The GT300/Fermi Thread

[003]

Oh the Fermi is real! Just it's going to be a long wait if the Quadro Cards are not coming until Q2 2010

003 I am not sure if the Quadro Fermi clocks will be lower? (granted they might be on the memory), I am going by the Quadro FX5800 which had a Core Clock of 650Mhz compared to the GTX 280 which had a core clock of 600Mhz

Now, BFG will most likely do an OCX, Gainward a Golden Sample and EVGA a WTF, BBQ FTW edition with higher clocks, but the fact remains we have no idea whether the Quadro cards will be clocked higher, lower, or the same as the consumer cards.

John

I could have sworn reading a news article on this. I believe it was from BSN.

Ah, yup I am right. Here is the article in question. Some interesting quotes:

According to specifications based on NV100 A2 silicon [subject to change], C2050 will deliver 520 GFLOPS of IEEE 754-2008 Dual Precision format and 1.040 TFLOPS of single precision.

So yes it looks like the current numbers of 520 and 630GFlops are in fact based on A2 silicon, and A3 should up this considerably, as even Charlie admits in one of his latest editorials ("A3 will almost assuredly up the clocks quite a bit...").

First and foremost, Tesla is the slowest clocked member of Fermi-GPU architecture as it has to qualify for supercomputers. ... In order to satisfy the required multi-year under 100% stress, nVidia Tesla C2050/2070 went through following changes when compared to the Quadro card [which again, will be downclocked from the consumer cards]:

ECC will be disabled on GeForce cards and most likely on Quadro cards

Also there are cases were AMD/ATi's ECC implementation will be better/faster than Nvidia's since in the case where Nvidia's ECC will actually try to correct the error and once it realizes it cannot be corrected it will still need to be flushed and redone.

2-bit ECC is necessary for high precision HPC applications (i.e. medical imaging). ATI only has 1-bit ECC on the video memory, which isn't enough. Nvidia has 2-bit ECC on the video memory and the entire cache hiercharchy.

First you claimed you cannot "break" NDA.
Immediately after, you "broke" NDA by claiming that Fermi is significantly faster.

I am not the signer of the NDA, I know someone who is and NDA was broken when they talked to me. I will reveal general information that can't be traced back to the NDA signer. Whether or not you choose to believe me is out of my control. Irrelevant though as it will be revealed to everybody in Q1.