The Future: Competition, Secrecy, & the Unexpected

Finally, while Apple developing their own GPU is not unexpected given their interests and resources, the ramifications of it may very well be. There hasn’t been a new, major GPU vendor in almost a decade – technically Qualcomm’s team would count as the youngest, though it’s a spin-off of what’s now AMD’s Radeon Technologies Group – and in fact like the overall SoC market itself, the market for GPU vendors has been contracting as costs go up and SoC designers settle around fewer, more powerful GPU vendors. So for someone as flush with cash as Apple to join the GPU race is a very big deal; just by virtue of starting development of their own GPU, they are now the richest GPU designer.

Of course, once they start shipping their custom GPU, this will also open them up to patent challenges from those other players. While it has largely been on the backburner of public attention, this decade has seen a few GPU vendors take SoC vendors to court. This includes NVIDIA with Samsung and Qualcomm (a case that they lost), and still ongoing is AMD’s case against LG/MediaTek/Sigma/Vizio.

GPU development is a lot more competitive due to the fact that developers and compiled programs aren’t tied to a specific architecture – the abstraction of the APIs insulates against individual architectures – however it also means that there a lot of companies developing novel technologies, and all of those companies are moving in the same general direction with their designs. This potentially makes it very difficult to develop an efficient GPU, as the best means of achieving that efficiency have often already been patented.

What exists then is an uneasy balance between GPU vendors, and a whole lot of secrets. AMD and NVIDIA keep each other in check with their significant patent holdings, Intel licenses NVIDIA patents, etc. And on the flip side of the coin, some vendors like Qualcomm simply don’t talk about their GPUs, and while this has never been stated by the company, the running assumption has long been that they don’t want to expose themselves to patent suits. So as the new kid on the block, Apple is walking straight into a potential legal quagmire.

Unfortunately, I suspect this means that we’ll be lucky to get any kind of technical details out of Apple on how their GPUs work. They can’t fully hide how their CPUs work due to how program compilation works (which is why we know as much as we do), but the abstraction provided by graphics APIs makes it very easy to hide the inner-workings of a GPU and make it a black box. Even when we know how something works, features and implementation details can be hidden right under our noses.

Ultimately today’s press release is a bit bitter-sweet for all involved in the industry. On the one hand it absolutely puts Imagination, a long-time GPU developer, on the back foot. Which is not to spell doom and gloom, but the company will have to work very hard to make up for losing Apple. On the other hand, with a new competitor in the GPU space – albeit one we’ve been expecting – it’s a sign that things are about to get very interesting. If nothing else, Apple enjoys throwing curveballs, so expect the unexpected.

Imagination: Patents & Losing Apple
Comments Locked

144 Comments

View All Comments

  • Laststop311 - Monday, April 10, 2017 - link

    Thats why you disable icloud backups
  • Meteor2 - Wednesday, April 5, 2017 - link

    'paranoid'

    -- you used the correct word there.
  • pravakta - Friday, April 7, 2017 - link

    "Imagination Technologies just brokered a deal w/ Qualcomm"
    What is the source of this info? Where Qualcomm will use IMG GPU? What about their own Adreno?
  • mrpii - Tuesday, April 4, 2017 - link

    I have to wonder if this isn't about being competitive with CUDA/OpenCL engines that run on GPU. Not only can this dramatically speed up some compression and encoder algorithms running on a GPU, but right now on a Mac, there is no support for things like Tensorflow running on an Imagination GPU. Apple hardware can't play along.
  • Torrijos - Wednesday, April 5, 2017 - link

    Actually OpenCL on the macPro was one thing that was working and using both GPUs.
    The problem then was that the tech wasn't properly used by software developers and such and then the GPUs didn't evolve.
    Check the Luxmark 3 Benchmarks
    http://barefeats.com/hilapmore.html

    Apple's Final Cut Pro too is optimised etc.

    Apple's true failure was believing that the entire industry was going to switch towards more abstraction of the hardware so that 2 GPUs could fight with single GPUs.
    HSA still is in the future...
    crossFire and SLI look to be dying...

    Apple now feels it's time to customer design it and ensure they aren't dependent on other's choices.
  • BillBear - Wednesday, April 5, 2017 - link

    You can do neural network training in Tensorflow and then export that neural net to run under Apple's Basic Neural Network Subroutines API which was added in the last version of MacOS and iOS.

    https://www.bignerdranch.com/blog/use-tensorflow-a...
  • easp - Thursday, April 6, 2017 - link

    Apple may well have some of their own graphics IP to bargain with. Technically, this isn't their first GPU. They shipped the short-lived QuickDraw 3D accelerator in 1995.
  • farloo - Tuesday, April 11, 2017 - link

    Looks like the future of Apple is ARM, even for their laptops and PCs. With computing relying less and less on <a href="http://www.emobly.com/">CPUs</a> and more on dedicated processing units, the in-house GPU thing makes sense.
  • amosbatto - Wednesday, April 12, 2017 - link

    In no way will this save Apple money when they are currently paying Imagination around 30 cents per device. For Apple, that is pocket change. It is probably worth $60 million per year for Apple to pay Imagination to avoid lawsuits over the IP, because they will need to defend against AMD, nVidia, Intel and Qualcomm as well, which means the need to be able to counter sue using Imagination's patents. Otherwise, Apple is a prime target for the picking.
  • msroadkill612 - Monday, May 1, 2017 - link

    Whatever, what I see is the prescience of AMD in seeing correctly (IMO), that the future belonged to having a presence in both vital processors to IT solutions - cpu & gpu, ~15 years ago. (formally bought ATI ~2005)

    Now we have apple and intel (that recent israeli company buy) in a mad scramble to catch up.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now