AMD: R8xx Speculation

Discussion in 'Architecture and Products' started by Shtal, Jul 19, 2008.

?

How soon will Nvidia respond with GT300 to upcoming ATI-RV870 lineup GPUs

Poll closed Oct 14, 2009.
  1. Within 1 or 2 weeks

    1 vote(s)
    0.6%
  2. Within a month

    5 vote(s)
    3.2%
  3. Within couple months

    28 vote(s)
    18.1%
  4. Very late this year

    52 vote(s)
    33.5%
  5. Not until next year

    69 vote(s)
    44.5%
  1. Pete

    Pete Moderate Nuisance
    Moderator Legend Veteran

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2002
    Messages:
    5,152
    Likes Received:
    681
    Not to feed too much into this sideshow that I've only superficially followed, but did any part of that response refute the accusation/allegation in question?

    We need hardware sample leaks now, because the waiting is forcing the journo corps to resort to devouring themselves. ;)
     
  2. digitalwanderer

    digitalwanderer Dangerously Mirthful
    Legend

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2002
    Messages:
    17,656
    Likes Received:
    2,145
    Location:
    Winfield, IN USA
    Ah, let the silly season commence! :cool:
     
  3. rjc

    rjc
    Regular

    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2008
    Messages:
    270
    Likes Received:
    0
    except for the conium error the discussion has been restricted to trees so maybe an "disproportionate dendrological dialogue" might be a better way of putting it.

    Looking at the codes, there are quite a few and no obvious order. The only possible order i have left is that the trees are present in the location that the chip of the same name is being developed in. ie Tsuga in Canada or Taiwan based, Redwoods in California, Juniper in Texas say. Cypress and Cedar are hard to pin down to a particular location though as they grow everywhere.

    After puzzling for awhile, not being able to see reason at all, i saw this job ad(sadly removed yesterday) for a new graphics product planner for AMD.

    ....so it appears the guy who liked trees got the axe.
     
  4. Ailuros

    Ailuros Epsilon plus three
    Legend Subscriber

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2002
    Messages:
    9,445
    Likes Received:
    181
    Location:
    Chania
    ...tree huggers unite! :twisted:
     
  5. rjc

    rjc
    Regular

    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2008
    Messages:
    270
    Likes Received:
    0
    I don't think this is the right way to look at it, not now anyway.

    At the time the sweet spot strategy was a fig leaf to cover that ATI no longer had the dollars, to develop a really large gpu. It caused problems at first as it allowed their competitor free reign and quite good profits from temporariy having no competition.

    Times change though, since then, like sand in the desert, the millions of customers shifted so that today the landscape looks completely different to the one of a few years ago. Now there is just not enough grains left to cover the cost of developing the really huge gpus.

    This would be quite bleak, if not for another development over the last year or two. The design process appears to have got much more automated such that can scale the different parts of their design up and down very rapidly to cover all parts of the market.

    Last year AMD produced 3 chips and a dual card within 3 months to overhaul their complete lineup. Similarly nvidia was pursuing the same course with 4 chips top to bottom: GT212->GT218. Nvidia had some issues with the top 2, some combination of lack of market, price/performance over existing offerings or technical difficulties(ie excessive leakage in their larger parts).

    Coming in a September AMD appears to be introducing 3 or 4 chips + dual card. From the notebook schedule it appears the smallest is delayed somewhat, most likely till TSMC can build out 40nm late this quarter sufficently to handle the orders.

    I havent got a good term for this rapid scaling but it appears to be the normal development strategy now.
     
  6. Ailuros

    Ailuros Epsilon plus three
    Legend Subscriber

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2002
    Messages:
    9,445
    Likes Received:
    181
    Location:
    Chania
    There's also the theory that large GT21x chips had been cancelled before they even reached tape out in order to divert those resources elsewhere.
     
  7. trinibwoy

    trinibwoy Meh
    Legend

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2004
    Messages:
    10,582
    Likes Received:
    625
    Location:
    New York
    Well that remains to be seen. It would only make sense if Nvidia were working on a DX11 performance part too.
     
  8. Vincent

    Newcomer

    Joined:
    May 28, 2007
    Messages:
    235
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    London

    40nm GT200 + GDDR5 Support :grin:
     
  9. Jawed

    Legend

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2004
    Messages:
    10,875
    Likes Received:
    767
    Location:
    London
    No, the strategy was in place before R600 arrived, hence RV670 was small and the rumours of the X2 version were part and parcel of the expectation of its arrival. It was only ~190mm² (perhaps <180mm² if you allow 0.5mm of packaging margin). G92, its theoretical competitor, is 256mm² on the same process (240mm² if allowing for packaging margin?). You could say RV670 was actually competing with G94, not sure what die size that ended-up at on 55nm.

    Back in 2004 R420 was 281mm², half GT200 size in 2008. No wonder the prices of the halo cards have gone up.

    Huge GPUs also predicate a significant testing period on a process if you want to be assured of a successful launch - whoops R520 and hence NVidia's process reticence all these years.

    So if you want to adopt a new process rapidly with a huge GPU that launches first then the effort naturally hinders the rest of the chips. Just cutting out the 400mm²+ chip saves a lot of engineering time and cost.

    R5xx GPUs were supposed to be a top-to-bottom launch over ~5-6 months (~May-October). That was 3 GPUs.

    AMD simply not doing a 400mm²+ GPU leaves resources for the other parts. In theory the ring bus was part of making it easier to scale a GPU, since it's not just the count of units that needs scaling, but the connectivity.

    (I can't help thinking that a ring bus might return... Larrabee has one.)

    GT200b took 3 revisions on a "mature" 55nm process.

    NVidia's cancelled G100, GT206 (though did that ever exist?), GT212 and GT214. I'm now wondering if NVidia has cancelled the original GT300 chip, because the conflicting tape-out rumours coupled with a chip of <<500mm² conflict with a chip that's just taped-out and is >500mm². Maybe the GT300 that gets launched is another re-think like G100->GT200?

    Jawed
     
  10. Kaotik

    Kaotik Drunk Member
    Legend

    Joined:
    Apr 16, 2003
    Messages:
    9,088
    Likes Received:
    2,955
    Location:
    Finland
    Wasn't "GT206" same as GT200b?
     
  11. Ailuros

    Ailuros Epsilon plus three
    Legend Subscriber

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2002
    Messages:
    9,445
    Likes Received:
    181
    Location:
    Chania
    There are 3 revisions yes, but it didn't take GT200b 3 revisions to get on shelves (just to avoid misinterpretations).

    http://www.pcgameshardware.com/aid,...16-with-55-nanometer-GT200b-reviewed/Reviews/

    GT206 appeared as a codename on that infamous Elsa roadmap as a 55nm chip; I don't think anyone knows for sure what it stood for. It could have very well been a revamped GT2x0 or what we saw as GT200b after all.

    G100 is a pretty weird story; I recall someone saying years ago that G80 will be followed by a "G200" and after that a D3D11 "G100", while others insist that it was a rather weird project that has been canned and was replaced by GT200.

    IHVs change codenames and roadmaps all the time, but I have severe doubts that any of them has the luxury to radically change architectural aspects for refresh X or generation Y when each of them lies years in development. Yes of course can their be "plan B's" for each chip but I severely doubt radical changes there and no I don't believe that either AMD or NVIDIA operate for the past few years on a constant "plan B string".

    Can you really make out in all honest what is what when it comes to ATI's own codenames of the past and today? What's the mythical "R700" that was to follow years ago the R600? RV770 or "RV870" no wait make that Evergreen to be completely correct after all, since I recall rumors of the ancient past wanting "R700" to be an X11 compliant architecture.

    If you want me as a layman and observer to put a different perspective on the whole X vs. Y affair: years ago there was a saying circulating that one should let ATI design GPUs and NVIDIA do the execution. NVIDIA can nowadays learn how to execute or more simple start to learn walking again; if anything ATI/AMD has cornered NV tremendously these days since RV670 since they're driving a damn strong and admirable execution timetable.

    The rest how and what changed on each sides' roadmap and meaningless codenames is such a worthless bubblegum to me that it isn't even worth noting. Call "GT300" or "G300" D12U and its the safest bet you can get at the moment; or as my personal joke went Little Red Riding Hood (LRRH) as a nice answer to both Evergreen and LRB :twisted:
     
  12. MfA

    MfA
    Legend

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2002
    Messages:
    7,140
    Likes Received:
    577
    GPUs are highly modular, it's not a flat cost to develop a larger chip but the scaling is highly sublinear. What would it have gained them to have competition in the high end but still be stuck with no competitive parts in the high volume markets for 6 months though?

    Their market share was pathetic, going from the trickle down release schedule to mainstream part first was quite obviously the correct choice. It diminished the profitability of 3D graphics hardware as a whole, but that wasn't really their main concern at the time.

    The shift really made life difficult for NVIDIA ... the sheer brilliance of the G80 made it possible for them to stick to the trickle down schedule for a while longer, but with the DX11 shift it's going to really hurt them if they try to do it again.
     
  13. LordEC911

    Regular

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2007
    Messages:
    795
    Likes Received:
    78
    Location:
    'Zona
    Any ideas on where to find those rumors?
    I never heard anything of the sort...
     
  14. w0mbat

    Newcomer

    Joined:
    Nov 18, 2006
    Messages:
    234
    Likes Received:
    5
  15. fehu

    Veteran Regular

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2006
    Messages:
    1,729
    Likes Received:
    712
    Location:
    Somewhere over the ocean
    I think that it was back when the upcoming DX10.1 was confused with DX11 by some
     
  16. trinibwoy

    trinibwoy Meh
    Legend

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2004
    Messages:
    10,582
    Likes Received:
    625
    Location:
    New York
    The relatively simpler/cheaper scheduler was part of their advantage over Nvidia though. If they start spending more transistors on hardware thread control and scheduling the flops/mm^2 gap might close.
     
  17. Silent_Buddha

    Legend

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2007
    Messages:
    17,044
    Likes Received:
    6,339
    Who knows, maybe they pulled off another miracle and managed to beef up the rest of the chip without increasing size similar to what they did with with the ALU's for Rv770.

    I seriously doubt it, but at this point I'm not putting anything past them.

    Regards,
    SB
     
  18. rpg.314

    Veteran

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2008
    Messages:
    4,298
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    /
    I am disappointed at the less scope for flop improvement because of this, but I hope they did something smart to make gpu's more programmable.
     
  19. LordEC911

    Regular

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2007
    Messages:
    795
    Likes Received:
    78
    Location:
    'Zona
  20. neliz

    neliz GIGABYTE Man
    Veteran

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2005
    Messages:
    4,904
    Likes Received:
    23
    Location:
    In the know
    Would you be disappointed if the chip grew to.. say G92 size, while G300 stayed GT200 size?
     
Loading...

Share This Page

  • About Us

    Beyond3D has been around for over a decade and prides itself on being the best place on the web for in-depth, technically-driven discussion and analysis of 3D graphics hardware. If you love pixels and transistors, you've come to the right place!

    Beyond3D is proudly published by GPU Tools Ltd.
Loading...