Results 1 to 25 of 2036

Thread: The GT300/Fermi Thread

Threaded View

  1. #11
    Xtreme Guru
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    3,562
    Quote Originally Posted by saaya View Post
    but you saw it with the overhead projects, not the 3 monitors with bezel, right?
    Nope. They were showing a car racing game (can't remember which one) on three 24" Acer 120Hz monitors.

    wha wha whaaaa? didnt jensen just tell the BBC in an interview that they started mass production of GF100 cards? How can they mass produce something if the spec isnt finalized?
    Just because the heatsink and PCB isn't finalized doesn't mean the chips can't be produced.

    As for "mass production", if you ask five people at NVIDIA about actual production, two will say it is in mass production, two will say it isn't and the final person will just shrug their shoulders.



    Quote Originally Posted by saaya View Post
    mmhhh sounds to me like its not really a propper benchmark standard tho... they used MS DX11 toolkit, well yeah, just like EVERY DX11 benchmark and game uses the MS DX!! toolkit... that doesnt mean its an objective unoptimized benchmark... in that case they should have compared fermi to gtx285 like they did in the other tests...
    Unfortunately, there are no "objective benchmarks". However, developers do use the benchmarks within toolkits for validate their code so having good performance in those is a must.


    Quote Originally Posted by saaya View Post
    oh and how about HAWX, did they bench HAWX or did nvidia only offer slides for the HAWX perf?
    No, HawX was a simple slide which was supposed to illustrate how the new ROP layout and design decreases overhead when using higher instances of AA.

    Quote Originally Posted by Solus Corvus View Post
    AT gets 14fps more on a 5870 @ 2560x1600 in FC2. With SKYMTL's numbers at 2560x1600 fermi has a 39% lead over 5870. Sub AT's numbers for 5870 and it's a 6% lead.

    What a mess. I can't wait to see this in an independent reviewer's hands so we can get real apples-to-apples tests in a variety of games. I'm curious to see some 8xAA numbers as well.
    FC2 is very CPU limited and I'm pretty sure they use either a 3.8Ghz or 4Ghz i7 which in my tests could equate a 15-18% improvement in the Ranch Small benchmark over a chip clocked at 3.2Ghz.
    Last edited by SKYMTL; 01-18-2010 at 06:47 AM.

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •