current rumors are March 2010Quote:
Originally Posted by LiquidReactor
Printable View
current rumors are March 2010Quote:
Originally Posted by LiquidReactor
They already got TWO working Fermis :-)
http://www.tcmagazine.com/comments.p...=31382&catid=2
OOohh, seems like they are getting somewhere with this! :rofl:Quote:
Originally Posted by mibo
:rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl: now if they times that by 10,000 we will be fine :p:Quote:
Originally Posted by Anemic
Yess! Now we can play Duke Nukem Forever in SLI!! :rofl:
Ah lads come on!
It's not so bad.
I for one want fermi out and working asap!
We need some compitition. Yes the current situation is good for AMD but more options is always good.
Now bring on the reviews NV!
/yawn I guess we wouldn't see relevant news about Fermi until next year :(
Is that Fermi? I don't know.
All I see is a guy with an Apple t-shirt hugging a PC.
:D
good point.Quote:
Originally Posted by Piotrsama
for all we know "G100" could be the super duper amazing 112SP 40nm DX10.1 chip everybodys' been waiting for.
But, if it really is Fermi, and it really IS working in SLI, then it is very very good news. This means much of single GPU verification/testing was done and already have fixes for major 3D bugs. In other words, chips and boards are working good.
Then again, it could be 2 "prototype" mockup boards pretending to be powered. Heck, I might just pull some Voodoo2 boards to show MY triple SLI i7 power rig.
Its all in the drivers.
lol his thumb barely rises :ROTF:Quote:
Originally Posted by mibo
The physx demos I saw at Nvidia made my jaw drop...and that was just the rip if the iceberg. Some uber cool stuff around the corner (hope AMD and Nvidia keep pushing eachother...we, as enthusiasts, reap the benefits). There is so much power in GPUs way beyond gaming.
^talking about that box of water? that was pretty sick.
I know what you are talking about but this is a totally different demo using MORE than one Nvidia technology :) INSANE stuff. The future of gaming is bright :)Quote:
Originally Posted by Manicdan
Tech demos are one thing and real games (or applications) are other very different.
We can equate demos to those PR screen shots that developers show us during development to hype their games.... but are more BS than anything.
Yeah, and each card is probably about $800USD...maybe there the $3000 versions of Fermi, who knows? haha .."Anouncement!, Crysis finally mastered for $6000.00" LOLZ
I am sorry but I disagree. When I as shown the demo I did not accept the proposal at face value (I am a former software engineer). The first thing I did was to check out the CPU utilization and monitor it during the demo . . . .and verified the demo verified the claims being made. There is no reason applications cannot be coded to take advantage . . . .of course that is up to the application developers. I do understand your skepticism though.Quote:
Originally Posted by Piotrsama
http://img26.imageshack.us/img26/807...00specs560.jpg
"GeForce GTX 380 will be 15% faster than dual GPU Radeon HD 5970."
"In terms of performance GTX 360 will sit between HD 5870 and dual GPU HD 5970."
Words on MSRP for GTX 380 is $499 and GTX 360 is $379, if that's true then count me in. :D
Source?:eek:Quote:
Originally Posted by iTravis
Exactly, like Wikipedia often says: "Citation needed"! :)
I'm talking about this:
"GeForce GTX 380 will be 15% faster than dual GPU Radeon HD 5970."
"In terms of performance GTX 360 will sit between HD 5870 and dual GPU HD 5970."
I call it BS.
I think the source is some anonymous comment over at BSN.Quote:
Originally Posted by shoopdawoopa
Scroll down a bit.
If any of that proves to be true things are definitely going to be interesting. While this peaks my interests I'm still waiting for some solid numbers.Quote:
Originally Posted by iTravis
I seriously doubt it though, not the performance part but the price part. But well with all eyes on Fermi now, they can pretty much make up anything.Quote:
Originally Posted by highoctane
Unfortunately, there are. Formerly, there's the question of the hardware itself. I suppose that the demo you're talking about would be running on CUDA. So the real problem here is not the CPU but to be able to run the physics in addition to the graphical load at the GPU. Demos use to be graphically simpler than games, and even if not, you will be always cutting down your graphical resources to include physics. And graphics are shown in screenshots...Quote:
Originally Posted by DarthBeavis
Then, it's the thing of how much of the target audience can run that code. Probably only people with a high end graphics card (a much smaller target audience than you could think, amongst gamers). Then, if it's done in CUDA, cut that in half (no ATi compatibility). That gives some unacceptably low numbers that makes non profitably to invest resources on that. Sincerelly, if you were a developer, you would better invest your resources on a thing that so little people could see, or in something more widely useable instead?
Someone could argue than some graphical settings are not usable except with high end hw. Well, graphics are special in a thing: games are sold by selling screenshots, and the graphics are the screenshots. So even if not everyone can take advantage of the graphics, the developers take advantage of their effort with everyone...
Notice that even when PhysX is the most widely used physics library, only a few games have any kind of CUDA accelerated effects (Batman and Mirror's Edge basically, if we don't count the laughable falling leaves in Sacred 2 or the extra out-of-main-game level/s on UT3). There's a reason for that.
Maybe you're right with it being the future of the videogames, maybe not (I'm somewhat skeptical in that it's a good idea to transfer workload from CPU to GPU in a field of sw that has been GPU bottlenecked for years now, but I don't think it's impossible). But anyway I don't think it will happen any soon (not at the GF100 life time anyway, oh well, at least if it finally lives in 2010 or so...). And when it does, it will be with some kind of widely supported GPGPU standard (be it OpenCL, DirectCompute, or whatever it will be), and I think most of them are more immature than CUDA right now.
Haha, yeah.... they wish.Quote:
"GeForce GTX 380 will be 15% faster than dual GPU Radeon HD 5970."
Your nearest Nvidia PR guy.Quote:
Originally Posted by shoopdawoopa
It very likely is.Quote:
Originally Posted by Teemax
[QUOTE=
"GeForce GTX 380 will be 15% faster than dual GPU Radeon HD 5970."
"In terms of performance GTX 360 will sit between HD 5870 and dual GPU HD 5970."
Words on MSRP for GTX 380 is $499 and GTX 360 is $379, if that's true then count me in. :D[/QUOTE]
i just got new info nvidia decided to release gtx 370 which also will be faster than 5970 (didn't say how much though) Msrp will be 459 and great thing about this new one it will have only one slot cooler :eek:
My source (Santa) told me that everybody should write his wishes to this thread.
Edit: The GTX385 will cost $99, beat a 5970 by 27,25% and have passive one slot cooling.
YOu all are making fun of fermi, come on guys it has the potential to really be a either a series 5 or a series 6....
Series 5 was beaten black and blue by ATi and Nvidia took their revenge with series 6 which was quite different architecture and included hyper games like Doom3 in the bundle....
If GTX360 is on par with 5870 it will be a huge accomplishment but "and a huge but" if nvidia does not fund DX11 games it may as well have a low track record for DX11 and we will again have something like 5870's performance coming close to GTX 380...
Wouldn't that put nVidia is the same situation as the last gen where in terms of performance GTX260 and 4870 were basically equal.Quote:
Originally Posted by ajaidev
well no, you said it yourself, 260 was nvidias mainstream, 4870 was atis fastest.Quote:
Originally Posted by AKM
if 360 is as fast as 5870 it means nvidias fastest is as fast as atis fastest.
why would nvidia make one chip have different L1 and L2 caches than the other? what happens to the 380s that are bad yields, will they just trash them cause they cant down bin them into 360s when they are completely different?Quote:
Originally Posted by iTravis
Considering how common harvesting due to cache has been with cpu's I would imagine they need some way to downgrade otherwise good dies with bad cache not to mention the available cache could also be relative to the number of shaders.Quote:
Originally Posted by Manicdan
FFS why on earth have nVidia pulled some really random RAM sizes out of the Paul Daniel's Magic Hat. I was hoping for the 360 to have 1GB and the 380 to have 2GB!Quote:
Originally Posted by Manicdan
I really do need a 2GB+ Video card :down:
there are no numbers due to no cards exists....Quote:
Originally Posted by highoctane
:yepp:
there is always next year...
Its over!Quote:
Originally Posted by iTravis
ATI is finished !
I was thinking about posting this earlier, but I guess now is the time :p:
I love how all you guys make jokes and laugh about Fermi, the delay and it's performance ( yeah, I've seen lots of people saying it's going to stink, it won't even come close to a 5870, etc ) and still cry like kids asking nVIDIA to release it ASAP...
:confused: How so?Quote:
Originally Posted by LiquidReactor
ATi still produce leading edge and cutting edge GPU's.....albeit availability is awful and the launch here in the UK has been all but a paper launch... shipments ARE coming in.
You can now get a Radeon 5870.... for £400 odd pounds and one e-tailer even has TWO Radeon 5970's in stock!!!! for £525
After Christmas the prices will come down to common sense levels (if the cards are stocked nicely) by that I mean Radeon 5870 £250 and the 5970 £350
John
I disagree. Nvidia will be in trouble again.Quote:
Originally Posted by saaya
The issue of differing die sizes, memory bus sizes and PCB costs would favour AMD/ATI again.
Plus, the 5970 is already here so that puts quite a lot of pressure on the "GTX 380". Also, AMD/ATI may pull out a tweaked Cypress for maybe a "5890" or something like that again...
5870 already here?!... only just and highly over priced too and NO 2GB model.... hardly what I would call here, but here nether the less.
What do you mean nVidia would be in trouble again?!?
I agree that they are in trouble NOW (by not having a new DirectX 11 card on the table) but the last time they were in trouble was the notorious Geforce FX series cards
John
i was expecting nvidia to aim a little smaller this time around, so they can have a single card that uses 180W and a duel card would be right at 300W. but instead they went massive again. and have we even herd of a dx11 card from nvidia that will cost less than $200? those are the ones that will sell the most, and given how games are still being built for consoles, it will be strong enough to really enjoy a game on any 150$ monitor.
G200 (rather RV770) was trouble for Nvidia. A spade is called a spade.Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnZS
Massive price cuts after after the first week, subsiding AIB partners, profit margins damaged while AMD/ATI's market share increased in both desktop and notebook sectors.
The high costs of producing G200 compared to RV770 was what made Nvidia's pricing and product placement strategy inflexible.
Also the Radeon 5xxx series supply shortages are blown way out of proportion. I remember that the G80 was facing similar problems years ago. It's just pent up demand in the face of a new OS and new DirectX revision.
I wouldn't consider 5970 putting "a lot" of pressure if prices keep going up since prices have reached $700+ (I never seen such price tag since G80 Ultra) and yet not knowing how the "GTX 380" will perform, its hard to find a lot of people willing to pay $700 for a video card now days (since gets replaced in s short time compared to other pc hardware) nvidia is probably working on a GX2 version as well which could be nvidia triumph card...Quote:
Originally Posted by Wesker
Inflexible, thats just pulling things out your crack, they managed to shrink gt200 to 55nm, drop the prices to competitive levels and still maintain margins and performance during the time frame up until now.Quote:
Originally Posted by Wesker
Just a refresher on q3 results:
http://img704.imageshack.us/img704/2807/37015610.jpg
yeah overpriced sure when gtx 285 is nearly selling for same price :ROTF: and what are you gonna do with 2 gb model how many games are there demanding that much ?Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnZS
nvidia does more than sell gt280s. just cause they were making 5$ on every 280 and 260 sold, does not mean they ever paid off the cost to design them. if they were able to keep the prices only a few bucks higher, they could have made alot higher margin (if they are working under 5% margin for a 200$ chip. then to get 10% margins (or double profit) they only need to sell it for 210$) again, thats an example scenario, and i have no idea how much they either hate or love themselves for how the gt200 series went. but i think we all know ati loved how well the 4000 series worked for them.Quote:
Originally Posted by highoctane
If that trend continues, going off that table, ATI will overtake them in the 4th Quarter. Nvidia need to do something to stop their decline because they will be the next matrox at that rate.Quote:
Originally Posted by highoctane
Ummm... he was specifically talking about the gaming card/market, not the professional/workstation which is what was saving Nvidia for most of the G200/RV770/RV870 time period.Quote:
Originally Posted by highoctane
G200's BOM was around 2x RV770s. The gap between GF100 and RV870 is going to get even larger. I will be very surprised if we don't see 3-4 cutdown variants of GF100, not at launch but eventually.
EricQuote:
Originally Posted by eric66
If we try to find a Radeon 5870 IN STOCK for shipping 24hrs the only one I can find costs a whopping £400 odd pounds the most expensive 2GB GTX 285 is hideously over priced @ £330. Now when the Radeons which are showing (and have been showing as Pre-order) since late October/Early November finally come in stock the Radeon 5870 will cost around the £270 mark IMHO
as for the 5970... £525 is the cheapest I can find in stock (around 855USD)
As for 2GB, already I have a few games which require 2GB of VRAM for optimal performance such as "Grand Theft Auto IV, and S.T.A.L.K.E.R Complete 2009. FYI GTA IV Lost and Damned is for release next week too.
I am waiting on either a Radeon 5870 with 2GB or a Fermi
EDIT
I would hardly call the GT200 a failure, I would however say that the Radeon 4850/4870 were a bigger success than the mean green machine anticipated, however the GT200 was (and still is) a very fast GPU and the fastest SINGLE GPU* although the Radeon 5870 has changed that as that is now the fastest single GPU card ;)
John
the idiot who made that table is just that, an idiot.Quote:
Originally Posted by iTravis
tell them to study what nvidia does with their cards before making a table.
Me too. There was a thread about THIS 2GB MODEL a while back. Hopefully we'll see some better third party cooling solutions for both cards. In any case, waiting until Fermi is released seems to be the logical option here.Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnZS
Thanks SamHugheQuote:
Originally Posted by SamHughe
Nice article :)
However I'd (and perhaps you too?) would like to see a Gainward Golden Sample Heat Pipe special cooler Edition of this card. Their GTX 285 2GB cards are very cool and quiet.
A Sapphire VaopourX or HIS ICECOOL Edition of this card would be good too.
I am hoping Fermi would have a decent cool and quiet cooling solution.
John
Ok so is this your own personal claims based on assumptions/opinion or is this coming from a reliable source?Quote:
Originally Posted by LordEC911
I've never seen the BOM costs of either card from ati or nvidia, would you mind posting that info?
The volume of sales is by and far largely for end consumer sales which is what makes up most of the market share for the quarter with professional/workstation sales being a much smaller percentage overall of higher margin sales.
Me threeQuote:
Originally Posted by JohnZSI am waiting on either a Radeon 5870 with 2GB or a Fermi
John
Quote:
Originally Posted by SamHughe
but with lemon
i hope the 5890 is going to be sick, thats probably when ill make the jump, since it should last a very long time
ill probably end up waiting for atis new arch before changing anything..im all about eyefinity and the 4870x2 is good enough for anything out right now so theres really no reason to upgrade..id rather get my ssd(which is within a week or two) and do some other small upgrades to case/cooling...however id like to see what nvidia has to offer and probably wouldn't even consider them until they have a refresh of fermi..but id also need to see something like eyefinity unless the card is just straight kickin ati's arse which i dont see happening...
Perhaps the 5890 might even be THE 2GB 5870? (so not only 2GB of VRAM but a nice speed boost as well :) )Quote:
Originally Posted by Manicdan
the only thing it better do is please me until im bored of bulldozerQuote:
Originally Posted by JohnZS
they are ripping you off thats what i am gonna say :D situation is totally different in newegg/us so i guess conditions change from country to country and that pound thing really f's you up sorry must say that :p: as for 2 gb games u said gta is lazy port and stalker is bug hole but of course may be they really need that much of memory don't know ...Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnZS
These are great articals on EDC and ECC. I am thinking that the AMD's EDC is based on parity bit and Nvidia ECC is based on either Hamming ECC.
http://www.eccpage.com/ "ECC"
http://graphics.stanford.edu/~seander/bithacks.html "EDC"
The end result is ECC has default EDC but the complexity varies. ECC does not always correct the errors tough resending the code may have to be used. In EDC case its the only option. So which is faster, ECC is faster but not always take a scenario where ECC tries to fix a code but could not and has to ask for a resend of the code in that case the EDC system will be faster as it will detect and request and not like ECC which first detects then tries to fix and the requests.
A3 stepping in production:
http://www.semiaccurate.com/2009/12/...-silicon-oven/
Let's see what frequencies the A3 chips will be able to handle.
Hopefully TSMC get their 40nm yield problem fixed. Otherwise we might end up waiting for fermi cards till summer :-(
are there any mid range cards in that A3 hot plate? what are their plans for <200$ cards? it better not be renaming dx10 cards until 2011.
no they'll make a special 200b chip for those products ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by Manicdan
does that mean its 200 series architecture with dx11?
well from what we saw with gt210 to gt310 transformation that is unlikely. mid parts will prolly support only dx 10 fermi arch based ones will be dx 11
Surprisingly, as video cards have progressed over the decade, clock speeds are becoming less and less relevent (anybody here recall the first power hungry 120Mhz GeForce 256 made on 220nm from '99.. back before DDR memory)Quote:
Originally Posted by mibo
Despite ALL THE HIGH PRAISE OF MOORE'S LAW, I find that Amdalhs law is much more improtant
Back in '99 using higher than 1024x768 was considered needless and excessive. But with today's 3200 SP 5970, thats not enough pixels to show speedup.
We are seeing LESS AND LESS SPEEDUP WITH EACH VIDEO CARD GENERATION.
Perhaps this quote from wikipedia illustrates the point best:
So next time you're overclocking that 5870 to dizzying 1Ghz stratosphere and wondering why you're only getting 1fps gain.. its no fluke... its Amdalhs law.. diminishing returns.Quote:
For example, if 95% of the program can be parallelized, the theoretical maximum speedup using parallel computing would be 20× as shown in the diagram, no matter how many processors are used.
There was a chart circling around awhile ago that was pretty close, though that wasn't the first/main source of the info. I had heard how much both companies were selling their kits for which didn't include all components nor packaging/shipping and everything else. So the base numbers are pretty accurate but are used to extrapolate the real cost. The final numbers seemed to be pretty accurate when it leaked that the GTX260c216 cards were selling for ~$150, they were actually losing money.Quote:
Originally Posted by highoctane
http://img44.imageshack.us/img44/451/29268575.jpg
As far as the gaming vs professional market, I recall a statement from nvidia saying that 70% of their profit comes from the workstation/professional market. I cannot seem to find the quote, so I might be wrong.
The law has a flaw.Quote:
Originally Posted by ***Deimos***
When a non-parallelized instruction is used, queue more of them at the same period to make use of idle resources (oh hey, reminds me of tile buffering with the Kyro series. which works EXTREMELY well).
That aside, Mhz does still mean a lot or we'd be using 120mhz Radeon 5870's.
What holding back gaming returns is primarily software development.Quote:
Originally Posted by ***Deimos***
The more you design a game for high end hardware, the more customers you alienate and the smaller your sales.
Not to mention console gaming. Almost anything that not a MMO RPG has to be developed for consoles in mind, as a result, games are being program with being able to run on a console.
IF pc gaming was stronger and people had better hardware on average we would see a larger gap between generation as programs would likely be more specialized for stronger hardware.
How correct is that chart?
I am surprised the cost of DDR5 is not really anymore expensive than DDR3.
Also the price of the GPU seems really low. If high end GPU were so cheap, I wonder why consoles are sold for a loss when they come out considering they come out at 500 dollars.
Interesting breakdown but the ram pricing seems screwy to me, ddr5 seems a rather bargain compared to ddr3 with ddr5 512 at $13.30 & doubled to 1024 for $19.95 vs ddr3 at $13.98 for 512 & $33.83 for 1024?Quote:
Originally Posted by LordEC911
Whats up with the est cost of the 285 gpu in relation to the 275 or bigger 65nm 280, the gpu cost seems screwy even if you where to factor in a skewing for extra validation for binning for the 285.
Seems like there is a little bit too much extrapolation & manipulation without enough solid verifiable information, I mean do you think the 4890 gpu cost is really the same as a big gtx275?
Shipping costs shouldn't be a bid deal with cost distributed across the volume of these things moved at a time.
Anyways interesting chart but I have my reservations about its accuracy overall.
EDIT: There was in interview where it was mentioned, the claim on more profit from the quadro market but the sales volume was in gaming/retail. You don't stay in business selling your products at a loss, things might have been skinny with 65nm but a fundamental of business is sell it for more than you paid for it. Even with higher margins in the professional market I highly doubt there is enough volume even with higher margins in that market alone to support Nvidia at its current size.
Just some more cannon fodder:
http://vr-zone.com/forums/519373/gf1...s-coming-.html
lolz at them, they seem overly excited like its really news. fermi better be the fastest gpu, its much larger than ATI'sQuote:
Originally Posted by highoctane
and for the duel gpu thing, im still wondering how badly they will have to downclock it to keep under 300W. Perf per watt will be extremely interesting this spring/summer
Quote:
Originally Posted by highoctane
Ack that suck no spesific launch date. :( :p:Quote:
no spesific launch date
Well from what I can get from the translation it will be at CES 2010 but who knows...
http://translate.google.com/translat...tm&sl=tr&tl=en
They will definitely show it, but a launch would be nothing but a paperlaunch. It's better then nothing I guess lol. Hopefully we will finally see some real numbers.Quote:
Originally Posted by highoctane
So that will be unveiling and a few scores released between the 7th and the 10th of January 2010?
Paper Launch later that month?
Cards hitting retail in March?
Not just a downclock but also a cutdown... they aren't going to be able to pull a GTX275 like they did last time, unless something drastically changes in the next 4 months.Quote:
Originally Posted by Manicdan
I am thinking -25% for both clocks and specs.