This is exactly the slider to max or not max everything on a gpu for games. The more pixels the more memory and the more compute.

Post by Stevvo » Sun, Jun 07, 2026, 4:54 PM UTC

maccard wrote: post #499

Stevvo wrote: post #429

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What? It's incredibly easy to take full use of memory bandwidth. For example, put proper volumetric smoke/fire/explosion sim in your game. But game developers don't do that because they are lazy.

No, we don’t do it because the tradeoff isn’t worth it. A gpu based particle sim is very difficult to do well - it’s easy (but computationally expensive) to do a volumetric sim, but when you want that simulation to interact with world geometry correctly it comes with an explosion in complexity and performance. I promise you want our games to look as good as you want them to look.

Post by bigyabai » Sun, Jun 07, 2026, 4:57 PM UTC

moffkalast wrote: post #500

bigyabai wrote: post #426

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Nvidia can barely scrape together one Ubuntu release per Jetson generation Why would they do more? It's an LTS distro, the Nvidia drivers are updated for as long as the hardware's compute capability is supported. Nvidia's ARM drivers are updated constantly, and battle-tested as the backbone in hundreds of thousands of Grace ARM servers.

Yes it's an LTS, which means it only makes sense to build something on it early in its release cycle, so the platform itself needs to keep up with new releases. Orins will go EoL next year, so good luck with that. That's not even considering the lazy out tree patchwork support Nvidia does for their products on top of that. Maybe it's different in this case for Windows since it forces a rolling release, but I seriousl…

Post by trumpdong » Sun, Jun 07, 2026, 5:01 PM UTC

marcosdumay wrote: post #531

ssivark wrote: post #504

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How about having a large pool of unified memory and expanding the next layer (L3?) of cache to accommodate more of the CPU's the low-latency RAM usage?

As a rule, increasing the size of cache increases its latency, and how much of it you can use is capped by the quality of your cache management algorithms and the latency of the level above it. Since CPUs are highly optimized, both increasing the latency of the main memory and increasing the size of L3 will probably lead to larger L3 latency.