Page 60 of 82 FirstFirst ... 10505758596061626370 ... LastLast
Results 1,476 to 1,500 of 2036

Thread: The GT300/Fermi Thread

  1. #1476
    Xtreme Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Sydney, Australia
    Posts
    466
    Excellent read from the Hardware Cunucks article which i can honestly say has always been the first place in which i read any review. They seem to give you exactly what you want to know and break it down in ways that you can understand (instead of techno babble).

    Anyways whilst debating benches on FC2 is fun i think people are really missing the point of the whole GF100 arc. Basically with the current gen of games the G100 would have good performance but won't really blow the 5870 out of the water. Honestly though why on earth are people debating current games?I'm sure most that loved it have finished it already as well.

    The G100 will really shine with NEW or NEXT GEN games i.e. DX11 and tessellation and will then really have the performance advantage esp with other goodies (AA, etc). We are talking way more than 20%, which for me is significant. That's what i understand from reading the articles.

    So basically i think i always knew that the 5870 is a great card and it was always going to be difficult to make it look bad. But it is a beast for what's out now and not what's to come. That in itself says alot. It will be interesting with more benches..
    Last edited by takamishanoku; 01-18-2010 at 01:36 PM.

  2. #1477
    Xtreme Guru
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    3,562
    Quote Originally Posted by zalbard View Post
    On AT's graph 5870 is faster and 285 is slower, so can't agree with you here, Nvidia shamelessly shaved those 7%.
    And here I thought the major contention was with the HD 5870 1GB result I posted. Luckily that has now been put to rest by AT's chart.

    As for the GTX 285 results, AT's seems low to me since NVIDIA GT200 architecture scales VERY well as resolution and detail settings are turned up in FC2 DX10. Then again, we can go on all day arguing about the results from one system to another but I'll say it again: I was able to replicate NV's result very well with both an i7 960 @ stock and an i7 920 overclocked to 3.2Ghz.

  3. #1478
    Xtreme Addict
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Saskatchewan, Canada
    Posts
    2,207
    Quote Originally Posted by zalbard View Post
    On AT's graph 5870 is faster and 285 is slower, so can't agree with you here, Nvidia shamelessly shaved those 7%.

    Yeah, OK, I checked some driver comparison tests and I take it back. I said I wasn't sure anyway. Seems to be within 5% in most cases, rarely up to 10.
    You have to look at the results differently those, AT use playback action rather than small ranch which was used in the leak results.

    Additionally Nvidia really wasn't that bad in any of its marketing results. All the graphed results used a baseline of 0. When the last time you see AMD do that?

    I don't AMD really improved that much from driver releases because the 5xxx architecture is so similar to the 4xxx architecture that the driver improvements are already there. The only exception is the 5970 which can improved more because of its reliance of crossfire.
    Core i7 920@ 4.66ghz(H2O)
    6gb OCZ platinum
    4870x2 + 4890 in Trifire
    2*640 WD Blacks
    750GB Seagate.

  4. #1479
    Xtreme Enthusiast
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Portugal
    Posts
    811
    Quote Originally Posted by fiskov View Post
    Exactly what i wanted by the looks of it, as good as the 280 GTX in SLI, with a DELICIOUS lack of Catalyst Control Center.
    Sign me up, i'll take 2 please.
    Thank God for that one
    ASUS Sabertooth P67B3· nVidia GTX580 1536MB PhysX · Intel Core i7 2600K 4.5GHz · Corsair TX850W · Creative X-Fi Titanium Fatal1ty
    8GB GSKill Sniper PC3-16000 7-8-7 · OCZ Agility3 SSD 240GB + Intel 320 SSD 160GB + Samsung F3 2TB + WD 640AAKS 640GB · Corsair 650D · DELL U2711 27"

  5. #1480
    I am Xtreme
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    France
    Posts
    9,060
    Quote Originally Posted by tajoh111 View Post
    I don't AMD really improved that much from driver releases because the 5xxx architecture is so similar to the 4xxx architecture that the driver improvements are already there. The only exception is the 5970 which can improved more because of its reliance of crossfire.
    In fact, I don't understand this. 5870 should be at least as fast or faster than 4890 CF, yet it's lagging behind 4870x2 sometimes. They doubled everything on a single die and even added some caches and optimisations, yet it's not working out well.

  6. #1481
    Xtreme Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Lancaster, UK
    Posts
    473
    ^ drivers?
    CPU: Intel 2500k (4.8ghz)
    Mobo: Asus P8P67 PRO
    GPU: HIS 6950 flashed to Asus 6970 (1000/1400) under water
    Sound: Corsair SP2500 with X-Fi
    Storage: Intel X-25M g2 160GB + 1x1TB f1
    Case: Sivlerstone Raven RV02
    PSU: Corsair HX850
    Cooling: Custom loop: EK Supreme HF, EK 6970
    Screens: BenQ XL2410T 120hz


    Help for Heroes

  7. #1482
    Xtreme Cruncher
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Bloomfield
    Posts
    1,968
    Quote Originally Posted by zalbard View Post
    In fact, I don't understand this. 5870 should be at least as fast or faster than 4890 CF, yet it's lagging behind 4870x2 sometimes. They doubled everything on a single die and even added some caches and optimisations, yet it's not working out well.
    its not double everything. i have a hunch this is the achilles heel of cypress. this is the first time geometry performance has not increased. for the record gf100 can set up 4 triangles per clock which is a significant change in architecture and a first for any gpu. so 2.4 billion tris/sec v. cypress with 850 million tris/sec.
    http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...&postcount=249

  8. #1483
    Xtreme Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    161
    Quote Originally Posted by Chumbucket843 View Post
    its not double everything. i have a hunch this is the achilles heel of cypress. this is the first time geometry performance has not increased. for the record gf100 can set up 4 triangles per clock which is a significant change in architecture and a first for any gpu. so 2.4 billion tris/sec v. cypress with 850 million tris/sec.
    http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...&postcount=249
    Interesting. So this means GF100 is extremely good at handling Tessellation?

  9. #1484
    Xtreme Addict
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    'Zona
    Posts
    2,346
    Quote Originally Posted by kgk View Post
    Also, when you compare die size and how many chips they get per wafer, doesn't AMD get twice as many churned out per wafer as NVidia?

    Gives them a pricing/profitability advantage doesn't it?

    I mean, assuming R&D and overhead for both were equal, which they clearly are not.
    AMD/ATi gets ~60% more dies per wafer, Cypress vs GF100.
    Then again, current yields put AMD/ATi ~3x higher.

    Quote Originally Posted by jaredpace View Post
    edit btw, does anyone know how many clock domains this thing has? It's something like rops&core/l2&scheduler/sampler/shader/memory. going to be kinda wierd seing 5 different mhz's in your gpu-z window
    You will get to play with 3, just like last time.
    Core, which is tied to the ROPs & L2, shader which is tied to CCs and the texture units w/ the TMUs/scheduler running at half the hot clock(more on this later) and then the memory clocks.

    FYI- GPUs have many different units running at many different frequencies.

    Quote Originally Posted by FischOderAal View Post
    Yepp, it does. But don't forget yields. I think it's safe to assume that Fermi has worse yields than RV870.

    Someone made a claim that NVIDIA would have to sell Fermi at a loss in the desktop market. If things go bad for NVIDIA (AMD cuts prices, very bad yields etc) I can see this being true easily.
    Much worse yields.
    Nvidia won't be selling GF100 at a loss, unless something drastically changes but GF100 will have a BOM of more than 2x Cypress, meaning the 5970 will still be cheaper to make.

    Quote Originally Posted by W1zzard View Post
    given the same defect density per wafer of silicon a bigger die will automatically have lower yield (take a piece of paper, put 5 defect dots on it with a pen, cut it into 10 pieces, now cut another piece of paper with dots into 20 pieces, count how many pieces without dot you get)

    if nvidia is smart (they probably are) they put some spares on their gpu which is basically extra pieces of hardware that can replace pieces where defects are in the silicon. for example you could imagine having a 5th GPC cluster that can replace one with defects. if you do the proper math you can compute spare designs that are statistically going to increase your per-die yield even though such measures increase the die area
    Yes, but this has been discussed before. Having too much redundancy adds additional area that is not going to be enabled, unless things go very poorly. Too little redundancy means terrible yields if you are using a salvaging technique. There needs to be a choice made of a middle of the road design decision and it seems as if Nvidia went a little on the low side this time.
    Though I have a feeling you knew that.

    Quote Originally Posted by omar little View Post
    has it been established whether fermi uses hardware or software tesselation?
    Both. There is specific units that handle the tessellation, see Polymorph Engine, but are tied to clusters. This is a very different implementation than AMD, obviously. Where Nvidia has a massive advantage is being able to do 4 triangles per clock, compared to Cypress' 1 triangle/clock and Hemlock's 2 triangles/clock.

    Quote Originally Posted by SKYMTL View Post
    Which synthetic tests? Unigine, Far Cry 2, HawX, DX11 Toolkit, etc. don't use PhysX at all.
    Ummm... the hair demo and water demo plus the other "Nvidia" supplied demos. I know for sure he said the hair demo used PhysX.


    Since some don't want to look over the articles, Rys summarized the good stuff that we didn't know before, well most of us.
    Quote Originally Posted by Rys
    • Sampler runs at scheduler clock (half the hot clock)
    • 4 samplers per cluster (64 total)
    • Sampler will do jittered-offset for Gather4 (no idea how, the texture-space offset is constant per call)
    • 4 tris/clock setup and raster
    • Raster area per unit is now 2x4 rather than 2x16
    • PolyMorph Engine (heh), effectively pre-PS FF, one per cluster
    • ROPs now each take 24 coverage samples (up from 8)
    • Compression is improved, 4x->8x delta drop is less than GT200 clock-for-clock
    • Display engine improvements


    That's the list of the stuff I either got wrong or missed in my article at TR, concerning the graphics. Biggest thing is probably the > 1tri/clk for small triangles, and the change in the per-clock rasterisation area for each of the four units. Aggregate setup and rasterisation performance is no faster per clock than G80+ for triangles that are > 32 pixels.

    Sampler count was out by 2x, so NV will need a > 1.6 GHz hot clock to beat a GTX 285 in peak possible texture performance, and there's a distinct lack of information about the sampler hardware in the latest whitepaper. Doing more digging there, but it looks like no change to texturing IQ other the ability to jitter the texcoords per sample during an unfiltered fetch.

    NV claim that everything they list in the PolyMorph block exists as a physical block in the silicon. Obviously interesting thing there that didn't exist before is the tessellator, and it seems the fixed block there is responsible for generating the new primitives (or killing geometry too), and the units run in parallel (where possible), with most other stuff running on the SM.

    As for my clock estimates, I doubt 1700 MHz hot clock at launch (:sad, but the base clock should be usefully higher, up past 700 MHz. They still haven't talked about GeForce productisation or clocks, but at this point it looks unlikely the fastest launch GeForce will texture faster than a GTX 285.

    That's about it, will have an article up ASAP.
    It was also brought up that the TFUs are run at the full hot clock, to give it a 1:2 ratio like G80, to make sure enough info is fed to the TMUs since they are more efficient than G200's.

    I am very impressed with some of these large architectural changes Nvidia made with GF100. They can easily scale this architecture up in the coming years and hopefully see some good performance scaling, after small tweaks. The main problem other than the huge complexity and manufacturing problems, is being able to scale this design down. Sure it is doable but with the same clock complexities, I don't see the smaller chips being able to hit much higher clocks which will be needed.

    I look forward to see what they can do on 28nm.
    Last edited by LordEC911; 01-18-2010 at 02:53 PM.
    Originally Posted by motown_steve
    Every genocide that was committed during the 20th century has been preceded by the disarmament of the target population. Once the government outlaws your guns your life becomes a luxury afforded to you by the state. You become a tool to benefit the state. Should you cease to benefit the state or even worse become an annoyance or even a hindrance to the state then your life becomes more trouble than it is worth.

    Once the government outlaws your guns your life is forfeit. You're already dead, it's just a question of when they are going to get around to you.

  10. #1485
    Xtreme Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    184
    Quote Originally Posted by SKYMTL View Post
    Which synthetic tests? Unigine, Far Cry 2, HawX, DX11 Toolkit, etc. don't use PhysX at all.
    at least Hair Demo uses PhysX according to ChrisRay. But then again.. he also siad the only thing holding it back was the current boards and there's nothing wrong with the GPU. I loved it how NV always seems to miscommunicate between their PR, marketing and sales departments.
    Last edited by neliz; 01-18-2010 at 02:15 PM.

  11. #1486
    Xtreme Mentor
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Oslo - Norway
    Posts
    2,879
    Quote Originally Posted by neliz View Post
    at least Hair Demo uses PhysX according to ChrisRay. But then again.. he also siad the only thing holding it back was the current boards and there's nothing wrong with the GPU. I loved it how NV always seems to miscommunicate between their PR, marketing and sales departments.
    Are you indicating that nVidia is bluffing all this? I don't get what you are trying to say.

    ASUS P8P67 Deluxe (BIOS 1305)
    2600K @4.5GHz 1.27v , 1 hour Prime
    Silver Arrow , push/pull
    2x2GB Crucial 1066MHz CL7 ECC @1600MHz CL9 1.51v
    GTX560 GB OC @910/2400 0.987v
    Crucial C300 v006 64GB OS-disk + F3 1TB + 400MB RAMDisk
    CM Storm Scout + Corsair HX 1000W
    +
    EVGA SR-2 , A50
    2 x Xeon X5650 @3.86GHz(203x19) 1.20v
    Megahalem + Silver Arrow , push/pull
    3x2GB Corsair XMS3 1600 CL7 + 3x4GB G.SKILL Trident 1600 CL7 = 18GB @1624 7-8-7-20 1.65v
    XFX GTX 295 @650/1200/1402
    Crucial C300 v006 64GB OS-disk + F3 1TB + 2GB RAMDisk
    SilverStone Fortress FT01 + Corsair AX 1200W

  12. #1487
    Xtreme Addict
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    Ontario, Canada
    Posts
    1,782
    Fermi looks good on paper but I want to see it in action. The only real metric I'm going to judge it by is its performance versus power usage.

  13. #1488
    Xtreme Mentor
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Oslo - Norway
    Posts
    2,879
    Quote Originally Posted by freeloader View Post
    Fermi looks good on paper but I want to see it in action. The only real metric I'm going to judge it by is its performance versus power usage.
    Good point, but price would be important too. Which brings me to the idea of introducing the new term : PPP

    ASUS P8P67 Deluxe (BIOS 1305)
    2600K @4.5GHz 1.27v , 1 hour Prime
    Silver Arrow , push/pull
    2x2GB Crucial 1066MHz CL7 ECC @1600MHz CL9 1.51v
    GTX560 GB OC @910/2400 0.987v
    Crucial C300 v006 64GB OS-disk + F3 1TB + 400MB RAMDisk
    CM Storm Scout + Corsair HX 1000W
    +
    EVGA SR-2 , A50
    2 x Xeon X5650 @3.86GHz(203x19) 1.20v
    Megahalem + Silver Arrow , push/pull
    3x2GB Corsair XMS3 1600 CL7 + 3x4GB G.SKILL Trident 1600 CL7 = 18GB @1624 7-8-7-20 1.65v
    XFX GTX 295 @650/1200/1402
    Crucial C300 v006 64GB OS-disk + F3 1TB + 2GB RAMDisk
    SilverStone Fortress FT01 + Corsair AX 1200W

  14. #1489
    Xtreme Addict
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    'Zona
    Posts
    2,346
    Quote Originally Posted by Sam_oslo View Post
    Are you indicating that nVidia is bluffing all this? I don't get what you are trying to say.
    We are wondering how Nvidia managed to "benchmark" 5870 in the hair demo since it uses PhysX.
    I was wondering if any of those other demos use PhysX as well.
    Originally Posted by motown_steve
    Every genocide that was committed during the 20th century has been preceded by the disarmament of the target population. Once the government outlaws your guns your life becomes a luxury afforded to you by the state. You become a tool to benefit the state. Should you cease to benefit the state or even worse become an annoyance or even a hindrance to the state then your life becomes more trouble than it is worth.

    Once the government outlaws your guns your life is forfeit. You're already dead, it's just a question of when they are going to get around to you.

  15. #1490
    Xtreme Guru
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    3,562
    Quote Originally Posted by neliz View Post
    at least Hair Demo uses PhysX according to ChrisRay.
    The hair was animated using Direct Compute and rendered using tessellation as was the water.

  16. #1491
    Xtreme Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Turlock, CA
    Posts
    264
    Quote Originally Posted by NaMcO View Post
    Thank God for that one
    Umm, you don't have to install CCC, just download the drivers only w/o the Catalyst program. What's the big deal?


  17. #1492
    Xtreme Addict
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    'Zona
    Posts
    2,346
    Quote Originally Posted by SKYMTL View Post
    The hair was animated using Direct Compute and rendered using tessellation as was the water.
    Hmmm...

    Quote Originally Posted by ChrisRay
    There are alot of interesting things that can be done with tessellation with a little creativity. The hair demo you've seen is actually physx + tessellation.
    http://forum.beyond3d.com/showpost.p...&postcount=524

    Edit- On a side note: This guy manages to mention PhysX when talking about tessellation in the Uningine...
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gkI-ThRTrPY&NR=1
    Last edited by LordEC911; 01-18-2010 at 02:48 PM.
    Originally Posted by motown_steve
    Every genocide that was committed during the 20th century has been preceded by the disarmament of the target population. Once the government outlaws your guns your life becomes a luxury afforded to you by the state. You become a tool to benefit the state. Should you cease to benefit the state or even worse become an annoyance or even a hindrance to the state then your life becomes more trouble than it is worth.

    Once the government outlaws your guns your life is forfeit. You're already dead, it's just a question of when they are going to get around to you.

  18. #1493
    Xtreme Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    184
    Quote Originally Posted by Sam_oslo View Post
    Are you indicating that nVidia is bluffing all this? I don't get what you are trying to say.
    That's one thing, if you don't know the variables, it's useless to look at the awesomebars(tm) (yeah, you can find me saying that before)

    With the Fermi tech preview, they did the same. Big Awesomebars! 8xDP over GT200.. well GT200 is a P.O.S. in DP and actually barely puts it over Cypress. Single Precision still won't be as fast as Cypress.

    Now comes the 8xMSAA scores versus GT200.. "up to 2 times as fast!" awesome and all, but at 2560x16008xMSAA some games run single digit on GT200! You can make it all percentually cool and see the geeks in the room whip it out because of your awesomebars(tm) but you're basically saying "yeah GT200 sucked in this, we fixed it, it's now competitive."

    Really, up until now we know nothing of GF100 performance, let alone benchmarks of soon to be available parts.


    edit: And yeah, marketing puppet as he may be, I believe him on this.. man .. "they're only waiting on board production" oh man.. that had me cracking up...

  19. #1494
    Xtreme Guru
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    3,562
    Quote Originally Posted by LordEC911 View Post
    I have the audio form the session recorded. The use of compute shaders was clearly stated.

    Unless the person misspoke since PhysX wasn't mentioned until a later session and then only when talking about Dark Void.

    Odd...

  20. #1495
    Xtreme Mentor
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Oslo - Norway
    Posts
    2,879
    Quote Originally Posted by LordEC911 View Post
    We are wondering how Nvidia managed to "benchmark" 5870 in the hair demo since it uses PhysX.
    I was wondering if any of those other demos use PhysX as well.
    I don't know what's the underlaying technology for that hair demo, but if it is using the physX, then it would be more fare to "benchmark" 5870 + GTX 260

    ASUS P8P67 Deluxe (BIOS 1305)
    2600K @4.5GHz 1.27v , 1 hour Prime
    Silver Arrow , push/pull
    2x2GB Crucial 1066MHz CL7 ECC @1600MHz CL9 1.51v
    GTX560 GB OC @910/2400 0.987v
    Crucial C300 v006 64GB OS-disk + F3 1TB + 400MB RAMDisk
    CM Storm Scout + Corsair HX 1000W
    +
    EVGA SR-2 , A50
    2 x Xeon X5650 @3.86GHz(203x19) 1.20v
    Megahalem + Silver Arrow , push/pull
    3x2GB Corsair XMS3 1600 CL7 + 3x4GB G.SKILL Trident 1600 CL7 = 18GB @1624 7-8-7-20 1.65v
    XFX GTX 295 @650/1200/1402
    Crucial C300 v006 64GB OS-disk + F3 1TB + 2GB RAMDisk
    SilverStone Fortress FT01 + Corsair AX 1200W

  21. #1496
    I am Xtreme
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    France
    Posts
    9,060
    Quote Originally Posted by Chumbucket843 View Post
    its not double everything. i have a hunch this is the achilles heel of cypress. this is the first time geometry performance has not increased. for the record gf100 can set up 4 triangles per clock which is a significant change in architecture and a first for any gpu. so 2.4 billion tris/sec v. cypress with 850 million tris/sec.
    http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...&postcount=249
    Wow, that sucks. I remember reading about it a few months ago, but kind of forgot by now. Thanks for the info.
    Is it possible to somehow test it in real games? To see if it's geometry performance limited?

    Edit: in fact, I see what they did there. This geometrical performance should be enough for today's games. And tomorrow's games should use tessellation hence the need for higher geometrical performance will not be as dire. Nice future proof solution.
    Last edited by zalbard; 01-18-2010 at 02:58 PM.
    Donate to XS forums
    Quote Originally Posted by jayhall0315 View Post
    If you are really extreme, you never let informed facts or the scientific method hold you back from your journey to the wrong answer.

  22. #1497
    Xtreme Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    184
    The PDF actually says:

    "The Hair demo (left) uses tessellation, geometry shaders, and physical simulations."
    P.15

  23. #1498
    Xtreme Guru
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    3,562
    Quote Originally Posted by neliz View Post
    The PDF actually says:

    "The Hair demo (left) uses tessellation, geometry shaders, and physical simulations."
    P.15


    Trust me, if it was PhysX I'm pretty sure they would have said so....

  24. #1499
    I am Xtreme
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    France
    Posts
    9,060
    Quote Originally Posted by neliz View Post
    The PDF actually says:
    Link, please?
    Donate to XS forums
    Quote Originally Posted by jayhall0315 View Post
    If you are really extreme, you never let informed facts or the scientific method hold you back from your journey to the wrong answer.

  25. #1500
    Xtreme Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    184
    Quote Originally Posted by zalbard View Post
    Link, please?
    http://www.nvidia.com/object/gf100.html

    Graphics whitepaper PDF on the left

    edit: SkyMTL, it's a SigGraph 2008 presentation (http://developer.nvidia.com/object/devnews041.html) so I'm going to try and see what the presentation said (if I can find it!)
    Last edited by neliz; 01-18-2010 at 03:01 PM.

Page 60 of 82 FirstFirst ... 10505758596061626370 ... LastLast

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
  •