Printable View
Saw that coming. Hahaha, you're hilarious. You need to read sir. Never insulted anyone. Said their arguement was a joke. Didn't put anyone down, insult anyone's character or make fun of them in anyway. I'm sure you'll reply to this saying "need to read" is an insult. :rofl::ROTF:Quote:
Originally Posted by Chumbucket843
An interesting observation btw.
You've all seen the thread about ASUS MARS based on ATI, right? Which has a huge cooling system and can draw up to 450W of power.
Why are they releasing this? I am sure no one doubts that Fermi will not be considerably faster than 5970 (and in fact will probably be slower).
Since it's not just ASUS who is going to release similar monster cards, it makes me think that dual Fermi is coming, sooner or later. It will be just as hot, huge, power hungry and expensive.
That's what this card is supposed to compete with.
if something is too pessimistic even for saaya... then there is a problem :D jkQuote:
Originally Posted by saaya
I don't know why you guys are basically saying it would be impossible for them to even do 600mhz with 480SP's. There are yield issues and those issues are eliminated when you are considering launching only 5000 or so cards.
I am sure that if Nvidia was to go as low as 600MHz for 480SP Fermi's, they would be able to produce that in large quantities. But of course they won't because it has to be (surprise) good in performance also :D
I think it's Charlie's articles which make everyone try to put everything in as bad of a light as possible. While you're at it you might also try predicting that Fermi will not even do 500mhz, it will cost $13500 per card and Nvidia is going to go bankrupt because a plane carrying all their engineers and managers as well as millions of chips will crash and burn because Fermi is "huge, broken and unfixable".
well there hanst been any talk about dual fermi for a while...Quote:
Originally Posted by zalbard
originally it was supposed to come out "very soon" after the fermi single gpu launch... but then again, nvidia said fermi is launching "very soon" and that was almost half a year ago :D
i really wonder if a dual fermi card makes sense...
if the power consumption of the single cards is really that high, then a dualgpu fermi card would have to be clocked pretty low, which would make it not that fast... only 20% faster than a 5970, if even that...
thats assuming a single 480 is slightly slower than a 5970...
hahha, thats so true man :D :lol:Quote:
Originally Posted by annihilat0r
sigged :D
I'm surprised the doom and gloom posse haven't already "predicted" this very dilemma, maybe they're not as good as they thought! :yepp:Quote:
Originally Posted by annihilat0r
Hey, since you post in pretty much every thread it'll be great to see my name on everywhere on XS now :toast:Quote:
Originally Posted by saaya
It's because there were never any rumors of such a plane crashing. But now I said it and everyone is going to bet on it! Nvidia will die!Quote:
Originally Posted by highoctane
The question should be - Why would NOT they release such video card? Since when, manufacturer are making cards, that should compete with another, that come from vendor? This is just silly observation. If there is going to be another card from ATi, it will come from them, not from anybody else.Quote:
Originally Posted by zalbard
so is the march 26 another paper launch ???
its the geforce based on fermi paper launchQuote:
Originally Posted by Sn0wm@n
the november paperlaunch was of fermi as an architecture by itself... with a hint towards gpgpu... :D
So help me god if this is a paper launch.... Really what I'm far more miffed at is the potential price tag; I find it unconscionable given the economic times we live in to drop $1200 on a pair of video cards. That's almost enough to cover my car payments for the entire span they have been playing hide and go :banana::banana::banana::banana: yourself games with their marketing department since it was known that Fermi wasn't going so well.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sn0wm@n
These had better be AT or BELOW $400 or I will be moving to Hecatonderes in the fall and skipping nvidia indefinitely until they get their head on straight.
Quote:
Originally Posted by saaya
fermi as a gpgpu + another paper launch about the card gefore still equal another paper launch... but they are trying to make themselves look good... their pr dept is good at that... cant blame em for trying...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sentential
they say the price tag will be close to 700$ but they didnt say newegg price... im sure some retailler will hike the price alot to make up for the lack of availability ..... countdown to 1200$ gtx480 on ebay
Like this?Quote:
Originally Posted by trinibwoy
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zed_X
U$400 for the GTX470 and either U$500 or U$550 for the GTX480
that's my guess
$299 for GTX 470
$399 for GTX 480
$499 for double GF100
These prices wil become reality if ATi has an existing or new/refresh card to match/beat the Fermi-lineup at launch. Otherwise you can add about $100 to $200 from bottom to top, would I suggest.
Ummm... Nvidia is just passing that info on to AIBs. Nvidia knew what A3 was like in Jan.Quote:
Originally Posted by annihilat0r
My $499 and $599 estimates were a little high and yours are a little low. ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by -Sweeper_
stop expecting nvidia to give you fermi for free... it wont happpen... big dies cost alot to make so they cost alot to sell..... + delays = more cash invested in fixing initial problem this involve a bigger investment .... so a fermi at 700$ isnt out of range
The "ONE Fermi" bit? Yeah he was off there but still has a higher hit rate than anyone else on the board at this point.Quote:
Originally Posted by LordEC911
Idk I just have the feeling Fermi is the new R600...even if is faster than GT200 products won't be offering the true performance we expected, and knowing nvidia the prices are going to be sky-high, is not worth releasing a product that would run 10-20 fps faster than competition (lets say GTX480 vs 5870) for $300 more...or yet slower than competition offerings (GTX480 vs 5970) for same price or even more expensive...ending up being hotter and a lot more demanding on watts... idk I just lost hope on nvidia in this generation...I guess is all up on nvidias driver team (they are way much better than ATi by the way) to make Fermi "shine"Quote:
Originally Posted by saaya
there's A LOT of assumptions in there... all of which contradict posts from people with a good track record on these things...Quote:
Originally Posted by Blacky
what if the gtx480 is "only" 10-20fps faster than the 5870 and $100 more explensive? ;)
neliz doesn't count?Quote:
Originally Posted by trinibwoy
still, would be hotter (which could mean more failures) and consumes even more... so theres 2 cons vs 1 pro :/ and even if it has more fps, now days any performance hardware level is overkill now days (thanks to consoles)... so I don't think someone with a ATi 5000 has the need to jump the bandwagon even if runs 30+ fps while gaming 80-100 fps in most games...as long there no PC exclusives (like crysis was) theres no need for more powerful hardware atm, at least for gaming...Quote:
Originally Posted by 570091D
so.... the hd5xxx series is useless too then?Quote:
Originally Posted by Blacky
how exactly does hotter = fail? the i7 920 is "hotter" than a q9650, does it then have higher failure rates? also, please enlighten all of us on what exactly the power consuption and thermals for the gtx4xx cards will be.
Not useless but rather unnecessary. The thing was in the past if the game wasn't demanding then you could always argue that if you wanted to go a higher res or AA, etc you need the power. Now 30" is probably as big as you would want a computer screen to be, so the res has hit a ceiling (hence why eyefinity which is cool but i know i wouldn't play with bezels). Coupled with console ports then really any decent card from last gen would be enough.Quote:
Originally Posted by 570091D
As long we keep getting crap ports (again for gaming), yes, I had 285's on 3-way and temps were awful in gaming session's I had to put it at 100% to have <85, I sold it and got myself an 5870 which is enough for anything right now even for eyefinity and for power consumption is probably is not going to be less than ATi 5000 thats for sure everyone knows that already I guess...Quote:
Originally Posted by 570091D
I don't fully agree here. This is a very subjective thing to say as it depends on your framerate demands, image quality settings and last but not surely not least, resolution. At 1920x1200, I find myself wanting more than what a single 5870 can offer (I like to have above 60fps at all times if possible with 4x AA / 16AF for single player games, and even more online ; again subjective and NO a 5870 cannot do this let alone a 5970 in some cases ). If a GTX 480 can meet that demand, I am all for it ( given a reasonable cooling solution ) I'd sooner pay $700 for a single card that is 10-15% slower than a 5970 but that is just me. Multi gpu solutions should be a last resort in my opinion ( an educated opinion at that as I've personally used 5 different multi gpu configs / cards in the past few years ; I'm speaking of the pitfuls and issues that have always plauged these solutions ; driver problems, power usage , noise, heat, low performance increase relative to price )Quote:
Originally Posted by Blacky
what games, besides Crysis&CrysisWH, don't run at 60+ at 1920x1200 4xAA/16xAF with HD 5970 ?
I don't expect everyone agrees with some of my assumptions or subjective statements, but a single 5870 runs most all games (except crysis of course :D) above 60++ fps in 1920x1xxx with all settings cranked up, even in some games runs decently at 2560x1600... and could be like this for a while since there isn't a mayor demanding game this year besides Crysis 2 and Metro 2033, and maybe Bad Company 2...Quote:
Originally Posted by Chickenfeed
Meh. Which card, EVER, was able to give that? On all modern games? We're talking about a med/high resolution with 4xaa and 16AF. And a MINIMUM of 60 fps?Quote:
Originally Posted by Chickenfeed
Then I guess you have been limiting yourself to playing Doom 3 or so for eternity. I mean, current games are all console ports so they are light for the PC and all, but a minimum of 60 fps for high IQ is too much to demand.
It's just people seeing that there has been absolutely NO increase in graphics quality (except for Crysis) in like 3 years, while PC graphics capability has increased five fold; seeing the regular FPS numbers on the roof and then trying to find & justify the meaning for buying an expensive graphics card.
I am on 1920x1200 and I find that even a 5870 can be overkill most of the cases. Just think, I haven't overclocked the card even 1 mhz, and I didn't even install the 10.1 drivers (current is 10.3) because the system doesn't break a sweat on 4xAA and 16xAF in all games, except Crysis.
I am fine with not having min 60 fps in games. It's impossible to generalize it anyway. On Crysis 30-40fps average is perfectly fine whereas on some games the FPS changes from 50 to 200 in a matter of seconds, so you do want 60 fps. It's more like a matter of having constant FPS rather than a high one. If your avg Crysis FPS is 35, chances are it hardly ever goes below 30 and above 40. You get used to it and play the game perfectly.
Nope and you should know why.Quote:
Originally Posted by LordEC911
It's OK for now, but think about DX11 games to come...
It really depends on what your purposes are.Quote:
Originally Posted by annihilat0r
For a high-detail graphically intense race sim, having high FPS and a high refresh rate matter. It makes a big difference in how well you hold your lines.
Competitive FPS is also a place where high FPS is required (though, in these cases you usually keep turning down the graphics to get FPS and give yourself a visual-awareness advantage)
That said, I can usually play single-player FPS games so long as the frames stay above 40. It's not like the AI is going to be so fast or so good that it blurs by you without a supper high frame-rate.
I know everyone's talked eyefinity to death. But I think that it still hasn't sunken in. I think multi-display is looking like the best reason for having a big-time GPU going forward. If the console ported games aren't driving the GPU hard enough, put it to work pushing 3x the pixels.
well R600 wasnt that much faster compared to their previous parts, but even if you look at a worst case scenario of less than 480sps and lower than 600mhz clocks, its STILL going to be notably faster than a gtx285... so like i said before, i dont think perf is a problem... heat and power and cost, yeah... especially cost...Quote:
Originally Posted by Blacky
the thing is, nvidia stumbled with fermi but they were so far in the lead that they didnt really fall behind, at least i dont think so...
and their driver team... im scared of them man :lol:
whenever they had perf issues in the past and needed their counterpart to an ati card to perform slightly better, they went for very questionable optimizations... ati too, i know, but nvidia was much worse... the geforce fx spawned SOME ugly image quality for all nvidia cards, not just the fx series...
im worried that fermi underperfoming will result in them lowering the image quality on all cards, including my 260s :S
exactly!Quote:
Originally Posted by jmke
hence the multi monitor and 3d and physix stuff...
if your hardware is too fast for the software, make the software slower :D
http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/video/d...ar_Nvidia.html
Q3 to Q4 sounds like GF104 on 40nm, definately not 28nm...Quote:
It is rather clear that GF100 is an expensive chip and it will not be able to power mainstream solutions. As a result, it is completely expected that Nvidia will tape out and release a new graphics processing unit (GPU) – some call it GF104 – for more affordable accelerators. It is a surprise that Quadro FX 6000-series will not feature the GF100, at least, based on the information provided by the CFO of Nvidia. Nvidia also confirmed that in Q2 – Q3 2010 graphics processors powered by Fermi architecture would become mainstream for the company.
GTX480 = 512SP, 650MHz core/1350 shader, 5870 = -10%~+15% (very low availability. For reviewers and PR) $599.99
GTX470 = 480SP, 675MHz core/1450 shader, 5850 = +15~+20% (Better avail. Most widely sold over GTX480) $449.99
Just guesses! ;)
or add higher resolution textures, we don't need 32xAAQuote:
Originally Posted by saaya
1920x1200 is nowhere mainstream yet, and those with 2560x1600 screens... I don't know anybody personally who has one.
+1 just some days ago i was talking to a friend of mine who works in india games and discussing about mobile game they were developing. He said the problem is with compatibility even with java you have to guess screen size if you have a specified resolution and how well can the phone handle the game the solution he said was a unified game.Quote:
Originally Posted by jmke
A single big jar file that had high resolution support as well as low resolution. This would install the proper game pack out of the choices and give better flexibility. But there is a catch he says the total size would well exceed the bar of 2MB and then phones with lower ram/buffer size will not be able to install the game.
A similar thing crops up if high resolution text's are packed along with low resolution ones but in computers case we have the ability to pre-define the correct sequence and put that on the ram piece by piece. There is no real reason why not to include high resolution textures along with the game other than it will take some more space.
You're basically saying a GTX 470 will perform on par with a HD5870, but a GTX 480 can be 10 percent slower than that in some cases? :confused:Quote:
Originally Posted by Your_Boss
hater's confusion syndrome :D
i was lol'n too
one month until "the silence of the trolls"
:clap::up:Quote:
Originally Posted by saaya
Like this?Quote:
Originally Posted by jmke
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p49vOX-_LyU
what the hell??!Quote:
Originally Posted by -Sweeper_
666 SP's? That's the devil's card
Nvidia doesn't have any 666 sp chip so it's probably SLI. Or tri-sli on a board or quad-sli
Whatever he had, it must be good :D
Expired dope ? :D
That's one crazy card!:shocked:
That pic. serious?:eek:
Is it April 1st yet? :hm:
On second thought that can't be real. So much for the accuracy of SemiAccurate :D
wait... you thought there was some accuracy before?Quote:
Originally Posted by annihilat0r
It definitely isn't real...
- a card only for sweden?
- that is only available at one retailer?
- every spec is 666 ? 666 MHz Core, 666 MHz RAM, 666 Shaders, 666 Bit... Yeah right...
100% fake. I'll eat my shorts if this card exists.
The shop definitely did it for teh lulz.
Haha, they made a news article on someones joke photoshop... haha
lol, I only saw the 666 shaders. I'd have called it earlier if I'd seen the 666mhz and 666 bit bus...Quote:
Originally Posted by FischOderAal
altho SA still hasn't called it it seems.
Nobody noticed it was posted under Graphics & Humor?
Even at humour they fail. :p:
Only read the first paragraphs with the specs :DQuote:
Originally Posted by Tim
The source page says the card has gone EOL and can no longer be bought, but according to Inet's facebook page it was just a contest where the first one to find a fake product page got 4 kilograms of candy/sweets sent to him.Quote:
Originally Posted by -Sweeper_
The semi-accurate article was posted under what seems to be a Swedish joke-name (Gurra being a nickname used for people with the first name Gustaf and Aktersnurra being something like those engines with a propeller that you have on the back of a motorboat), probably posted as a joke :D
Edit: My guess is Lars-Göran Nilsson posted it. He's from Sweden, though he lives in Taiwan at the moment
Yes, basically. Slower MHz 480 than 470 in both core and shaders. Memory I not sure of, probably about same speeds.Quote:
Originally Posted by annihilat0r
So you have info about clockspeeds? I don't think 470 clockspeeds are going to be higher than 480, but that's only if what I heard about the 480 being 480SP and 700+mhz is correct.Quote:
Originally Posted by Your_Boss
Even if it's not, though, 470's speeds cannot be much higher than 480 can they?
You do realize that:Quote:
Originally Posted by Your_Boss
1) The average performance delta between the 5870 and the 5850 is 10 - 15%.
2) The GTX 480 is the highest model of the line ( single-gpu at least ) and the GTX 470 is a high end model, not the top dog.
That being said, the GTX 470 is faster than the GTX 480 by your numbers :D
something tells me that we won't see such textures in a game anytime soonQuote:
Originally Posted by trinibwoy
a tech demo is just that
the first Far Cry tech demo was also shown years before actual playable game
As was Crysis, and the final game was downscaled even from the one year ago tech demos. Maybe we can blame AMD for this - for not being able to keep up with G80 and giving Dear Leader no incentive to produce a faster card
we can blame consoles for the poor advances in GFX on the PC; games are all DX9 at the most (with some DX10 features thrown in for good measure); and they all need to run butter smooth on modest hardware and limited resource
so we end up with console ports which don't take any advantage of the PCs extra power;
but it's a completely understandable decision if you start looking at sales figures.
Crysis did quite horrible compared to Call of Duty or Halo;
if they can't find an user-friendly way to block piracy, the industry might actually see more sales on PC platform than any other. As it stands though, I thought I saw some numbers on the Call of Duty Modern Warfare 2 title;
the amount of total copies on PC (most part illegal) surpassed that of all console sales together by a healthy percentage. taking only into account legal copies, PC didn't even account of 10% of the sales.
why develop for a platform which doesn't generate the most income?
well, rage uses MegaTexture...Quote:
Originally Posted by jmke
I didn't say they were "much" higher. Only shader is "somewhat" higher teh other just a little.Quote:
Originally Posted by annihilat0r
Just my guesses, can I not have any? :)
Yes, having more SP but less MHz will mix the performance with the 470 a little. Depends on the game. Overall the 480 will win but very limited availability so can we even count that? :)Quote:
Originally Posted by BenchZowner
You are joking right ? :DQuote:
Originally Posted by Your_Boss
All is lost in this thread it seems... even common sense...
rage is a console engineQuote:
Originally Posted by -Sweeper_
Not true. It's PC as well. :)Quote:
Originally Posted by jmke
:up:Quote:
Originally Posted by Tim
Although in fairness id has been pretty clear that they want it to run excellently on all platforms.
It's just too bad Carmack is so busy with his aerospace stuff, or Doom 5 would probably be out by now! :shocked:
Who cares about space anyways, video games where you blow stuff up are far more important. :D
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tim
yeah ;)
http://s09.idav.ucdavis.edu/talks/05...Challenges.pdf
Rage is the game based on multiplatform engine called "id Tech 5"Quote:
Originally Posted by jmke
obvious facts (everybody already knows):
- Fermi GPU has ~50% more transistors than Cypress 5870
- Fermi GPU is bigger than Cypress 5870
- the yields at best can't be as good as Cypress 5870
- Fermi GPU costs more than a 5870 (price can be anything)
- expect disabling of chip units (harvesting) and clock speed binning
- Fermi has 2x SP and hence double shader performance of GTX2xx (like GTX295).
- Fermi will be faster than GTX2xx. Thats a fact.
- Fermi will require new (not yet available) drivers.
- Fermi DX11 and new features will get heavy marketing.
- Fermi will be dual-slot card.
Fermi in many ways is similar to other big projects like Boeing 787. Very ambitious. Rarely on time.
But even if things are 10x worse than we imagine, just like R600, it will still launch "as is". And, its not the end of the world. Fermi successor is already designed and being finished off.
Regardless if performance is +10% or -10% from expected, and whatever the availability, with new drivers and time, that will change dramatically over the months.
40% more Transistors, ~64% more die size.Quote:
Originally Posted by ***Deimos***
Yields aren't comparable between two differenz chip designs, so costs are also not comparable. Different contract details with TSMC.
you beat me to it!Quote:
Originally Posted by mapel110
deimos, because transistor density is LOWER on fermi than it is on cypress, yields might actually be similar. sure a larger die has a higher probability of process failure (random failures on the wafer), but the lower transistor density means it's less complicated for tsmc to manufacture (relativly speaking). [speculation] about the manufacturing contracts, i have a feeling that tsmc is giving nvidia a better deal per wafer than it's giving amd. tsmc knows that amd will be going to gf fairly soon, so there is no insentive to lower it's prices to retain the customer. nvidia however, has the option to go either way, so i beleive it's safe to assume that nvidia is getting some good prices in an attempt to keep them happy with tsmc. [/speculation]
Defect rate increases exponentially with die size, not linearly, so regardless of transistor density, Fermi is going to get more errors periodQuote:
Originally Posted by 570091D
(And density isn't a big deal depending on how they do redundancy and error mitigation in the design, there's a lot more to it than just density = more errors)
Quote:
Originally Posted by annihilat0r
Given my background is in competitive first person shooters, my demands are higher than most I will admit but I am someone who gets very annoyed with framerate drops / slowdowns. On the topic of Crysis I actually play them with a 360 controller as controllers tend to deal with lower framerates much better than mice. Now most things I play rarely dip bellow 60 but some the odd game does and sometimes frequently. Again, just my subjective demands for ideal gameplay. Don't take this as I *won't* play something at less than 60fps, I just greatly prefer 60+, if at all possible. This is more for input reasons, not visual reasons. 30 fps constant looks fine to me, but it doesn't feel fine. I confess I don't play things online nearly as much as I used to and as I find myself gravitating torwards single player games, I am not nearly as fussy as I used to be but I still demand a smooth experiance. Now this is mostly in regards to first person shooters, as RTS games and SIMS do completely fine at lower framerates ( eg Supreme Commander, World in Conflict ect )
Anyways back when 1680x1050 was the bees knees, I have to say the 8800GTX provided a very nice experiance for many months, probaley the best I've had with a launch card ever. I'm waiting for the next card that does this but at 1920x1200. We are getting closer but we still are not there yet and with the advent of advanced ambient occlussion and tessalation in current and upcoming games, its going to be a while yet.
I couldn't agree with this post more. :up::up::D:DQuote:
Originally Posted by Chickenfeed
Bravo!
A man can have his dream :DQuote:
Anyways back when 1680x1050 was the bees knees, I have to say the 8800GTX provided a very nice experiance for many months, probaley the best I've had with a launch card ever. I'm waiting for the next card that does this but at 2560x1600 We are getting closer but we still are not there yet and with the advent of advanced ambient occlussion and tessalation in current and upcoming games, its going to be a while yet.
aerospace stuff? :oQuote:
Originally Posted by Sly Fox
like what? didnt know he was into that...
and carmack... his genius is completely wasted on getting "ok-good" graphics on consoles... im not even sure hes good at that, hes good at pushing graphics to the limits, not on getting the job done with the least possible resources...
yes, but depending on yields it kinda doesnt matter anymore...Quote:
Originally Posted by ***Deimos***
rv870 = 100% yields
150/150 = 25us$
GF100 = 33% yields
33/100 = 100us$
GF100 = 50% yields
50/100 = 70us$
GF100 = 66% yields
66/100 = 53us$
at 50% yields the difference in chip cost is already acceptable... 50$ isnt much, and consiering that fermi is 50% bigger and SHOULD be at least 20% faster, nvidia can easily charge 50$ more for fermi than an rv870 part... so that means if fermi hits 50% yields AND perf is 20% better or even more, nvidia will make as much money selling GF100 as ati does selling rv870...
nvidia clearly never aimed for high yields with fermi, they knew it wouldnt be good, but they didnt expect the claimed single digit yields, which is a huge deal breaker for them...
why arent costs comparable? :stick:Quote:
Originally Posted by mapel110
you take the amount of money transferred from nvidia to tsmc and divide it by the functional parts nvidia received, and the same for ati... and voila... was it that hard? :D
and different contract details... afaik thats not true, both nvidia and ati buy wafers and not functional chips. at least thats what an article i read mentioned... was it anandtech?
yeah but how much of a difference would that make? lets say tsmc gives them 50% off, which is a huge discount, even then they need ~20% yields to get to a point where they can get the same margins as ati... (again, assuming GF100 is at least 20% faster than rv870 so they can sell GF100 for 50$ more)Quote:
Originally Posted by 570091D
if the rumors of single digit yields are true, then even a massive discount of 50% wouldnt help nvidia...
0_o mmmmkaaaaay... :D heheheQuote:
Originally Posted by Chickenfeed
Check out http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Armadillo_AerospaceQuote:
Originally Posted by saaya
If there's ever been someone in the game business who I'd call a legitimate genius, it's Carmack. :up:
Which is to say, that I agree wholeheartedly with you. :ROTF:
700+ MHZ frecuency of the core is a myth..
GEFORCE GTX 480 will have 48 ROP not to "have more than Ati :D" but to compensate lower GPU frecuency. And the power consumption will not be so bad as predicted. :)
625-650 core frecuency more reality.
What about SP count?Quote:
Originally Posted by xdan
More probably after or during CEBIT. NDA is very respected.Quote:
What about SP count?
ROP's are a good sign, GTX 480 will have 50% more ROP than a 5870 which may compensate very much other lacks of performance.
GT200 has 100% more ROP than Rv770/rv790,but not much faster...Quote:
Originally Posted by xdan
Still i consider that 1600SP's of 5870 suffered a bit of too few ROP's...that's way it didn't beat GTX 295.
we can stay here and stipulate on how much nvidia can produce or look at retailer and realise they have no fermi in stock yet .....
They have no stock of an... unreleased product, that must be a world's first :rofl:Quote:
Originally Posted by Sn0wm@n
http://inox.org/demot/TROLLING.jpg
My guess was that this was due to the fact that Fermi wasn't released. Of course I could be wrong. :eek:Quote:
Originally Posted by Sn0wm@n
yes "as well" :clap:Quote:
Originally Posted by Tim
meaning it will be made to run on consoles first, PCs later. Yet another console conversion.
he builds rocketsQuote:
Originally Posted by saaya
living under a rock? Carmack loves the challenge of pushing as much pixels as possible, no matter what the hardwareQuote:
and carmack... his genius is completely wasted on getting "ok-good" graphics on consoles... im not even sure hes good at that, hes good at pushing graphics to the limits, not on getting the job done with the least possible resources...
http://www.gamasutra.com/php-bin/new...hp?story=23997
:-)
Sabre PC illegitimate according to nVidia
BSN - ASUS to introduce Dual-Fermi on Computex 2010?Quote:
The company gave us the following statement about GTX 400-series pricing:
NVIDIA and our launch partners have not released pricing or pre-order information yet. Any Web sites claiming to be taking pre-orders should not be considered legitimate.
Computex is the 1-5 june 2010.
Only hope good 480/470/460's availability, that will be a good start ... :D
Surprise surprise. Who would've guessed... :rolleyes:
Quote:
Originally Posted by BenchZowner
of course i must be trolling....
nahh... your right... so why speculate on how much fermi die have been produced... yet we keep hearing how much they need to fix engineering problem etc... this is what nvidia is doing with tsmc's help .... revision B or whatever.... trying to keep good yield ... so until we hear more concrete number on how much good die nvidia can have per month we could start to speculate on availability ..... but in short i had to say my stupid comment ..... it was much easierQuote:
Originally Posted by annihilat0r
Anyone know the length of the 480?
Id hate to buy a case it doesn't fit in..
No you're not trolling, you're just failing at trolling.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sn0wm@n
"I wonder why no shop has Fermi or the Radeon 6890 in stock..."
You are not alone about this. Unfortunately, too many are doing the same. This thread has a tendency to get "wild" very frequently. Too many baseless claims form one side, and some bigger baseless claims from the other side to counter those other baseless claims about a unreleased product.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sn0wm@n
When i tried to cast a light on this problem, several chose to use personal attacks to offense me. I'm wondering why it is so hard to keep this thread at a level which this forums reputation would deserve. This is something that can affect the credibility of the entire forum.
I heard 10.5''Quote:
Originally Posted by fiskov
may? so are you speculating or do you actually have a source?Quote:
Originally Posted by xdan
and according to several articles i read nvidias rops are chewing through data about half as fast as atis?
then how come the rop castrated 5830 scales pretty well according to sps?Quote:
Originally Posted by xdan
oh enough with this bs speculation already!!! :mad:Quote:
Originally Posted by annihilat0r
hahahha :D
wow.. thats cool...Quote:
Originally Posted by jmke
yes jmke, im living under a rock... sigh...Quote:
Originally Posted by jmke
and thanks for proving my point by linking to carmack spending time to get (how many years old?) doomI running on a 5" screen mobile phone instead of cooking up a crysis eye candy killer :D
i heard nvidia is doing some special fermi verification process for cases? check nvidia.com or google, shouldnt be too hard to find infos... i remember silverstone and coolermaster launched new cases and they said it was fermi certified...Quote:
Originally Posted by fiskov
whatever that means... :shrug:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sam_oslo
stop! please stop! :rofl: :ROTF: :lol:Quote:
Originally Posted by Sam_oslo
your killing me man! :lol:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MOZDG9UgzkQ
This what you have been doing mostly. Dismiss, judge, and laugh of everything you don't have the ability comprehend or understand.Quote:
Originally Posted by saaya
It is not a good idea to make fun of others meanings and ideas generally. It is a good idea to show respect for others ideas and meanings, specially when we are talking about a unreleased product with all those unknown factors around it.
You are one of those with biggest baseless claims in this thread, so I'm not surprised that you are reacting to my post. But this kind of reactions just proves the point in my previews post.
since when is a 295 faster than a 5870...:cussing:. you just cant make that generalisation. it gives the impression a 295 beats the 5870...Quote:
Originally Posted by xdan
no 295 can beat my 5870 OCFTW take your bird out slap you about card.... :weapon:
a quick google gives us... http://forums.ocworkbench.com/showthread.php?p=452360
Hmm, the bigger the (nVidia) die, the more possibility of die defects, and evidently the higher the rate of (nVidian user) brain defects
Coefficient of correlation >0.75 :toast: