Incase you didn't know, ATi is trying to go quad-crossfire too...Quote:
Originally Posted by sabrewolf732
Again, people flame one company for something both companies are doing.
Printable View
Incase you didn't know, ATi is trying to go quad-crossfire too...Quote:
Originally Posted by sabrewolf732
Again, people flame one company for something both companies are doing.
In response to nvidia doing so, as I said, the rest of the industry will follow.Quote:
Originally Posted by DilTech
7900GT
http://www.guru3d.com/admin/imageview.php?image=6819
memory layout looks alittle diffrent from the 7800, doesnt it?
that core is the same size as the NV42! :shock2:
ya, had my 7800GT nacked a few days ago.Quote:
Originally Posted by Pinnacle
and the mem blocks on the 7800GT are almost perfct squares the ones on ur pic arent.
that and on the 7800GT there is less room between the blocks then on that pic.
http://www.techpowerup.com/?9172
New from tech-powerup.
450Mhz core clock for the 7900GT? And the 7900GTX is supposed to have a 650Mhz core clock? That's a rather LARGE gap considering that the 7800gt has a 400Mhz core and the 7800gtx a 430.
Interesting...
You fail to understand that is is more efficient to design a small Perfect Processor than it is to start from scratch and Strangle all the performance you can get out of it..Quote:
Originally Posted by sabrewolf732
OR do you not understand why Thread Level Parallelization is the new standard...
If you consider more power consumption, more space needed, and more heat more efficient, go for it. I guess efficiency is subjective.Quote:
Originally Posted by nn_step
Bigger gap because the 7800gt had 4 pipes less than the gtx.Quote:
http://www.techpowerup.com/?9172
New from tech-powerup.
450Mhz core clock for the 7900GT? And the 7900GTX is supposed to have a 650Mhz core clock? That's a rather LARGE gap considering that the 7800gt has a 400Mhz core and the 7800gtx a 430.
Interesting...
Will you can't consider Processing without considering Power and costQuote:
Originally Posted by sabrewolf732
Might I suggest you read http://www.aceshardware.com/read.jsp?id=60000313
it will help you understand the reason behind multible cores a bit better...
7900GTX Details
http://www.dailytech.com/article.aspx?newsid=915
lucky me
ok with 3500+ AMD DDR400 everything stock
9GTX5 stock not tweak
05 96xx
06 46xx ;SM2 2xxx SM3 2xxx CPU "8xx"
If that's true, then it would mean 48 pixel shaders just like the X1900, since current 7800GTX has 24 pipes and 24 shaders.Quote:
Originally Posted by onethreehill
that would be yummy.
and if they can keep it cheap :slobber:Quote:
Originally Posted by HKPolice
there's no way it's twice as fast.
Twice as fast as previous gen. Previous gen was G6 series, this gen for nvidia is G7. So it will be twice as fast as the 6800Ultra..... which the 7800GTX 512 is already in a lot of cases.Quote:
Originally Posted by Cybercat
What the heck is that?:slobber:Quote:
Originally Posted by nn_step
The future..;)
Why four?...It will be too hot:)
not with a small enough process
btw the temp for 7900gtx512 is really hot
with one card on 50 idle /66 load
SLi mode
the "inside" card up to 57idle / 73 load
*load temp is right after 06 finished
look just like 7800gtx512
650 but 700 no go
memory up to 950 / 1900 ok same as 78512
Denny, any chance for a better CPU than the 3500+?
Performs fairly identically to my GTX-256 at the same clocks (in the 06 GPU tests....I was running a 2.8GHz Toledo, so not a fair comparo in 05), btw....24pipes it is.
Kind of disappointing :(
LOLQuote:
Originally Posted by physics_geek
It's obviously an Audigy or X-Fi card because of the black background, the bulky ram, and the 4 cores per card with the X-Fi stock heatsink :rolleyes:
I dont think something like that will ever exist anyway, because ram will probably be a lot smaller, and something like that would probably cook the insides of your PC.
Quote:
Originally Posted by sabrewolf732
lol, coincidence? :p:Quote:
Nvidia will invite its loyal press, to Satan Clara to show them its new part.
under same machineQuote:
Originally Posted by Vapor
3Dmark06
1024*768 4AA 8Anti only for SM2
79SLi vs 78SLi is 29% gain
1280*768 4AA 8Anti
31% gain
1280*1024 4AA 8ANTI
.........49% gain
for single card
79vs78
SM2
21xx vs 11xx....
50% gain
btw 78 is runing at 600/1800
Holy :banana::banana::banana::banana:....this card is AWESOME then! That's not a 50% gain, that's at low-90s% gain!!!Quote:
Originally Posted by guess2098
WHOA!
Oh....and am I to deduce that it can do HDR with AA, akin to the R5xxs?
Looks like HD if where the action is with this card
Quote:
Originally Posted by guess2098
mmmm
waiting till cebit
Dual pcb cards 7900GT will be out too...!!!
83.90 don't work properly....when they are in quad sli the are loosing the multi sync and no good scores can be done...!!!
~15k is capable with fx60@3GHz nad default that beasts...:D
these are SM2.0Quote:
Originally Posted by Vapor
The HDR benchmarks are SM3.0
Ahh, good call :p:
But damn that's still amazing!
Is it possible for that kind of a performance difference out of only 50mhz difference?...
maybe its more then just a die shrink
Quote:
Originally Posted by DilTech
no there must be something new, rops, shaders, something...
alot more..:slobber:Quote:
Originally Posted by Starscream
Exactly what I was thinking... 50mhz wouldn't do THAT much damage!Quote:
Originally Posted by metro.cl
maybe there's not working 1:1
they used a 3:1 ratio so 24 pipes & 8 vs (16rops) maybe they are using another ratio and getting the rops higher maybe 24 or 32Quote:
Originally Posted by Marioace
maybe they switched it from 3:2 to 2:3 and have 24 pipes & 36 VS
http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/vid...indepth_3.html
The G70 already has 2 mini alu's per shader unit, which there's 2 per pixel pipeline. Is it possible they expanded those ALU's?
it had only 8vs but it did 16rops, now maybe they still have 8vs but 32ropsQuote:
Originally Posted by nn_step
for instance, perhaps they separated the second shader unit from the texture unit, gave it mirror functionality to the main one, so that they could have as many shader units they want without having to worry about texture units working (like ATI). Texture units are the hardest to get working in a pipeline, and they're the first to go defective. Doing this would increase the efficiency as well, since before, the second shader unit couldn't do shading if texturing was needed, and it couldn't do texturing if shading was needed.Quote:
Originally Posted by DilTech
32 rops, mmmmmm i think that could be 24 rops.
the only thing i know is that if it still has 24 pipes the rops must have gone up
Do you guys listen to this dude ?
Who is he ?
http://forums.hardwarezone.com/showthread.php?t=1229856Quote:
Originally Posted by denniszz
man Asus is really trying to milk king kong for everythign its got.
Note that the above compares to a "generic" 7800GTX, which is 430 MHz. There are 256 MB cards with 490 MHz on the market, have faster RAM, too.
That happens to be 14% more clockspeed :)
not that impressive imo, was hoping for 32 pipes :(
Hmmmm, yes....this is all very confusing so far.....guess we'll have to wait and see.Quote:
Originally Posted by uOpt
I'd trust Denny's results except a MARKETING ploy is low-balling him, so idk what to think.
partners comparissions are the same as manufacturers just numbers, sometimes are reals and sometimes are fake.
Those would be mine! :)Quote:
Originally Posted by uOpt
How is the angle-independent anisotropic filtering, Denny? Noticeable image quality improvements?
The pic is fake. 430mhz * 1.14 is exactly 490mhz. The pic just shows the Asus 7800GTX 490mhz card, the "8" in 7800 is changed to "9".Quote:
Originally Posted by onethreehill
Here is eVGAas 470/1200 MHz 7800gtx/256 card:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16814130254
And the 490/1300 MHz:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16814130237
Both are 256 MB variants.
XFX's 490/1300 256MB (the ones I have)
http://www.xfxforce.com/web/product/...rationId=16980
http://www.beyond3d.com/misc/chipcom...r=Order&cname=Quote:
Originally Posted by Vapor
110nm @ 18.65 x 17.9 millimeters
Therefore, if transistor count is still 300m, we have G71 at:
90nm @ 18.65 * (90/110) x 17.9 * (90/100) millimeters
= 15.3 x 14.6 millimeters
I think thats a 3dFx cardQuote:
Originally Posted by Turok
http://www.dailytech.com/article.aspx?newsid=907
7900 GT specs and Pics.
European prices for 7900 GTX and 7900 GT emerge
http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=29871
if them prices are correct then they could sell nicely even if their not more powerfull then the x1900xtx.
Anyone think there'll be an Ultra version coming or why all these rumours about 32-pipes? Or would that be the G80 (since it's not unified shaders afterall it seems)?
MSRP on 7900GT(X) is dirt cheap though. I still wonder if there aren't any more differences than mfg process, since there earlier was talk about higher IPC seeing Denny's benchmarks and ofc additional features (angle-independent af etc).
Seriously, if MSRP is "dirt cheap" as you say, there's only one possible reason: performance. It either ties or doesn't come close to X1900.
As for proof of my statement, just look at 7800GTX 256MB (when unopposed) and 7800GTX 512MB (inflation!). NVIDIA loves charging exhorbinant prices when they're in the lead, and I don't blame them for doing so.
i,
OK I have been given some real information about the new Nvidia 7900 and it's exactly what I have been saying all along. The G71 appears to just be a speed bumped G70 with just enough performance to win back the NV crown in most games. IQ is unchanged making the X1900 still IQ king and in shader intensive games the X1900 XT-X will still win out and be far more future proof with games later this year.
As you can see price wise the 7900 GTX is around the intial price of the 512 GTX which IMHO was very over priced. This to me makes the XT-X a real bargain and a no brainer.
Specs
7900 GTX
24 pipes
650 core
1650 memory
Selling for approx £450 +VAT
7900 GT
24 pipes
450ish core
sub 1400 memory
Selling for approx £300 +VAT
Enjoy
It will be very hard to get high enough yields to make 32 pipes profitable. I think Nvidia is just making a cheap GPU this round (it's smaller than the G70). I see no way that Nvidia could ever make a high clocking 32 GPU with this "new" 90nm process. They are probably just going to clock it higher than the G70 and that's about it.Quote:
Originally Posted by krille
If it is only a speedboost of 100MHz on the core there is no way it can win back the crown.Quote:
Originally Posted by detractor
Whoa...what happened to 32 pipes !!??
Perkam
the same that happened with the 24/32 pipes of the R520Quote:
Originally Posted by perkam
just speculations
What about some Dual 7900 Powah???
http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y25...7900GTDual.jpg
That's a beauty GoriLLakoS...wow
is that similar to the quad SLI of the CES
Don;t know...i spot it on a Japannese site at he morning....and now i can't find it again....!!:(
I did't even copied the specs...:(
That is SO disappointing. I had put my hopes into this G71. Guess X1900XTX it is then... and for CF I would have to buy a new mobo - again. Great! :rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by detractor
So I take it no angle-independent AF then?
Remember though..that its on 90nm tech...meaning higher oc's ;)
Perkam
and that we have to be more carefull with our voltmods..Quote:
Originally Posted by perkam
they are easier to fry..
lol...:p True.Quote:
Originally Posted by nn_step
Though I wonder if Nvidia has new features out in response...with the 7900s both being 24 pipes (i still think thats unlikelY)...it seems Nvidia wasn't as far ahead in 90nm production as everyone thought.
Perkam
i said from the beginning that the next card after 7800GTX 512 would just be a die shrink, but nooooo everyone was on about 32 pipes, little old me must of been wrong.
24 pipes 90nm 650mhz
i said the same except for 700mhz, but we'll see that from the BFG and Gainward cards easily.
The one thing I know is that this core will not be clocking high....700 might be out there from delux BFG/eVGA models, with an even better cooler than the GTX-512's. G71 has had clocking problems from the beginning and they were certainly aiming for higher than 650. If it could do it, they'd do it, *unless* it already wipes the floor in terms of performance, a la the GTX-256's release at a moderate 430MHz.
Pricing!!!!!!!!!!!
http://www.techpowerup.com/?9246
So, $650 MSRP for 7900GTX. Lets hope nVIDIA has a HUGE supply so e-tailors don't sell for over $700...
It seems like Nvidia really been sleeping since 7800 256 card was released.
http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...&postcount=262Quote:
Originally Posted by Nicksterr
If the 7900 GT is going to be $300, and the 7900 GTX is going to be $650, It's a much better deal to get 2x 7900 GT on SLI than a single, slower, and more expensive 7900 GTX.
I hope the 7900 GTX drops below the $500 range, otherwise I'll get two 7900 GT
I think prices will be reasonable. A simple die shrink can only make it cheaper to produce for NVIDIA. This card is virtually here just to satisfy the demand for the 7800GTX 512 that they couldn't fill.
And if that 7900GT is starting at $300, it's looking extremely appealing.
It doesn't say $650... It'll be $549-$599, NOT $649.
Oth, if you get dual 7900GT nVidia sell more SLI chipsets = more money anyway...
I agree it is a bit weird though. Dual 79GT being both cheaper and faster than a single 79GTX. Something about this just doesn't feel right...
549 Euros...650 US dollars...Quote:
Originally Posted by DilTech
I don't understand what you are proving by this?Quote:
Originally Posted by krille
Not trying to prove anything mate. I just wanted to inform you it had already been posted a page back or two (and there the original source, your link had that source as its source and it's generally better to just skip the middlehand and go for original source unless you want to give credit to the source who helped you find original source). Perhaps I should've added a message. :)Quote:
Originally Posted by Nicksterr
Still, News posting is always good so don't feel discouraged. Sorry if I appeared a bit harsh. :toast:
Actually DilTech is probably right: Original source (The Inq) also says...Quote:
Originally Posted by Nicksterr
So, it would seem these cards actually cost less in dollars than in euros. Then, Europe always was discriminated. :mad:Quote:
$299 in the US but Europeans will be able to buy this card for a more realistic €329
I was just stating the currency equivalent, and my source is different then yours regarding the pricing.
What is your source?Quote:
Originally Posted by Nicksterr
techpowerup...
2 sources with similar statements = good. :)
No, I think you didn't read me right. Techpowerup's source is "my" source.Quote:
Originally Posted by Nicksterr
1. The Inq writes something.
2. Techpowerup reads what The Inq wrote, now they reword it a little (otherwise it's called plagiarism) and specify Inq as their source.
This never was Techpowerup's scoop. All-in-all: We have only one "real" source: The Inquirer. (Although The Inq probably has a source itself it hasn't published, so The Inq is as far as we get in the source web.)
Hope I made myself clearer this time. :)
meh if Nvidia can make a good hardlaunch supply and keep the supply up ul see that price fall quickly.
Indeed, that's what happend with the GTX 256. nVidia rarely changes its MSRP, however retailers sometimes now what competition means by themselves.Quote:
Originally Posted by Starscream
So basically 299US for 7900 GT and 499US for 7900 GTX
That would make sense as 7900 GT look to have about 70% of the performance for the 7900 GTX. It's price/performance ratio has to be higher then the flagship.
Which is nice it could mean we have 7800 GTX performance at the 250US price bracket fairly soon if supplies are good.
I thought the production of anymore of the 7800 seris for PCI Express was canceled by nVIDIA?
I think you are thinking of the 6Series...Quote:
Originally Posted by Nicksterr
Nope...he's right. 'Last call' for G70 production is in a couple days.
But they haven't called for it yet.. :p: