Quote Originally Posted by ToTTenTranz View Post
You can't compare the G80's shaders with R6xx ones. RV670/R600 only has 64 shader processors "equivalent" to the G80/G92 ones, and nVidia has them at twice the clock speed. It's everything so different that you can't compare them that way. Besides, the benchmarks' score won't tell you the exact ammount of shaders.

I don't remember where I saw that, but I remember seeing some calculations proving that if ATI said it could do 1 TeraFlop, the RV770 had to have 800SPs for the numbers to match. Maybe it was in Beyond3D forums.. If I find it again I'll post in here.
Fair enough, but aren't you sure it wasn't the R700 / 2 * RV770? Even if ATI could provide that theoretical max in terms of flops, the reality of it would hard would be same. No architecture could ever get 100% of theoretical max, and ATI's architecture is very limited in this regard.

But then again, ATI still claims 320 / 480 SP vs NVIDIA's 128 / 240 SP from papers, and that alone should tell anyone, that ATI is full of it...

As soon as they called their part 320 SP vs nVIDIAs G80 GTX / Ultra's 128 SP... then anyone should know the depths this company has been lowered to, in terms of PR / FUD.

In terms of single card / single GPU, I would love ATI to be competitive in terms of raw performance and effective as well, but that is not going to happe, and thus this can never be a "R300 Deja-Vu" or even something like it.

ATI may well have the performance vs cost, in some markets, but in terms of raw effective performance, I can't see how nVIDIA can't win with the GTX 280.

If anyone wonders, then yes, only the best in terms of performance per GPU chip matters to me, no matter the cost. The GTX 280 bought from the US with tax, is about %60 the cost of each of my current Ultras...

That is my personal view and wants, but I respect and accept others see it differently