Nvidia confirms GT-200 with 1 billion transistors

[BenchZowner]

From your post in this thread and in the GPU-Z thread one could get the impression that you have some insight... Would you like to share it?

Yeap, his name is Nick... Ha! Gotcha!

In fact, I have someone with info directly from nVIDIA, but I'm not going to give out things that can cause troubles to him/me/others.

Last spec for the night... GDDR3 somewhere in between 1000-1100MHz.

[Don_Dan]

Yeap, his name is Nick... Ha! Gotcha!

In fact, I have someone with info directly from nVIDIA, but I'm not going to give out things that can cause troubles to him/me/others.

Last spec for the night... GDDR3 somewhere in between 1000-1100MHz.

Sure, I understand that of course!

But the info you already gave are very valuable indeed!

[Warboy]

Yeap, his name is Nick... Ha! Gotcha!

In fact, I have someone with info directly from nVIDIA, but I'm not going to give out things that can cause troubles to him/me/others.

Last spec for the night... GDDR3 somewhere in between 1000-1100MHz.

Awww only GDDR3?

[brinox]

geforce 1080 gtx!

[Frank M]

geforce 1080 gtx!

10800GTX you mean?

How's about X800GTX

Just DDR3? While that's a bit disappointing, it can also be a good sign
that this will come out sooner than waiting for GDDR5 to get to mass
production.

[Don_Dan]

Just DDR3? While that's a bit disappointing, it can also be a good sign that this will come out sooner than waiting for GDDR5 to get to mass production.

Using GDDR3 makes it cheaper I guess and availability should be much better.

[DilTech]

Awww only GDDR3?

512bit bus with GDDR3 at 2000-2200 would be faster than any available ram on a 256bit memory bus....

So, even if they stick with GDDR3, it'd still have a ton of bandwidth.

So 512bit bus with 32rops...This thing is going to be untouchable when it comes to post processing, and unlike the R600 it'll actually have the power to take advantage of the memory bandwidth it'll have.

[v_rr]

512bit bus with GDDR3 at 2000-2200 would be faster than any available ram on a 256bit memory bus....

256bits + GDDR5 gives you more bandwidth.

Look to R600 at 512bits. The formule didn´t work.
The PCB is much more complex, the core is bigger, you have more bus stops inside the chip.

[DilTech]

256bits + GDDR5 gives you more bandwidth.

Look to R600 at 512bits. The formule didn´t work.
The PCB is much more complex, the core is bigger, you have more bus stops inside the chip.

R600's formula didn't work because it couldn't USE the bandwidth. Too few rops, inefficient AA, too few tmus for AF... The rest of the architecture held it back.

Also, you realize you'd need roughly 4ghz GDDR5 at 256bit to match 2ghz GDDR3 at 512bit, right? Also, GDDR3 is likely to be lower latency than GDDR5 as well.

[STaRGaZeR]

R600's formula didn't work because it couldn't USE the bandwidth. Too few rops, inefficient AA, too few tmus for AF... The rest of the architecture held it back.

Also, you realize you'd need roughly 4ghz GDDR5 at 256bit to match 2ghz GDDR3 at 512bit, right? Also, GDDR3 is likely to be lower latency than GDDR5 as well.

I think his point is that if the two options can provide the same bandwidth (256+GDDR5 vs 512+GDDR3) it's cheaper and way less complex to design and use the first. And I agree with that. I loved the R600 PCB's visual, but looking at it from a practical POV, 256+GDDR5 is better. Also, 512bits will force NVIDIA to use 16 chips in one PCB, just like the 2900XT. If they plan to do a GX2 with the GT-200, I just can't imagine the monster PCB (two of them more than likely) it'll be with 32 GDDR ICs, that huge chip and all the power circuitry.

Of couse it'll be fast, but I don't want a second 2900XT talking about heat and power consumption.

[trinibwoy]

I think his point is that if the two options can provide the same bandwidth (256+GDDR5 vs 512+GDDR3) it's cheaper and way less complex to design and use the first.

GDDR3 is far cheaper and much more widely available than GDDR5. Also, Nvidia is concerned about the cost of their chips not the cost of the cards. If they use GDDR5 they don't get any benefit from using more expensive memory. Expensive chip + cheap memory for the same net performance and price to the consumer is an overall win for the chip maker. It's the AIB's that get squeezed.

[DeathReborn]

R600's formula didn't work because it couldn't USE the bandwidth. Too few rops, inefficient AA, too few tmus for AF... The rest of the architecture held it back.

Also, you realize you'd need roughly 4ghz GDDR5 at 256bit to match 2ghz GDDR3 at 512bit, right? Also, GDDR3 is likely to be lower latency than GDDR5 as well.

You forgot that GDDR5 is still not "available" so the original statement stands correct, for the time being.