nVidia DX10.1 cards specs and pictures

[ToTTenTranz]

GeForce G 210

- 16 processing cores
- 64-bit memory interface with 512MB GDDR2
- DirectX 10.1 support
- 589MHz core clock
- 1402MHz shader clock
- 500MHz (1000MHz DDR) memory clock













GeForce GT 220

- 48 processing cores
- 128-bit memory interface with 1GB GDDR3
- DirectX 10.1 support
- 615MHz core clock
- 1335MHz shader clock
- 790MHz (1580MHz DDR) memory clock









Source: TechConnect Magazine



G210 is a little meh (G98 shrink to 40nm?) but the GT220 certainly looks interesting for laptops.
I figure the GT220 could fit in 12 and 13" laptops, and that's a lot of power for such small laptops (it's still better than the crappy 9600M GT we see in most "gaming" laptops today).

[zalbard]

Guess TSMC is still having issues since there are no bigger 40nm chips being made yet...
God, I really believe they slowed down video card progress big time.
Regarding these cards... They are OK I guess. Just a bit sad the ancient G80 is still miles ahead of them.

[trinibwoy]

G210 is a little meh (G96 shrink to 40nm?)

Yeah that's really curious. I'm surprised the die isn't too small for a 64-bit bus. I saw die size estimates somewhere but I can't recall where.

[RejZoR]

Sorry, but whats the point of supporting DX10.1 if the cards are total junk anyway and won't be able to run anything that's using DX10.1.
It's like sticking a nitrous on old FIAT 500. Sure you have nitrous, but it you're still moving like snail when you use it.

[ToTTenTranz]

Yeah that's really curious. I'm surprised the die isn't too small for a 64-bit bus. I saw die size estimates somewhere but I can't recall where.

You mean it should be pad-limited?

Sorry, but whats the point of supporting DX10.1 if the cards are total junk anyway and won't be able to run anything that's using DX10.1.
It's like sticking a nitrous on old FIAT 500. Sure you have nitrous, but it you're still moving like snail when you use it.

The GT220 should be a pretty capable graphics card for around 40€ (this should be its price or it will be wasted by ATI's HD4650).

[trinibwoy]

You mean it should be pad-limited?

Yeah.

And it's interesting that they're OEM only. I guess Nvidia is happy to keep pushing 9500GT's in retail. Also lol@1GB DDR3 on the GT220.

http://www.nvidia.com/object/product...gt_220_us.html
http://www.nvidia.com/object/product...e_g210_us.html

[trinibwoy]

For the same reason your 8400GS supports DX10

[Shintai]

I´m abit sad to see the 210 with only 16 shaders when the 220 is 48. Seems like a larger difference. And 16 seems incredible small. 32 would have been nice.

Else its always ncie to see low profile cards

[ChinStrap]

I´m abit sad to see the 210 with only 16 shaders when the 220 is 48. Seems like a larger difference. And 16 seems incredible small. 32 would have been nice.

Else its always ncie to see low profile cards

ion has 16 shaders (iirc)

[grimREEFER]

hmm, the reference cards have hdmi....so does it do sound like the ati cards now?

g210 would be pretty nice for laptops....how long till we start seeing them in thin laptops?

[Shintai]

hmm, the reference cards have hdmi....so does it do sound like the ati cards now?

Sound is easily digitally carried from the audio codec in the chipset. You dont need onboard sound on a graphics card. You can even do it all in SW.

[ToTTenTranz]

Sound is easily digitally carried from the audio codec in the chipset. You dont need onboard sound on a graphics card. You can even do it all in SW.

Sound carried by SPDIF is easy to be carried into the HDMI port.
This means 16bit lossy 5.1 or 24bit lossless stereo.

But that's still miles away from what the HDMI can do -> discrete 7.1 lossless 24bit channels. No connection was ever made to pass that except for HDMI itself, so the have Blu-Ray quality audio it needs to come from the graphics card itself (or the sound can later be mixed with the video in the HDMI port through a specialized soundcard).


The ATI HD4000 family is still the only option for someone who wants to connect a media center to a high-quality surround setup.

[saaya]

wow... thats nvidias latest and greatest?

i know i know... but come on, its hilarious that this is all they could get done, isnt it?
nothing new at least decent performing on 55nm or 40nm... nothing... i dont even know what those cards are supposed to be used for... media center pcs i guess...

so is nvidia recycling the same chip for ion2 or is that another chip that has yet to be patched up errr mass produced by tsmc?

on a more serious note... this is a bad sign... i have a bad feeling about this...
nvidia is really in bad shape if all they launch for over half a year is a cheaper cost down gtx295 and some tiny crappy entry level cards...
who knows, after all larrabee might not even have to perform all that great as nvidia seems to be stuck with 55nm performance parts for the near future...

[Shintai]

wow... thats nvidias latest and greatest?

i know i know... but come on, its hilarious that this is all they could get done, isnt it?
nothing new at least decent performing on 55nm or 40nm... nothing... i dont even know what those cards are supposed to be used for... media center pcs i guess...

so is nvidia recycling the same chip for ion2 or is that another chip that has yet to be patched up errr mass produced by tsmc?

on a more serious note... this is a bad sign... i have a bad feeling about this...
nvidia is really in bad shape if all they launch for over half a year is a cheaper cost down gtx295 and some tiny crappy entry level cards...
who knows, after all larrabee might not even have to perform all that great as nvidia seems to be stuck with 55nm performance parts for the near future...

Hehe. Well you got DX10.1 You cant get it all

I'm not liking the tiny fans on those. Would have been easy to make them fanless, which would have been a lot better for OEM and HTPC.

Clocks are somewhat high. And the 40nm aint going good. So perhaps fanless parts aswell later. But yes, fully agree.

[SoulsCollective]

I'm not liking the tiny fans on those. Would have been easy to make them fanless, which would have been a lot better for OEM and HTPC.

[zalbard]

I'm not liking the tiny fans on those. Would have been easy to make them fanless, which would have been a lot better for OEM and HTPC.

That's a very good point. Totally agree. But perhaps we will see some non reference designs, this isn't an uncommon thing, at least in regards to heatsinks.

Well you got DX10.1

Welcome to the last year...

[N19h7m4r3]

Not just the fans, they just don't seem right.

1GB on a 128-bit interface seems odd really.

They're also just the same old cards that you can get now.

I hope they have better luck getting their current mid range on 40nm and DX10.1. They need to catch up at the momen on the low end HTPC segment.

[Andrew LB]

^^^ I believe you'll only be able to get Dolby Digital 5.1, DTS 5.1, and multi-channel bitstream by passing the pure untouched signal through your video card and into an HDMI cable. S/pdif enabled video cards that can pass the audio signal through the DVI port (then into a DVI to HDMI converter) are bandwidth limited due to s/pdif only carrying a maximum of about 2mb/s in audio data. If you want Dolby True HD or DTS HD Master 7.1 lossless audio, many changes must occur to the way audio is transferred between your optical drive/motherboard/soundcard/video card in order for a 15mb/s+ signal to be sent across the bus.

[G.Foyle]

Weird memory chips on GT220, so thin

[largon]

^The pic's gotta be of a version with DDR2 instead of GDDR3.

[soundood]

i have read every thread, and agree with most, but i must add,

i just dont get the point here,

is this a sort of nvidia stepping stone thing here i missed? if it is, god help us with any support for DX11

[grimREEFER]

here's an interesting question:

if you have a corei7 with qpi and triple channel ddr3, wouldnt it be better for a graphics card to use system mem than use gddr2 with a 64bit bus?

[Smartidiot89]

here's an interesting question:

if you have a corei7 with qpi and triple channel ddr3, wouldnt it be better for a graphics card to use system mem than use gddr2 with a 64bit bus?

AMDs HD3200 and HD3300 (integrated chips), is supposed to get a theoretical 33% performance increase if your system is using DDR3, instead of DDR2.

But for the situation you're explaining I really don't know...

[Shintai]

here's an interesting question:

if you have a corei7 with qpi and triple channel ddr3, wouldnt it be better for a graphics card to use system mem than use gddr2 with a 64bit bus?

Yes. You can actually run some "CPU+GPU" at about HD4650 to HD4670 speeds with DDR3-1066 up to 2000.

DDR3-2000 on i7 is about 50GB/sec or so. Add some quadchannel memory or simply just 128 or 256bit DIMMs and discrete graphics cards are in heavy danger of extinction.

[570091D]

Yes. You can actually run some "CPU+GPU" at about HD4650 to HD4670 speeds with DDR3-1066 up to 2000.

DDR3-2000 on i7 is about 50GB/sec or so. Add some quadchannel memory or simply just 128 or 256bit DIMMs and discrete graphics cards are in heavy danger of extinction.

so... the core i7 now has a graphics core? i blieve the problem with running gpu memory through the system bus would be the latency incured travelling over the pci-e lanes. but these cards are not meant for high end systems, i'm amazed that some feel bitter when a new card is released and it doesn't run crysis () on very high or cure cancer. these are entry level cards, the vast majority of what nvidia will sell. they added dx10.1 support to increase longevity of the product and it's overall competativness. these cards will be bundled with celeron powered systems or htpc. when customers buy systems with these cards, they will not be comparing shader cores or wondering why nvidia decided on 1gb of vram. they just want the sims to run and the ability to play blu-ray movies. given that purpose for existance, this will probably be a sucessful product.