Nvidia went SLI because they can't compete?
- Thread starter Redeemer
- Start date
- Status
Yeah and GeForce 10850 wont have any competition for 12 months 
Can't compete with ATi? I wouldn't agree. Rx800XT PE were more vaporware than available in shops,while 6800 Ultras were selling like nuts (comparing with 6800 Ultra Extreme would be even better if we want a fair match).
And these 6800 Ultra (Not U Extreme) can compete with any ATi card right now right here.
Can't compete with ATi? I wouldn't agree. Rx800XT PE were more vaporware than available in shops,while 6800 Ultras were selling like nuts (comparing with 6800 Ultra Extreme would be even better if we want a fair match).
And these 6800 Ultra (Not U Extreme) can compete with any ATi card right now right here.
The r520 will most likely go against a higher clocked 6800 with some core changes . I don't see a r520 as more than a sm3.0 r420 that is mabye clocked higher or has more pipelines than the r420 as its on 90nm
They simply don't need a new part as they have a sm3.0 part on the market .
As for sli yes i think its stupid but some people like it and if its there for them to choose than that is good .
They simply don't need a new part as they have a sm3.0 part on the market .
As for sli yes i think its stupid but some people like it and if its there for them to choose than that is good .
Jen-Hsun told the financial analysts that SLI was a big growth driver in their gpu business, and that sales had exceeded their own expectations. So apparently a goodly number of folks don't share your own views on ridiculous.
I think the X850 is the baddest of the bad in single-card solutions, but not by very much and not in all situations. And, really, NV did nothing short of stupendous to catch ATI at the top end this generation --they essentially quadrupled their performance from the last generation. I seriously believe that if ATI insiders were being frank (on or off the record) they would admit that GF6 is a more worthy competitor than they were expecting prior to its release. Orton implied as much in his interview with Dave, tho in typical geek-speak, opining on die-size. I think ATI caught a hint of this somewhere along the line, and that explains why they were so intent on going *second* in the Release derby.
As for R520, I hope it is a monster. . .but the jury is still out
(no, that's not right. . the jury hasn't even heard the case yet!), and who knows on time-line? Wavey, somewhere's around here, was channelling the spirit world recently and opined that NV was further along on next gen release than ATI.
I think the X850 is the baddest of the bad in single-card solutions, but not by very much and not in all situations. And, really, NV did nothing short of stupendous to catch ATI at the top end this generation --they essentially quadrupled their performance from the last generation. I seriously believe that if ATI insiders were being frank (on or off the record) they would admit that GF6 is a more worthy competitor than they were expecting prior to its release. Orton implied as much in his interview with Dave, tho in typical geek-speak, opining on die-size. I think ATI caught a hint of this somewhere along the line, and that explains why they were so intent on going *second* in the Release derby.
As for R520, I hope it is a monster. . .but the jury is still out
(no, that's not right. . the jury hasn't even heard the case yet!), and who knows on time-line? Wavey, somewhere's around here, was channelling the spirit world recently and opined that NV was further along on next gen release than ATI.
RejZoR said:Yeah and GeForce 10850 wont have any competition for 12 months
Can't compete with ATi? I wouldn't agree. Rx800XT PE were more vaporware than available in shops,while 6800 Ultras were selling like nuts.
Total sales of the x800XT PE and 6800 ultra are very likely to be comparable. Theyre pretty much tied in steams survey:
http://www.steampowered.com/status/survey.html
The 6800 ultra EE sold in the 100s I believe worldwide
No, nvidia went SLI because it's a marketing gimmick, and because they can. I personally think it's a horrible waste of money and way too much overkill, but there will always be a set of people who are more than willing to buy it. They didn't do it because their cards were unable to compete; that would be more of a valid concern if this was the FX card era.
As long as the product sells, the company will be likely manufacturing it. ATI also announced a similar solution called multi-renderer or sth, this is because they saw SLI is selling really good, and nobody wants left behind in the market.
Building a SLI system isn't as easy as pluging 2 cards in the modo and be done with it, you'll need to have a very smart driver handling the task assigning, etc. nVIDIA said they began research on SLI right after the purchase of 3DFX, I can see the SLI project costed a lot of R&D resources.
Why dual/multiple cpus configuration appeared much earlier than dual/multiple cores cpu in the workstation/server market? I think it's much easier to produce 2 functioning single core cpus than 1 functioning dual cores cpu, aggreed? The same logic still applies to GPU company.
Personally, I dont like the appearence of SLI, it's too unelegant. You've got only 1 or 2 PCIE slots left after setting up a SLI and the noise and heat are also annoying problems. But hey, there're freaks(no offense here ) who're willing to pay the bill, why not collect some easy coins from them?
Building a SLI system isn't as easy as pluging 2 cards in the modo and be done with it, you'll need to have a very smart driver handling the task assigning, etc. nVIDIA said they began research on SLI right after the purchase of 3DFX, I can see the SLI project costed a lot of R&D resources.
Why dual/multiple cpus configuration appeared much earlier than dual/multiple cores cpu in the workstation/server market? I think it's much easier to produce 2 functioning single core cpus than 1 functioning dual cores cpu, aggreed? The same logic still applies to GPU company.
Personally, I dont like the appearence of SLI, it's too unelegant. You've got only 1 or 2 PCIE slots left after setting up a SLI and the noise and heat are also annoying problems. But hey, there're freaks(no offense here
) who're willing to pay the bill, why not collect some easy coins from them? Don't forget how important it is to have that top benchmark score. It's not about selling that product, but the whole range of associated products. Overclocking is deemed to be trickery, but running two cards in parallel can help you score the outlandish frame rates that are necessary to sell your product.
This can be done completely transparently. Readers will know that they are seeing the score of two cards working in unison, but they will still make that important mental connection with the product, perhaps thinking "I'll get one for now and maybe add another in the future." By the time some are looking to couple up their single board with a second, a new generation may be out and the cycle (probably) begins anew.
The Scalable Link Interface is certainly interesting and I am sure it will find a permanent home in workstations with Gelato and others to help designers. Game acceleration should be good, but you always end up getting that extra performance above the current generation single board configurations without the features of the next generation.
It worries me to think that this modular design may impact game development. The last thing we need to see on a box is a dual GPU requirement before that is considered standard. The point I am trying to get across is that SLI somewhat artificially inflates the performance barometer. Then again, we had the same thing with Voodoo 2 and then the Geforce came out of left field and absolutely smashed it to pieces.
This can be done completely transparently. Readers will know that they are seeing the score of two cards working in unison, but they will still make that important mental connection with the product, perhaps thinking "I'll get one for now and maybe add another in the future." By the time some are looking to couple up their single board with a second, a new generation may be out and the cycle (probably) begins anew.
The Scalable Link Interface is certainly interesting and I am sure it will find a permanent home in workstations with Gelato and others to help designers. Game acceleration should be good, but you always end up getting that extra performance above the current generation single board configurations without the features of the next generation.
It worries me to think that this modular design may impact game development. The last thing we need to see on a box is a dual GPU requirement before that is considered standard. The point I am trying to get across is that SLI somewhat artificially inflates the performance barometer. Then again, we had the same thing with Voodoo 2 and then the Geforce came out of left field and absolutely smashed it to pieces.
Not quite. I doubt they would claim something was a growth driver if it resulted in a trivial amount of revenue. Your claim that a 5 unit sell would make it into a CC as a growth driver claim is ridiculous.
SLI exists because some people want it, just like some people want watercooling, or SMP. It's sexy. It's a concept car that sells your sedanl. And frankly, as other's said, Nvidia deserves praise for their GF6 series and for offering users another choice. The ATI f*nb*ys still replaying battles from the FX days need to open their eyes.
SLI exists because some people want it, just like some people want watercooling, or SMP. It's sexy. It's a concept car that sells your sedanl. And frankly, as other's said, Nvidia deserves praise for their GF6 series and for offering users another choice. The ATI f*nb*ys still replaying battles from the FX days need to open their eyes.
350,000 SLI nForce chipsets for the first revision alone doesn't sound like a "horrible waste of money" to me.
Redeemer, what prompted your specious assertion that nV "can't compete with ATI single slot solutions?" Benchmarks of the entire GF6 series stand at odds with your sentiment.
Redeemer, what prompted your specious assertion that nV "can't compete with ATI single slot solutions?" Benchmarks of the entire GF6 series stand at odds with your sentiment.
DemoCoder said:
Not quite. The poster does bring up a valid argument, all we've seen from nvidia is the 6800/GT/Ultra. There were no refreshes like with ATI's X850 (along with the 512 MB varient) and X800 XL; and lets just face it, ATI's offering is faster in everything but Doom 3 (and cheaper in some cases). Then there's the R520 which nvidia doesn't seem to have anything to compete against, unless they're keeping it a very good secret. Nvidia basically is surviving off of SLi and their NF4 chipset for the time being through what they do best, marketing.
I'm sure they are developing a high level next gen card, question is when will we see it?
ATI's recent refreshes hardly offered any performance improvement to write home about, they have zero architecture differences, and are mostly to decrease costs, frankly, because they needed something to line up against Nvidia's 6800GT, which was in the driver's seat. I mean, is the X850 and X850 w/512mb really worthwhile upgrades? ATI slaps a leafblower on their cards and gets a free pass, NVidia introduces SLI and gets criticized. When Nvidia had the leafblower, it was a desparate hack, but leafblower + driver overclock? That's elegance.
I'd say that shipping marginal freshes and extra ram is just as fishy as "SLI", something to offer the market because you don't have anything new. The X850 w/512mb reminds of the GF3 days when Nvidia shipped some cards with more RAM and a slight clock bump during Christmas when everyone was expecting the GF4. (or was it the GF2->Gf3 transistion?)
The fact is, both ATI and NVidia are milking their previous architectural generations. In fact, I'd say ATI has milked more, since the R420 and R300 have no importance differences, and the leap from GF4->GF5->GF6 was much more substantial.
I think it is also specious to suggest that Nvidia has no vaporware rumor product to compete with an ATI vaporware rumor product. Do you know the specs of the R520? The release date? Do you know the timelines of the NV5x or NV6x?
The lack of information is not proof of nonexistence.
I'd say that shipping marginal freshes and extra ram is just as fishy as "SLI", something to offer the market because you don't have anything new. The X850 w/512mb reminds of the GF3 days when Nvidia shipped some cards with more RAM and a slight clock bump during Christmas when everyone was expecting the GF4. (or was it the GF2->Gf3 transistion?)
The fact is, both ATI and NVidia are milking their previous architectural generations. In fact, I'd say ATI has milked more, since the R420 and R300 have no importance differences, and the leap from GF4->GF5->GF6 was much more substantial.
I think it is also specious to suggest that Nvidia has no vaporware rumor product to compete with an ATI vaporware rumor product. Do you know the specs of the R520? The release date? Do you know the timelines of the NV5x or NV6x?
The lack of information is not proof of nonexistence.
The only time Nvidia was critized on the leafblower was with their 5800U because it was damn loud; the cooler on the X850 isn't anywhere near as loud. While the performance difference from the X800 to the X850 is nothing to write home about it certainly is worth it for the cooling (especially since the prices are the same) as the X800 did run hot and this new solution also exhausts the heat out of the computer. This allows for better overclocking as well, since at stock it's basically just as good as having an ICEQ.
As far as the memory, ATI said they were going to introduce 512MB cards in the "save the nanosecond" PPT that was leaked months ago, so it comes as no surprise. Graphics companies have doubled the memory just about every two generations anyways.
SLi would be good if it weren't for the fact that a single next gen card will equal or best a pair of 6800Us and have more features for an overall less cost while working with all games.
- Status
Similar threads
