Quote Originally Posted by Cybercat View Post
What's Charlie's proof? Do detractors of his articles need proof that he clearly has an agenda of his own? All you need to do is look through the history of his news articles. The man has nothing good to say about NVIDIA.

Just because it sounds likely that NVIDIA might be having problems with their new design doesn't make it so. A new architecture isn't enough to give them issues, NV40, G80, many new architectures released without a hitch (irrespective of die size). If there's a problem it's with the process. Regardless, do we have any reason to think it will affect the launch late this year? All I'm hearing from critics is conjecture.

And from I've seen there was never a major yield issue with the GT200. It was just a lot more expensive to make than its competition, but hey, at least it was faster.
The fact that Charlie is NOT the source is why some of us are so sure of this news. I heard it from an informant/source on another site who gave me the correct codenames to Evergreen back at the beginning of August, which is when all the sites were mixing up the codenames. He has also had very good info in the past and is the one that heard G300 is larger than G200 and he even knew what information Charlie was going to post a day before he posted it.

Yields are the main factor in the cost per die. G200 did have some problems with yields, which is expected when you rely on salavaging, G200b had even more problems needing an extra respin.

New architecture on a new process with an ungodly large die size is more than enough to correlate with the supposed yields.