AMD patent reveals plans for distributed geometry processing

Marees

2[H]4U
Joined
Sep 28, 2018
Messages
2,096
h/t RedGamingTech

It is here: multi-GCD chip. The holy grail of GPU

https://www.freepatentsonline.com/y2023/0376318.html#google_vignette

DISTRIBUTED GEOMETRY

In one implementation, chiplets (labelled) 320 A to 320 N are coupled to (a single) index buffer (labelled) 360 stored in memory (labelled) 350 via communication link (labelled) 310

In one implementation, when a draw call is initiated on GPU 300, chiplets 320A-N are notified of the draw call and the location and size of index buffer 360 which includes the indices corresponding to one or more graphics objects of the draw call. Index buffer 360 can be stored in any number and type of memory devices accessible by chiplets 320A-N. In one implementation, index buffer 360 includes a list of pointers to vertices of graphics primitives that make up the graphics object(s). The graphics primitives can be, but are not limited to, points, lines, triangles, rectangles, patches, and so on.

In response to receiving the notification of the initiation of the draw call, each chiplet 320A-N calculates which indices to process from index buffer 360. Then each chiplet 320A-N fetches and processes indices independently and in parallel with other chiplets 320A-N fetching and processing their corresponding portions of index buffer 360. In one implementation, the chiplets 320A-N fetch indices a primitive group at a time in a round-robin fashion, resulting in an interleaving arrangement of portions of indices of index buffer 360 mapped to chiplets 320A-N. This allows chiplets 320A-N to process different portions of a draw call independently and in parallel with each other. This distributed geometry processing scheme relies on each chiplet 320A-N determining which portion(s) of the draw call to process without relying on a central distributor of work that dispenses work to the chiplets 320A-N. In other words, each chiplet knows where in index buffer 360 the previous chiplet left off and where the next chiplet will pick up again.

Referring now to FIG. 5, a block diagram of another implementation of a chiplet GPU 500 is shown. As shown in FIG. 5, chiplet GPU 500 includes chiplets 510A-N which are representative of any number of chiplets. In one implementation, in order to keep chiplets 510A-N in synchronization when processing draw calls, chiplets 510A-N utilize a state management scheme. For example, in this implementation, for a given draw call, each command processor 520A-N generates a state ID 560A-P, respectively, for each corresponding pipeline. The pipeline refers to the various graphics processing stages implemented by each chiplet 510A-N.

It should be emphasized that the above-described implementations are only non-limiting examples of implementations. Numerous variations and modifications will become apparent to those skilled in the art once the above disclosure is fully appreciated. It is intended that the following claims be interpreted to embrace all such variations and modifications.
 
So if I understand this correctly, this finally truly takes advantage of the chiplet concept for GPU's, and allows potentially infinate scalability (at least until the interconnects are saturated) by just adding more geometry engines, and having it appear as a single unified GPU to the OS?

I wonder if board makers will be able to make custom configurations, or if AMD will only sell them as part of a pre-configured organic package.
 
Also, having a patent, and having something works are two different things. So, this could just be a "foot in the door" thing for now.

Nobody patents an idea unless they already have it working, unless they know it doesn't work and want other people to investigate it (and lose money) but that's kind of pointless.
 
Nobody patents an idea unless they already have it working, unless they know it doesn't work and want other people to investigate it (and lose money) but that's kind of pointless.

Yeah, but working in a lab is different from being great on the market.

There is an incentive to file parents early these days ever since we moved from a "first art" type system to a "first to file" type of system.

In the past you had to prove you developed it, and if you could document that you were first that mattered. Now whoever gets the paperwork in to the parent office first owns it, regardless of if they actually developed it or not.
 
Nobody patents an idea unless they already have it working, unless they know it doesn't work and want other people to investigate it (and lose money) but that's kind of pointless.
This isn't true. There is no requirement to have working samples of anything patented. USPTO can request it, but not required to gain the patent.
 
Nobody patents an idea unless they already have it working, unless they know it doesn't work and want other people to investigate it (and lose money) but that's kind of pointless.
Actually, it doesn't really have to be working, but the rest of what you said in essence is that protection part of a design.

Though, I sometimes wish it were more like what you said.
 
This isn't true. There is no requirement to have working samples of anything patented. USPTO can request it, but not required to gain the patent.

No, that's not why they don't patent...

Actually, it doesn't really have to be working, but the rest of what you said in essence is that protection part of a design.

Yeah, they patent when they are willing to make their secrets public. Once a patent is issued, other companies like Intel and Nvidia can start developing similar tech that doesn't step on the patent.

Companies only apply for patents when they're about to implement the tech, when they know they're so far ahead with their implementation that other people can't start figuring out an alternative in any kind of time that it might be competitive.

There is a possibility that they're patenting something they know *doesn't* work in order to drain their competition's resources, but that's ridiculously retarded when their competition has unlimited resources.
 
Actually, it doesn't really have to be working, but the rest of what you said in essence is that protection part of a design.

Though, I sometimes wish it were more like what you said.
If only patent trolls were not a thing.


On topic, looking forward to what this means for future AMD products if they can get it working in a real product. This could finally be a killer feature that AMD needs to carve out for themselves, rather than just following along with what nVidia is doing.

The key here is whether or not they can make it seamless and not require additional specific programming to be utilized. The post seems to address that, but we know words are very different than actual execution.
 
Last edited:
sounds like VSA from the late 90s, but with a better end implementation. Can’t wait to see 32 chiplet cards
YES!!!!!!!!! NEED MOAR CHIPS
 

Attachments

  • 3536-front.jpg
    3536-front.jpg
    395.6 KB · Views: 0
Back
Top