ELSA hints GT206 and GT212

[willardjuice]

Sorry to interject, but what's the rough eta for these cards?

 

[loekf]

In case anyone hasnt heard allready (well done nvidia, fantastic idea)

IMHO Nivia's marketing department should get some serious spanking. What on earth is wrong with these people ? Do they get a bonus for who can confuse their customers the most ?

In dutch we call this "ouwe wijn in nieuwe zakken" (selling wine in old bags).

 

[DegustatoR]

http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/news/925/1050925/nvidia-tapes-cpus

Maybe it's time to change the thread title?

 

[trinibwoy]

Heh, Charlie's articles are like a breath of fresh air.

 

[ShaidarHaran]

I was a bit worried that I would feel a fool having purchased a GTX 285 the other day, but if GT212 is not to be then I feel I have made a wise purchase.

 

[Ailuros]

Heh, Charlie's articles are like a breath of fresh air.

It wouldn't surprise me if he's british; after all they managed to kill entire generations with their bad teeth *ducks and runs*

 

[ShaidarHaran]

It wouldn't surprise me if he's british; after all they managed to kill entire generations with their bad teeth *ducks and runs*

He lives in Minneapolis. I saw him downtown last weekend. Was gonna heckle him but thought "meh, what's the point?"

 

[Rayne]

I was a bit worried that I would feel a fool having purchased a GTX 285 the other day, but if GT212 is not to be then I feel I have made a wise purchase.

It could be worse. You could have bought the GT212 in Summer, and the GT300 could have arrived in Xmas. I do not see the point of this GT212, when the GT300 is the card to get this year.

Btw, i got a 285 too, one of those with 180GB/s It should be enough till the GT300 arrives

 

[DegustatoR]

I do not see the point of this GT212, when the GT300 is the card to get this year.

GT212 is supposed to have around 300 mm^2 die size while GT300 will probably be close to 600 mm^2. That makes GT212 a good candidate for ~$200 price range while GT300 will cost quite a bit more.
The point is that those two chips aren't exactly in the same price range.

 

[AnarchX]

600mm² @ 40nm? That would give around 3 billion transistors.
I would think GT300 is a more efficient approach.

 

[Ailuros]

600mm² @ 40nm? That would give around 3 billion transistors.
I would think GT300 is a more efficient approach.

You're thinking wrong I guess. Albeit 600 sqmm sounds a tad too much, I wouldn't be in the least surprised if the result would lie roughly =/<GT200's die size. Point being if NV manages this time to convince everyone that the monolithic single high end chip approach does really make a difference; personally I wasn't particularly convinced with anything GT2x0 so far.

He lives in Minneapolis. I saw him downtown last weekend. Was gonna heckle him but thought "meh, what's the point?"

I know that Charlie is downright a nice guy; it was merely a harmless joke since I love to poke the brits once in a while LOL.

 

[CarstenS]

You're thinking wrong I guess. Albeit 600 sqmm sounds a tad too much, I wouldn't be in the least surprised if the result would lie roughly =/<GT200's die size.

Which is, according to my measurements with a sliding rule, roughly 600mm² in 65nm.

 

[Arun]

Which is, according to my measurements with a sliding rule, roughly 600mm² in 65nm.

Yup, it's 583mm².

 

[Ailuros]

Oh make up your mind with the darned thing; it cannot be 576, 583 or even 600 at the same time ROFL

 

[Arun]

Oh make up your mind with the darned thing; it cannot be 576, 583 or even 600 at the same time ROFL

576 is what you get is if you estimate it at 24x24, 600 is what you get if you estimate it with a ruler based on the package size, and and 583 is the official number from NVIDIA. Happy now? In fact to be even more precise, NVIDIA claims it's a 24.3x24 chip...

 

[CarstenS]

I wasn't awara that Nvidia was giving out official number on die-size.

http://home.arcor.de/quasat/Die-Shot/GT200-Width.jpg
http://home.arcor.de/quasat/Die-Shot/GT200-Height.jpg

 

[Jawed]

So from the discrepancy between NVidia's numbers and Carsten's measurements, it seems that there's 0.5mm of sealant/packaging on each of the width and height. Useful to bear in mind when future die measurements are performed...

Jawed

 

[Arun]

Indeed, that's interesting. I wonder how much of that is at the packaging level, and how much is at the wafer level (i.e. inter-chip spacing) - clearly the latter would matter much wrt cost than the former...

 

[DegustatoR]

600mm² @ 40nm? That would give around 3 billion transistors.
I would think GT300 is a more efficient approach.

What's number of transistors and die size has to do with efficiency?
And don't forget - GT300 is the real LRB competitor from NV so i wouldn't be very surprised if it'll have loads of programmable memory/cache on die - Larrabee style.

 

[compres]

OMG LOL@Charlies article.

The reason is pretty obvious, the TSMC 40nm process is leaky as hell, and the bigger the chip, the more transistors that leak. Top this off with a totally botched design that couldn't be shrunk from 65nm to 55nm sanely, so 40 was very iffy.