The GT300/Fermi Thread - Part 2!

[jaredpace]

if I understand this right, this is not "made up" or fake.

Well they took these benches...




Then made their own graph with the data, and added a column for gtx480

To get the 480 scores, they took the gtx295 data and multiplied it times 1.5.

So it's a real graph of some fake scores.

[BenchZowner]

Being late is certainly a failure

Then everything's a failure... AMD's magny cours... intel's gulftown... amd 5990 windows 8... xbox 370 ... ps4

[Sam_oslo]

Well they took these benches...

http://images.trustedreviews.com/images/article/inline/12254-far4.gif[/IMG]
http://images.trustedreviews.com/images/article/inline/12254-cod44.gif[/IMG]

Then made their own graph with the data, and added a column for gtx480

To get the 480 scores, they took the gtx295 data and multiplied it times 1.5.

So it's a real graph of some fake scores.

Yeah, but nVidia provided them with that x1.5 info, right?

In case, it is a really interesting and valuable graph in this stage. Because even nVidia should have been optimistic with 1.5 x GTX 295-performance, these numbers are showing a really superior GTX 480. Or what?

[MrMojoZ]

Then everything's a failure... AMD's magny cours... intel's gulftown... amd 5990 windows 8... xbox 370 ... ps4

Errr, I think most would agree that Fermi was later than what nvidia was hoping for.

[MrMojoZ]

Yeah, but nVidia provided them with that x1.5 info, right?

In case, it is a really interesting and valuable graph in this stage. Because even nVidia should have been optimistic with 1.5 x GTX 295-performance, these numbers are showing a really superior GTX 480. Or what?

Its a fake graph, why are you acting like it matters?

[Sam_oslo]

Its a fake graph, why are you acting like it matters?

I don't know if they are real, but the guy is calming that nVidia has provided the info, and in case they matter a lot . Who told you they are fake? source please.

[Teemax]

I don't know if they are real, but the guy is calming that nVidia has provided the info, and in case they matter a lot . Who told you they are fake? source please.

I think you kinda misunderstood how rumors work.

If you spread a rumor, the burden is on you to prove that it's right. It's not for others to "disprove" a baseless claim.

[ElSel10]

Not to get OT or anything but I noticed this particular thread is pretty loose at modding. Everyone is taking open shots and insults at others...Just surprised to see that with no mediating.

You guys all need to chill.

Speak for yourself.

Can't everyone just agree Fermi is late and is for a reason ? Its a failure, no matter how you try to justify it.

[MrMojoZ]

I don't know if they are real, but the guy is calming that nVidia has provided the info, and in case they matter a lot . Who told you they are fake? source please.

THEY AREN'T REAL RESULTS FROM ACTUAL TESTS. Hence fake. You can prove it yourself with a little math. Wait for some real info. I'm sure Fermi will be very fast, it is the price/power/heat/stock levels issues that determine if it is a good product or not.

[Sam_oslo]

I think you kinda misunderstood how rumors work.

If you spread a rumor, the burden is on you to prove that it's right. It's not for others to "disprove" a baseless claim.

Did I say this a proven fact?

I'm trying to find out where these numbers comes from, and what they mean. I'm holding an open mind with all possibilities on the table.
But maybe you should say this to those who are trying to say it is proven fake?

[jaredpace]

@samoslo: I've see everything from 15% slower than a 295 to 50% faster than a 295. But I will just go by the GTX470 3dmark vantage score of P17,000. And another good judgement of performance, IMO, is the GF100 farcry2 and darkvoid benchmarks. Makes it ~65% faster than the 285, and up to 100% faster if using high physx lots of compute + rendering simultaneously. Sounds like it's going to be similar to GTX260 vs. HD4870, where the GTX470 and HD5870 will compete and trade blows. And the GTX480 will be above all in a league of its own, ~25% faster, fastest single gpu, and between HD5870 + HD5970.

If you were to use an application like (extreme compute, really high Phys-x games like batman, cryostasis, darkvoid, etc, raytracing, the rocketsled demo, folding, crunching, or unigine heaven w/tessellation, or tessellation demos), then the GTX480 would demonstrate the 100% lead over the GTX285 because of its raw compute power. With traditional games like modern warfare, farcry, etc, it should be like the FC2 demo, with a ~65% lead.

If it was really %50 faster than a GTX295, then it would blow away a 5970. If that remark is true, then they are probably quoting the 295 at high resolutions with filtering where the 295 starts to slow down a bit. This is also where the gf100 would pull ahead because of it's quad triangle setup. If you were to run 30" and pile on the 8xAA or 32xAA, the 295 would choke, and the GF100 could very well be twice as fast. This wouldn't say the same for gameplay at the more popular resolutions.

[Sam_oslo]

THEY AREN'T REAL RESULTS FROM ACTUAL TESTS. Hence fake. You can prove it yourself with a little math. Wait for some real info. I'm sure Fermi will be very fast, it is the price/power/heat/stock levels issues that determine if it is a good product or not.

You see in this stage we don't have real benchmarks, and this guy is claiming that the info is provided by nVidia based on some calculations/predictions that 480 GTX will perform 1.5 times better than GTX 295. In case this is the most interesting data in this stage.

This may be fake too, I don't know, but I don't don't get why so many are afraid of discussing the possibilities and meaning av this. is it that good?.

[annihilat0r]

You see in this stage we don't have real benchmarks, and this guy is claiming that the info is provided by nVidia based on some calculations/predictions that 480 GTX will perform 1.5 times better than GTX 295. In case this is the most interesting data in this stage.

This may be fake too, I don't know, but I don't don't get why so many are afraid of discussing the possibilities and meaning av this. is it that good?.

Aren't you getting it? That chart is calculated by multiplying the GTX 295 scores with an amount Nvidia told some time. They are not actual benchmarks. They don't tell anything more than that Nvidia once upon a time allegedly told someone something about GTX 480 performance.

[eric66]

ok some serious info 470 is faster like 25 percent from gtx 285 and gtx 480 is close to 5970 in both performance and power usage

[Teemax]

You see in this stage we don't have real benchmarks, and this guy is claiming that the info is provided by nVidia based on some calculations/predictions that 480 GTX will perform 1.5 times better than GTX 295. In case this is the most interesting data in this stage.

This may be fake too, I don't know, but I don't don't get why so many are afraid of discussing the possibilities and meaning av this. is it that good?.

OK.

The guy heard a "claim" from NVIDIA without any logical explanation whatsoever for the miraculous performance, and he went ahead and fabricated charts to ... back up his claims.

This is screaming fake for me.


Yet, you want to "discuss" it as facts. Interesting.

[xdan]

GTX 480 will be 40-50% faster than 5870. And would you know vhy...
Because Nvidia drivers for DX11 would have more performance in DX11&DX10 games...
You all know that DX11 for 5770(an example) lowered the performance..
I mean 5770 shoud have about same performance( in DX 10 games) with 4890(same specifications) , but it don't have it.
5830>=4890.
So GTX 480 will beat 5870 with the "power of drivers to"..

[Sadasius]

I am thinking this thing is going to be one leaky boat of hot transistors. There are obviously problems as it would not have taken this long to put the product out. I am awaiting patiently to see this thing finally come out of the proverbial closet to face the challenges of what customers will put it through. I am also anxious to see what this can do when watercooled as compared to air cooled because I think there is going to be a thermal limit on things here for sure. It's a big chip and it is going to be hot. There are no two ways around that unless you lower clocks significantly. Hence why I am waiting patiently as I want to see a F/C waterblock on this and see what happens when the thermal barrier is knocked down and a couple voltage tweaks added. As much as I do not like Nvidia's business practice of BS I have still sat by and waited and did not pick up the ATI counter part. If Fermi fails then it fails and I will pick myself up a nice Cypress package.

[jaredpace]

see what happens when the thermal barrier is knocked down and a couple voltage tweaks added.

Looking forward to seeing that as well. Won't be me, but I'm sure someone on this forum will do it. I bet it will be a screaming beast at that point.

[jaredpace]

Holy cow, have you guys seen this? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VpZXhR1ibj8

It is the Hitler video and his reaction is to the bad news about Fermi. HAHA, man it is classic.

[Etihtsarom]

Hahaha I thought that video was used once before on another product...Man that kills me...

[Olivon]

Holy cow, have you guys seen this? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VpZXhR1ibj8

It is the Hitler video and his reaction is to the bad news about Fermi. HAHA, man it is classic.

Thanks jaredpace

[Roger_D25]

Indeed thanks very much Jaredpace, I just laughed my butt off (and given how dissapointing things have been regarding this new Nvidia card I needed a good laugh)!

[Sadasius]

Holy cow, have you guys seen this? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VpZXhR1ibj8

It is the Hitler video and his reaction is to the bad news about Fermi. HAHA, man it is classic.

That was damn funny as hell!

[96redformula]

That was damn funny as hell!

I swear that video with different captions never gets old

[zalbard]

I swear that video with different captions never gets old

Agreed! I especially liked the part about JHH and wooden screws!