Printable View
1. No, I say GT 240 the second time, first is GT 230.Quote:
Originally Posted by 570091D
2. it's not GF100 news, read the thread title! The GT300 thread. GT330 :yepp:
3. because it's built on "40nm and has dx11 doesn't mean it's new", yes actually. It does.
Thanks for being an ass, it just makes your this response so much tastier.
It's NOT 40nm and it isn't DX10.1Quote:
Originally Posted by Chumbucket843
EDIT: nvm, had a good response, but i'm not going to feed the troll anymore...
lolQuote:
Originally Posted by Jowy Atreides
Anyway, back to GF100. Now Charlie is saying even A3 is in a hot mess and fully functional chips are pretty much non-existent. Should be a fun launch if it ever happens.
charlie has been saying nvidia yields are bad since g92 although yields probly arent good if die size rumors are true.
http://www.nvidia.com/object/product...gt_240_us.htmlQuote:
Originally Posted by Jowy Atreides
http://www.nvidia.com/object/product...9800gt_us.html
340 doesnt look to be a rebrand because gt 240 is 4.8GPixels and wider bus.
I'm not sure if I'm reading this correctly. Can you please clarify? Because right now it comes off as though you are listening to Charlie? :shrug:Quote:
Originally Posted by trinibwoy
Well his release dates have been a lot more accurate than any other's
die size rumours???Quote:
Originally Posted by Chumbucket843
what is there to question??
nVidia openly disclosed that Fermi is 3B transistors.
We also know G200 was 1.4 billion transistors covering a 576mm2 die surface area built on a 65nm process.
Put 2 and 2 together. Its a virtual certainty that Fermi die size will be very large (about as big), and the corresponding heat, power, and yield issues that come with that.
Nobody in the history of silicon has doubled yields by making a 2x bigger chip.
FUN nVidia GPU CLOCK STAT:
Remember GF2.. 175, 200, 225Mhz
GF4.. 250, 275, 300Mhz
GF6.. 325, 350, 400, 425Mhz - notice a pattern yet?
GF8.. 513? 575, 600, 612, 650 - ok a few bad ones..
G200... 633, 602, 612, 648, 576, 738... umm.. what was wrong with nice even spaced 25Mhz increments?
according to wikipedia (ie 9 year old):
Code:GeForce GTX 470 March 2010 GF100 40 3000 576? 1 PCI-E x16 2.0 1280 448:56:40 GDDR5 320 11 3.2
GeForce GTX 480 March 2010 GF100 40 3000 576? 1 PCI-E x16 2.0 1536 512:64:48 GDDR5 384 11 3.2
Just reporting what the man said. Charlie says a lot of stuff.Quote:
Originally Posted by ElSel10
actually those 40nm chips clock worse than the 55nm chips dont they?Quote:
Originally Posted by Chumbucket843
dx11 is enough to make it a different part in my books... its pretty irrelevant, at least now, but its a real change... 10.0 to 10.1 isnt really... if you look at the changes they had to make to go from .0 to .1 its really more of a revision, not a new part... if even that... i mean the 260 v2 with more sps was a more notable improvement and bigger change...Quote:
Originally Posted by 570091D
5770 is a 4870 with lower temps, it clocks better, and costs less, and has dx11
nvidia has lower temps too, but worse clocks, same or HIGHER costs and no dx11
i think calling it a g92 rebrand is the nice thing to do here... cause g92 was a kick4ss product, if you call this 10.1 chip a new chip, you would have to call it a square silicon piece of F A I L... calling it a rebrand sounds much more favorable :D
okay, so my sarcasm was lost on everyone. :(Quote:
Originally Posted by saaya
here's the deal, the gt240 is gt200 based.
http://i71.photobucket.com/albums/i1...00gtvgt240.jpg
the 9800gt's g92 and the gt240's gt215 probably have more differences than the 4870 -> 5770. yeah, the 5770 has dx11 and all of that jazz, but it's still basicly a modified and shrunk 4870. the gt215 is meant to fill the market UNDER g92 products... ironic isn't it? i'm not trying to defend the gt240, it's only remarkable feature is a 9w idle draw, but calling it an 8800 or 9800gt rebrand is just silly. :shrug:
sorry, but what exactly is the difference between the g92 and g200?Quote:
Originally Posted by 570091D
nvidia bumped up the specs to almost double, but they used the same building blocks, right?
so nvidia has pumped up their design and then cut it back to bellow where they started from and revised some features allowing them to place more checkmarks in the dx table giving them a 10.1 instead of 10.0...
ati went from dx10.1 to dx11 and reworked the way textures are filtered and how aa works afaik... thats def a bigger difference imo...
yes, now in what way is that rebranding cards? to me it looks like they're filling a gap in the lower end of the market place. i could care less if you don't like the card or nvidia's market strategy, i don't like it either, but let's not make this out to be something it's not.Quote:
Originally Posted by saaya
now let's all smoke a bowl and relax.... :up:
5770 uses rv870 arch thats enough for your porst to be marked as failQuote:
Originally Posted by 570091D
everyone grab some weed and chil out please
Except Nvidia's renaming department, they already got enough.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jamesrt2004
j/k
in the 40nm 10.1 parts its not rebranding cards, its rebranding tech...Quote:
Originally Posted by 570091D
its almost the same as rebranding cards...
the only reason anybody does this is to artificially increase the value of its products beyond what its really worth... and how anybody can say theres nothing wrong with that is beyond me... your basically defending or cheering for somebody whos bending you over... i guess some people are into getting bent over ^^
i think they are on something harder than weed... :DQuote:
Originally Posted by Piotrsama
nvidia marketing and sales seem more like your average speed/cocain fr3ak than a chillaxed weeder...
These are computer parts, everything is recycled, rebranded, regurgitated, cut down, binned, changed slightly and push off as the next great thing year after year.
I mean they add a couple mb of cache to a cpu and you have a totally new product, add a higher bin to memory and you now market uber speed memory, change the bezel on an lcd panel and different companies can market the same core product, wrap a new shell on a mouse, add a fan hole to an existing case design.
Everything gets blown way out of proportion....
Jesus. I think this is getting out of hands. DIE-shrink to 40 nm but same "tech" != rebranding IMHO. For me it's only rebranding when the GPU doesn't change at all, eg 8800 GT => 9800 GT.
A DIE-shrink to 40nm is not re branding. It is a new GPU and deserves a new name to indicate the lower power usage, cooler temp, etc .. .
Using GT 3xx naming will separate it from the new GF100-series too, and it should satisfy everybody. It is not like those famous nVidia re branding any longer.
This card cant come any faster, my 5870 has the grey screen issue, even with new drivers that are targeted to fix it, the issue is still present, i will stay away from ATI for my computers, i have 3 pc's, 1 gtx 285 2gb, 1 gtx 275, 1 with 5870, only one that has problems is the ati system which is my main gaming rig, also the fan sounds like a leaf blower. Im going to jump on this asap.
You are supposing that Fermi launch will be trouble free...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RebrandingQuote:
Rebranding is the process by which a product or service developed with one brand, company or product line affiliation is marketed or distributed with a different identity.
If the product changes for example die-shrink or hardware based for example DX11 then it can't be called rebranding. Rebranding is the exact same product with a different identity or name.
I don't agree how Nvidia plays the game with its Geforce, like saaya already said AMD has been doing a better job with its Radeon.
we've been waiting this long, it %*$#ing better be trouble free...Quote:
Originally Posted by Piotrsama
ATI is a joke, its been 5 months since 5800 launch. No fix for the grey screen, and they still havnt fixed the 2nd screen flickering when using dual screen. :down:Quote:
Originally Posted by Piotrsama