NVIDIA GF100 & Friends speculation

[Lonbjerg]

Does it ever really end?

Usually we get a respite between product cycles, but it seems not this time

 

[Picao84]

It seems the first iteration of GF104 will really have 336 CUDA Cores, with clocks a little higher than GTX465, if the following image is not shoped. Performance is said to be around GTX465 levels, with good overclocking potential. Power consumption is also said to be about 150W, which is IMO good (not excellent, though) considering that GTX465 consumers around 215W.

 

[Kaotik]

It seems the first iteration of GF104 will really have 336 CUDA Cores, with clocks a little higher than GTX465, if the following image is not shoped. Performance is said to be around GTX465 levels, with good overclocking potential. Power consumption is also said to be about 150W, which is IMO good (not excellent, though) considering that GTX465 consumers around 215W.

There has to be some sort of mistake there - sure, they could cut the size of multiprocessor to 16 from 32 "cuda cores", but 21 units? That just doesn't make sense at all.
Or then it won't be a full chip, but 22 "cores" sounds strange, too, and 24 sounds a little bit too high

 

[TKK]

There has to be some sort of mistake there - sure, they could cut the size of multiprocessor to 16 from 32 "cuda cores", but 21 units? That just doesn't make sense at all.
Or then it won't be a full chip, but 22 "cores" sounds strange, too, and 24 sounds a little bit too high

What about 48 cores per ShaderModule instead of 32?

2 GPCs, with 4 SMs each for a total of 8, of which one is disabled for yield reasons (at least on the SKU shown in the screenshot).

 

[Picao84]

There has to be some sort of mistake there - sure, they could cut the size of multiprocessor to 16 from 32 "cuda cores", but 21 units? That just doesn't make sense at all.
Or then it won't be a full chip, but 22 "cores" sounds strange, too, and 24 sounds a little bit too high

Thats why i said first itineration. GF104 is supposed to be made of 384 "cuda cores", with the higher variant launching a bit later with a 256 bit memory bus and 1GB RAM.

 

[Kaotik]

Thats why i said first itineration. GF104 is supposed to be made of 384 "cuda cores", with the higher variant launching a bit later with a 256 bit memory bus and 1GB RAM.

edit: just realized I calculated things wrong
But ye, that's a possibility, even though it sounds a bit high for middlerange variant

 

[Picao84]

edit: just realized I calculated things wrong
But ye, that's a possibility, even though it sounds a bit high for middlerange variant

Thats because GF104 probably is not intended to be a middlerange variant? GeForce 8800GT ring a bell? It seems like its GF106 job to go against 5770...
GF104 seems more and more like Fermi done right, by the day.. Probably too little, though, with Southern Islands around the corner..

 

[xDxD]

http://www.hardware-infos.com/news.php?news=3587

 

[Kaotik]

Thats because GF104 probably is not intended to be a middlerange variant? GeForce 8800GT ring a bell? It seems like its GF106 job to go against 5770...
GF104 seems more and more like Fermi done right, by the day.. Probably too little, though, with Southern Islands around the corner..

But it's not enough to compete in high(est) end either, so the "fermi done right" doesn't really fit either

 

[Picao84]

But it's not enough to compete in high(est) end either, so the "fermi done right" doesn't really fit either

What I mean with "Fermi done right" is in relation to the better perf/watt. If full GF104 hits GTX470 levels, with lower TDP and temps, that is Fermi done right in my book, as it can be the architecture revision for GF100 follower

 

[Picao84]

http://www.hardware-infos.com/news.php?news=3587

Am I reading the google translation right?

GTX 485 to expected to be left in the autumn in the market.

If it is coming only in September/October timeframe, meh.

 

[KimB]

That's kind of more what I was expecting. Even if the performance hasn't changed that much, though, if the power consumption has dropped significantly, I think it could be a much better buy for many.

 

[Picao84]

That's kind of more what I was expecting. Even if the performance hasn't changed that much, though, if the power consumption has dropped significantly, I think it could be a much better buy for many.

Did anyone do some kind of perf/shader analysis? How much more performance could 32 "cuda cores", negligencing the 20Mhz increase, give?

32 "cuda cores" are around 6% of 480. With the 20 Mhz increase, probably we will look at around 5-10% more performance? Is it really worth it, if temps and TDP is same?

 

[Alexko]

Did anyone do some kind of perf/shader analysis? How much more performance could 32 "cuda cores", negligencing the 20Mhz increase, give?

32 "cuda cores" are around 6% of 480. With the 20 Mhz increase, probably we will look at around 5-10% more performance? Is it really worth it, if temps and TDP is same?

According to that link, there's no increase in memory bandwidth. So (512/480) × (1440/1401) = 1,096, or +9.6%. That would be the theoretical maximum, possibly limited by the memory bandwidth. In practice, I'd expect about +5~6% FPS. In other words, nothing you'd really notice in actual gameplay.

 

[ninelven]

Well, I'd say bandwidth is the least of their problems...

 

[chavvdarrr]

There has to be some sort of mistake there - sure, they could cut the size of multiprocessor to 16 from 32 "cuda cores", but 21 units? That just doesn't make sense at all.
Or then it won't be a full chip, but 22 "cores" sounds strange, too, and 24 sounds a little bit too high

You still believe *16 is more real than *48 ?

 

[Kaotik]

You still believe *16 is more real than *48 ?

I never thought that, I just didn't think about 48 at all before

 

[Arty]

http://www.hardware-infos.com/news.php?news=3587

$5 says this is KonKorT.

 

[TKK]

Rumour has it that the GTX 460 is crippled and there will be a GF104-based GTX 468 with full 384 cuda cores, 64 TMUs, and (presumably) 32 ROPs/256-bit/1GB.
http://translate.google.com/transla...010/0611/A20100611668221.shtml&sl=zh-CN&tl=en
www.enet.com.cn

Performance should obviously end up above GTX 465 level (higher clocks, more cores & TMUs) and close to or even on par with GTX 470.

 

[Alexko]

Damien asked a few questions to ATI and NVIDIA's partners: http://www.behardware.com/news/lire/15-06-2010/

With respect to the Radeons, more than 8 months after launch, availability is still problematic.[...] On the other hand and in contrast to what the rumour was telling us, the GeForce GTX 400s are widely available according to the various partners we talked to in Taipei. Sales are however disappointing with partners highlighting the high energy consumption and noise levels, as well as the price/performance ratio as being the major factors keeping customers away.