The difference between the GTX and the GTX 512 is just core speed and some extra ram.. big freaking deal.. its price is going to go down anyways...
Printable View
The difference between the GTX and the GTX 512 is just core speed and some extra ram.. big freaking deal.. its price is going to go down anyways...
check this:
http://xtremesystems.org/forums/showthread.php?t=90542
quad sli 7900gtx system will have 1.3billion transistors so 1.3bill/4 = 325million vs 7800gtx 304millions
so definetly there is something else :)
Well the 7800GTX had 302M so they didn't do a huge upgrade as we would hope..
rops take more transistors?? hopefully it can perform good, on vr-zone they said that the 7900gt will score like a 7800gtx in 3dmark06 about 4k
i believe 7800gtx 512 does 4k right??
Well the difference between the 6800ultra and the 7800gtx is
302M vs 220m
24 pipes vs 16
8 vertex vs 6
and a different architecture.. that might make guessing the difference easier..
my bet is another SLi interface on Die..
The 7800gtx also has 2 mini-alu's per pixel-shader pipe. :fact:Quote:
Originally Posted by nn_step
That's adds even more transistors.
that started with the 6800 UltraQuote:
Originally Posted by DilTech
So, let's say you are nVidia with a new 110 nm, 32 pipe chip. Your competitor does not release on time, and your new card will completely dominate as such that it will hurt current 6800 cards in the channel even when price reduced.
Yield is OK, but I cannot promise enough demand with 32 pipes. Now, kill two bad quads, and see what happens. That's more like it. Much better yields. Hmm, wierd performance. We need to bump the ROP/Shader clocks a tad over the crippled core to see some better performance. Looks some some nice chips testing out. Let's bin those for later. Now, what to do with the GT. It has the same pipes as the GTX. Reduce the clocks? Not enough of a difference. Hmm, let's kill a quad and a vertex and see. Not bad. Have to change the oscillation, however. That's better.
Die shrink time. Looks like ATI has some good gains over our speed binned variant. Yields are looking pretty good. Time to get a jump again. Let's release it as we intended with 32 pipes on the GTX and 24 on the GT. That should give us what we need. We wasted the 1.1 ns chips on the 512 with the near stock timings. Let's tighten them up some like ATI and spec the speed to match core delivery better. Ah, much better. So, 1600 MHz it is. What's this? Performance at 700 MHz plus is too much of a gain. No one will buy any of the remaining 7800 cards and it makes just that much slower than the upcoming G80. Let's do 650 on the core. A nice 100 MHz bump over the GTX 7800 512. There we go. That should do it for a few months.
Oh, and if anyone asks, you can let them know there are NO changes. It's just a die shrink, after all.
G71? Any source?Quote:
Originally Posted by Willis
<center>Willis and HeavyH20 >> Pure speculation or?</center>
It's Willis day dreaming!:)
Honestly I would love for him to be proved right...
The best out come works for all of us...
The rumour mill is forever crunching...
Let me point you to: http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=28609
They said 32pp and 16 ROPs for the G71. Now that its confirmed to no longer be 32pp, they have resorted to saying 24 ROPs..
:stick:
:stick:
:stick:
But on the other hand, they lower memory frequencies which means they must have tightened the timings. That alone will show a noticable gain in 3dmark05, but like it was said before, Nvidia will need at least 750MHz on the core to compete with the x1900xt. And that doesn't look like its happening.
you cant use info the inquirer brings as the truth/fact.
you can use it as a lead orso but never as truth.
theinq jumps to much around with their facts.
The only item I have seen that can be confirmed is the die shrink from 110 to 90 nm. Other than that, it's all conjecture and speculation. NVIDIA is not going to play all their cards out before the bets are down.
The INQ information is the official face of simple rumors. They have fallen prey to misinformation in the past and will most likely continue.
The INQ is human.. what do you expect?
As for what nVidia is upgrading is what we are here to talk about...
I'm doubtful on ROPS, it wouldn't give enough benefit, atleast as far as I can tell.
HDR + AA is a good chance.
Pipelines, maybe, but current sources claim otherwise.
They still could be expanding on the mini-alu's found in the current G70, perhaps adding a third or expanding them to full alu's.
Beyond that is anyone's guess.
Both NVIDIA and ATI have said that no more than 16 ROPs are needed. Period.
7900GTX Specs
http://www.pureoverclock.com/story440.html
Mem clock 2.0GHz ?!
Now how`s that possible with 1.1ns chips ? Or they`d move to GDDR4 0.7ns ?
http://www.pureoverclock.com/story440.htmlQuote:
[update] Memory specification originally posted (2.0GHz) looks to be incorrect, i fully blame the source, who emailed me today revoking that claim and insinuating it to be more closer to 1600 MHz, just like many other sites have stipulated, grrrr! It does make me wonder where this figure came from in the first place though....
Back to 1600 MHz then. 1024MB around april/may already? Some people still argue 512 MB isn't needed (for gaming)... :rolleyes:
Sounds like they can't make up their minds or that they are attempting to keep the competition confused about what they are planning on doing...
7900GTX is eight to ten per cent faster than 7800GTX 512MB
http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=29928
Geforce 7900GT has 7800GTX performance for $299
http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=29931
Disappointing :slapass: :slapass: :slapass: :mad: .Quote:
Originally Posted by onethreehill