Printable View
http://www.brightsideofnews.com/news...6gb-gddr5.aspx
Quote:
3.0 billion transistors
40nm TSMC
384-bit memory interface
512 shader cores [renamed into CUDA Cores]
32 CUDA cores per Shader Cluster
1MB L1 cache memory [divided into 16KB Cache - Shared Memory]
768KB L2 unified cache memory
Up to 6GB GDDR5 memory
Half Speed IEEE 754 Double Precision
definitly the later one. :ROTF:Quote:
Originally Posted by LOE
I missed that, sorry for repost.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bodkin
Which was pulled from BSN, which was pulled from the table linked in the other thread, which was pulled from wikipedia and changed slightly, which was pulled from random forum rumours. :p:Quote:
Originally Posted by LiquidReactor
In the table the memory bus is listed as 512 bit, here it's 384.Quote:
Originally Posted by randomizer
I can guarantee you that BSN's data was not pulled from a table on any other site.Quote:
Originally Posted by randomizer
it's a jumble then no one know but they have bits and pieces with out the picture to think it out.Quote:
Originally Posted by annihilat0r
doesn't matter much, it's the same;)Quote:
Originally Posted by trinibwoy
I think the most interesting part of this uarch is the cache structure. If the L1 and L2 is ECC, this could be a huge benefit to GPGPU computing. Nvidia looks like they will keep the lead in GPGPU if they have ECC and cache coherency taken care of. We can likely expect the GT300 to at least match the 5000 series in 3D gaming.
Where I doubt the GT300 can compete with the ATI products is price if yields aren't perfect.
I can't tell if this is marketing or brainwashing.Quote:
512 shader cores [renamed into CUDA Cores]
huh? what does ecc cache have to do with gaming performance?Quote:
Originally Posted by Mechromancer
READ WHAT I WROTE AGAIN. Your eyes failed you. ECC is useful for GPGPU appications.Quote:
Originally Posted by saaya
well you talk about gpgpu needing ecc cache and then the next sentence is that gaming perf will be good... it looked to me like your drawing that as a conclusion of the ecc cache :DQuote:
Originally Posted by Mechromancer
CUDA cores? Hahaha. :rofl:
They won't give up CUDA even when it's too late, huh?
They're slowly trying to turn CUDA into an architecture, like x86. So Intel has x86 cores, Nvidia has CUDA cores. It's all part of the master plan. Bwahahahaha! :worship:Quote:
Originally Posted by zalbard
But seriously, Nvidia's plans are far more extensive and longer term than we can cover in short-sighted forum banter. They really want to be a significant provider of high performance computing. So for them, it's a lot bigger than getting more frames in Crysis, it's about breaking into new markets with new products and making more $$$$$$.
:D I agree.Quote:
Originally Posted by trinibwoy
Well we can all agree that during Nvidia's GPU Technology Conference today, Jen-Hsun Huang will talk about GT300.
lol at CUDA cores, to use the cores you need cuda installed....
Well from what it seems GT300 will be a monster in scientifically intensive games :) How it performs in real games is the real question.
Most likely, yes.Quote:
Originally Posted by Clairvoyant129
You mean just like you need x86 binaries and an x86 OS to use x86 cores? ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by ajaidev
Seriously now, this new architecture is astonishing.
For me, just the ideea that it natively supports C++ is more then enough.
Speaking of games and physics, this GT300 will be the new frontier.
Don't know why, but ATI smells like "voodoo" to me.
anyone else noticed it doesn't say that is has DX11 support in those specs?