The GT300/Fermi Thread - Part 2!

anyone know if its being released early or late march?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by malik22

anyone know if its being released early or late march?

---

sure

whatever lets you sleep at night.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tajoh111

I think Intel is a good example of what happen when you don't do what nvidia is doing by jumping to the 4xx instead of the 3xx with fermi. Intel has probably the most confusing naming system in history. The core i7, i5,i3 and pentium processors need an extreme overhaul. There are too many processors that are named in the i7 range that shouldn't be there. Similarly the i7 980x is a hella confusing name, it should have been the i9 975 or something to show it has six cores.

I missed the days when processors frequency denoted speed.

I see way too many pc builds now a days that throw in a computer with a 1366 processor in a 1156 socket build on forums or add a triple channel memory kit with a dual channel memory system. These are real suggestion too, not imaginary anecdotal situations where people upgrade from 8800gt to 9800gt to 240gts, that could happen but don't.

---

Um no.
Intel's previous E6600 etc.. naming scheme was VERY clear.

Intel's current naming scheme was changed to make clear what is Nehalem/Lynnfield/Clarkdale.
All i7 are quad core +HT. the 9xx are X58 and the i7-8xx are P55 (1156).
All i5 and i3's are 1156. The 7xx is Lynnfield without HT. The 6xx and 5xx are Clarkdale.

Its a very simple naming system.

AMD liked it so much, they called their Phenom II X4 "965" just like the Nehalem 965.

Contrast with nVidia. What is the difference between a 8800GTS and a 8800GTS? Is a GTS250 better than a 9800GTX+?

so does this thread conatin any actual specs or exactly tru info other than it will be codenamed firem/GF100 and called GTX-4X0??? cuz i want like clock (core/mem/shader) info memory amounds interface etc etc info.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LordEC911

Fail... you need to go read the whitepapers again, unless you like making stuff up.
The only thing you are correct on is pixel fillrate, memory bandwidth and bus size.


Yep, should be double the 725, aka 1450.


Yes, but each GPU has access to all the 256bit bus. It isn't like each GPU has to split a 128bit bus.

---

guys dont get your skirts up.. 64 texture units/half shader clock makes fermi mind boggling efficient and still beats 5870 (44gigatexel vs 68 gigatexel) :rofl:

whitepaper doesnt state half/full or anything the shader clock.. only states "higher clock" ;)

whitepaper @ v1.4 it wont remain @ v1.4 lol

only 64 texture units @ half shader clock cannot coexist.. one or the other will get whitepaper update.. but then again it still beats 5870s texturing power :rofl:

@overclocking101 simply put..no :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by overclocking101

so does this thread conatin any actual specs or exactly tru info other than it will be codenamed firem/GF100 and called GTX-4X0??? cuz i want like clock (core/mem/shader) info memory amounds interface etc etc info.

---

Mostly rants about 'ATI drivers transitioning' to rants about 'rebadgeng' with a little off topic 'consumer vs. business' model rants and even some sprinkles of 'skipping generation'

Welcome to page 9... :shakes:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Teemax

No, actually I spend my day researching stuff before I buy so I don't get labelled "stupid", or "brainless" by you, oh-knowledgable-master! :clap:


I'm really really sorry it's my fault to point out a shady business method. I'm so sorry to voice my objection to a scheme that I think will hurts NVIDIA's name in the long run. And I'm especially sorry to dare to disagree with a mighty company!


I'll shut up now and do more research now. In fact, I need to ask for a day off tomorrow to do just that :clap:

/sarcasm

---

dude calm down, this is not that serious, we dont like re-branding as much as you, but the point is, we try the most we can to not get taken advantage of, but to be honest, in one way or another we all get take advantage of by companies, even the ones that research.

If you ran a company and someone put some papers in front of you with your debt and then laid down business models to pay that debt and keep the company rolling and one of those was re-branding, you would chose to do it too, based on how effective it is. Its business.

I know it sounds like poor logic just to deal with it, but unfortunately, its the truth, more importantly, you dont have to deal with it if you dont want to.

Your blowing this whole research thing out the water trying to make your argument sound full proof, it takes 10 minutes of research on a graphics card to find out a little of what your buying, rebranding, performance and what not, not an 8 hour work day LOL, and of course we dont do this for every little thing, impulse/convenient buying is in everyone, some more than others.

seriously, your saying you dont do this, yet your in this very forum right now, finding out exactly what fermi is, and im shure your not taking days off of work to do it.
and you saying your the consumer that would be tricked by this yet your, again, in this very forum showing your concern about re-branding on mobile chips.. Its your logic, that i dont understand.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NapalmV5

guys dont get your skirts up.. 64 texture units/half shader clock makes fermi mind boggling efficient and still beats 5870 (44gigatexel vs 68 gigatexel) :rofl:

whitepaper doesnt state half/full or anything the shader clock.. only states "higher clock" ;)

whitepaper @ v1.4 it wont remain @ v1.4 lol

only 64 texture units @ half shader clock cannot coexist.. one or the other will get whitepaper update.. but then again it still beats 5870s texturing power :rofl:

---

For someone who kept saying in the other threads that he didn't know what he was talking about, you sure love claiming "to know!"

Kind of like how you said that the GT200 was stomping the RV770 because 512-bit > 256-bit... cept for that inconvenient fact about GDDR5 which is exactly what Fermi is doing huh!

:rofl::ROTF:

Anyways, at B3D, they analyzed the numbers and it makes sense - games which use a lot of geometry / tri-clock (such as HAWX), Fermi was quite a bit faster than the GTX 285. Those that didn't though, it was close to 5870 performance... meaning there are games where the Fermi changes will improve it's performance greatly, and others where it won't be much faster if at all more than the 5870. Hence the average performance values put it above the 5870 but not faster than the 5970.

And if you want to talk efficiency... how about comparing the card to other cards in its power envelope???

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by zerazax

For someone who kept saying in the other threads that he didn't know what he was talking about, you sure love claiming "to know!"

Kind of like how you said that the GT200 was stomping the RV770 because 512-bit > 256-bit... cept for that inconvenient fact about GDDR5 which is exactly what Fermi is doing huh!

:rofl::ROTF:

Anyways, at B3D, they analyzed the numbers and it makes sense - games which use a lot of geometry / tri-clock (such as HAWX), Fermi was quite a bit faster than the GTX 285. Those that didn't though, it was close to 5870 performance... meaning there are games where the Fermi changes will improve it's performance greatly, and others where it won't be much faster if at all more than the 5870. Hence the average performance values put it above the 5870 but not faster than the 5970.

And if you want to talk efficiency... how about comparing the card to other cards in its power envelope???

---

*broken record* you keep saying that^ :ROTF: just wth are you on about.. what claims ???

claimer: i dont know anything zip nada/am no gpu prophet :welcome:

fyi: even g80 stomps on rv770 :rofl:

b3d ?? ohhh those ati gpu prophets ? :rolleyes: right yeah yeah

power envelope ?? ati gpus dont eat watts vegan straight up :up:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NapalmV5

fyi: even g80 stomps on rv770 :rofl:

---

WHAT!? :ROTF:

http://i47.tinypic.com/264szzl.jpg

If anyone had any doubts...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NapalmV5

*broken record* you keep saying that^ :ROTF: just wth are you on about.. what claims ???

claimer: i dont know anything zip nada/am no gpu prophet :welcome:

fyi: even g80 stomps on rv770 :rofl:

b3d ?? ohhh those ati gpu prophets ? :rolleyes: right yeah yeah

power envelope ?? ati gpus dont eat watts vegan straight up :up:

---

Some call this... sig worthy!!

Quote:

---

claimer: i dont know anything zip nada/am no gpu prophet :welcome:

---

So you can go ahead and claim you know exactly how Fermi will stomp ATI. Yeahhhh...

Quote:

---

b3d ?? ohhh those ati gpu prophets ? :rolleyes: right yeah yeah

---

Yeah you mean those guys who actually have technical knowledge of GPU's?

But hey, because the experts conclusions don't mesh with your "conclusions", they're ATI gpu prophets? LOL!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ***Deimos***

sure
whatever lets you sleep at night.

---

hahah this made me lol :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ***Deimos***

Um no.
Intel's previous E6600 etc.. naming scheme was VERY clear.

Intel's current naming scheme was changed to make clear what is Nehalem/Lynnfield/Clarkdale.
All i7 are quad core +HT. the 9xx are X58 and the i7-8xx are P55 (1156).
All i5 and i3's are 1156. The 7xx is Lynnfield without HT. The 6xx and 5xx are Clarkdale.

Its a very simple naming system.

AMD liked it so much, they called their Phenom II X4 "965" just like the Nehalem 965.

Contrast with nVidia. What is the difference between a 8800GTS and a 8800GTS? Is a GTS250 better than a 9800GTX+?

---

i agree that intels previous naming sheme was pretty good... not perfect but good...

about the current naming sheme... nah, its really confusing...
there are i5s that beat i7s, there are even i3s that beat i7s and i5s!!!
intel made the mistake of creating hw categories that dont mean anything to end users... end users want to know what product to chose for what task/system... ie gaming = X, workstation = Y, office = Z

with i9 i7 i5 i3 that doesnt work very well at all...

and about amd liking intels sheme so much they copied it...
nah, i dont think they care, they neither like or dislike it, they copied it just because its intel and people will be familiar with their sheme, more or less... ie people know 965 is a fast cpu, so if they see an amd 965 they know its a fast cpu as well...

very bad idea in my opinion tbh cause it makes amd look like a cheap asian copycat company instead of a propper western engineering powerhouse that... well it WANTS to be... and lets say it is, but im being really generous here :P

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NapalmV5

guys dont get your skirts up.. 64 texture units/half shader clock makes fermi mind boggling efficient and still beats 5870 (44gigatexel vs 68 gigatexel) :rofl:

whitepaper doesnt state half/full or anything the shader clock.. only states "higher clock" ;)

whitepaper @ v1.4 it wont remain @ v1.4 lol

only 64 texture units @ half shader clock cannot coexist.. one or the other will get whitepaper update.. but then again it still beats 5870s texturing power :rofl:

---

you have proven in your previous posts that you have no insider infos about fermi whatsoever, so how can you rave for an unreleased product? why are you trying to convince us how great it is when you have no possible way of knowing anything about it yourself?

or do you think you aresorounded by ati fans and think it would be fun to poke at them and call them out? :D

This thread is rapidly turning into a troll banquet (yet again) :eek:

Yes Fermi will hopefully be released soon.

Yes it will be pretty fast.

Yes it will be :banana::banana::banana::banana:ing expensive.

End of discussion :)

Until we get some (more) hard numbers what is the point of creating another 100 page long pissing contest?

About AMD copying Intels naming scheme I think it's because they want people to think that their 965 is equal to Intels 965.
Just like they did with the 3000+ etc trying to convince people their 3000+ equals a Pentium 4 3000mhz.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Biker

This thread is rapidly turning into a troll banquet (yet again) :eek:

---

Could have something to do with the Tag "Troll Party" at the bottom. :rofl:

I can honestly say that, "All I know, is nothing at all"
I feel I may have even lost some ground on that after reading some 40 odd pages in the last Fermi thread and the all of this new one. :rolleyes:

Lets hope the entertainment improves, hay. :rolleyes:

Honestly, it seems like whenever someone tries to interject with some facts, they are ignored while the trolls are replied to.

It's a vicious circle.

This and all other GF100-based threads need to be closed until additional, concrete info is available to the public. If not, these threads will continue to be littered with people claiming "insider knowledge".

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SKYMTL

Honestly, it seems like whenever someone tries to interject with some facts, they are ignored while the trolls are replied to.

---

whos tryin to interject with some fact?..i really hope not napalm being the person in reference. i mean could you honestly believe someone who says g80 "stomps" rv770 which is easily disproved with a short google search for anyone that doesn't "know"... or is there someone else in here that "facts" were missed because of all the BS surrounding it???

lmao @ the troll party tag

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SKYMTL

Honestly, it seems like whenever someone tries to interject with some facts, they are ignored while the trolls are replied to.

It's a vicious circle.

This and all other GF100-based threads need to be closed until additional, concrete info is available to the public. If not, these threads will continue to be littered with people claiming "insider knowledge".

---

which facts you are talking about ?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mortal

lmao @ the troll party tag

---

So true, though, isn't it?! Not like there is any leaked information... :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SKYMTL

Honestly, it seems like whenever someone tries to interject with some facts, they are ignored while the trolls are replied to.

It's a vicious circle.

This and all other GF100-based threads need to be closed until additional, concrete info is available to the public. If not, these threads will continue to be littered with people claiming "insider knowledge".

---

I remember one episode of this "vicious circle" a couple weeks ago. Somebody was making claims about the performance of the Fermi without having any documentation/benchmarks.

He was claiming boldly that he knew more about the Fermi-performance back in July than most us Know today, because of his "insider knowledge".

At the end he wanted to use the picture of his beer belly to prove his groundless claims about the performance of an unreleased product. Just because the claims for his "insider knowledge".

I can't believe myself that I'm still visiting and posting in this thread!!

wow... and to think i've been ignoring this thread... partly because it was all speculation but mostly because i have no intention of buying a fermi based product.... (i already invested in ati this round)...

'but' i have to say this last page has had me in stiches.... very funny stuff....troll party's are fun fun fun.... :)

sooo let me add a little conjecture of my own... ati will do dx11 better than nvidia and... no i think i'll stop there... that'll do it... ;)

^^ same reason I'm ignoring it.

If nVIDIA releases a faster card, I'll buy it. As long as ATI has the faster card, I'll use it. Napalm, what gives? You usually have constructive posts.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by eric66

which facts you are talking about ?

---

Look through this thread and the last dozen or so pages of the last Fermi thread.

- There IS a hardware-based tessellator in the PolyMorph Mngine

- The GF 100 architecture IS highly scalable

- The cards ARE in volume production and have been for some time now

- The PM Engine WASN'T an afterthought


I could go on and on but each of these points and more were discussed shortly before trolls continued their assault on the proper discussion points of this thread.