Template talk:Infobox graphics processing unit

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Infobox graphics processing unit template.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

fab & process

Why is there:

"process = GPU family's fabrication process"
"fab = Fabrication"

?
I have the feeling these are two variables for the same thing... Wikiinger (talk) 21:02, 25 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

product categories

I notice there are only entry through enthusiast product categories. I am thinking to add "Workstation" and "Data Center" (or maybe "Compute") product categories. This would help as there has cards like the Tesla/Radeon Instinct lines which do not fall into the current categories but are definitely GPU products. Thoughts (Wikiinger, Od1n, or ScotXW)? Dbsseven (talk) 23:06, 28 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I am against introducing more marketing buzzwords into the Wikipedia. But I am sure, I will loose one. User:ScotXW^t@lk 16:26, 14 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I agree about marketing buzzwords. But products that don't have video outputs (Radeon Instinct, Nvidia Tesla) are definitely not in the same category as enthusiast video cards. (I think a similar argument could be make for workstation cards.) Dbsseven (talk) 18:24, 14 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Firstly, the 'entry through enthusisast' product categories are mainly used for the mainstream/gaming GPU lineups, so I don't think Quadros/Teslas/Radeon Instinct/FirePros fit into this discussion. Those GPUs should remain on their own respective pages, rather than finding their way onto the "mainstream" GPU pages. The only current exception is for the Volta architecture, since that's sort of a successor to Pascal and contains compute/workstation-oriented GPUs. Anyway, the main point of contention as you noted @Dbsseven:, is for the Titan cards (excl. Titan V). Personally I think it is suitable to class them as "enthusiast", because whilst NVIDIA may market them as compute-oriented, most of the time they're just heavily-overpriced higher code-name GPUs. For example the Titan X (Pascal) was just a $1200 1080 Ti. The newer Titan Xp is just a $1200 fully unlocked GP102 die. Whilst NVIDIA has shied away from marketing them as "gaming" cards, there's really nothing to distinguish them from normal Pascal cards that would make them more compute/workstation-focused, unlike Quadros/Teslas, which definitely have large differences to the GeForce lineup. At least the Kepler Titans had one-third double precision, so you could possibly argue they were compute-focused. If you really wanted to assign them a different category, I think "Prosumer" might work best, because Quadros are more workstation, and Teslas are more datacenter. The Titans are sorta consumer whilst also being workstation/datacenter, and the "prosumer" classification fits this niche I think. Anyway, just my two cents. --Cautilus (talk) 18:15, 5 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]