Fuad of The Inq, trying to explain NV40 ... AGAIN

I still think its a 4-pipesolution, but with bigger pipes:

Photo-DirtNPipesLargeb.jpg


Sorry I couldn't resist..
 
london-boy said:
So... Whats more important... The length or the width? (Of the pipe) :LOL:

(sorry couldnt resist)

I know there is a funny in here about how, "nVidia says size doesn't matter it's how you use it", but I'll be damned if I can figure out a way to work in their flexible pipeline strategy into the insult. :(
 
Uttar said:
NV40 is 16x1/32x0.
Unless NVIDIA never really taped-out anything, and they plan on making tons of money on pre-orders then changing their company name.

Uttar

The catch is that you never get more than 8 pixels per clock w/o any funky conditionals out of that thing IMHO. What exactly are you insisting on again? If you want to set the record straight for the public, then give them that piece of information, that will be alligned with what they'll see in real time.
 
DoS said:
cheez
will he make up his mind FFS ?
What about all the ppl here saying it's 16x1 definetely ? There was also some pretty strong speculation about abusing VS untis to go 16x1 by Uttar if i remember correctly...but then he said it's 16x1 for sure.

:? :?

Nvidia could very well be going around simply calling it 16x1 regardless, and that's what they have been telling everyone. If Nvidia say it often enough, maybe everyone will think that's what it is. They wouldn't be the first corporation to issue an edict to all their staff that "Product X" must *always* be described as a "statement Y" .

The did the same thing with NV3x. While it could technicaly do 8x1 in certain limited circumstances with loads of attached conditions, in the real world it was always used as 4x2.
 
DegustatoR said:
Uttar said:
NV40 is 16x1/32x0.
More like 4x(4x1)/4x(8x1) i think 8)

That should read 4*(8*0).

To add even more to the confusion how about:

4*(4*1/2*2)/(8*0)

Haven't we reached a dead end yet, with all that numbering BS so far?
 
I tell you what, if this is true, a year from now we are all going to be sitting around still talking about Nvidia cheating on games and benchmarks in order to boost their scores against a 12x1 R420.
 
Bouncing Zabaglione Bros. said:
I tell you what, if this is true, a year from now we are all going to be sitting around still talking about Nvidia cheating on games and benchmarks in order to boost their scores against a 12x1 R420.

And I tell you that in a year from now we will all hail Bitboys and ImgTech as our new lords and masters.
 
Bouncing Zabaglione Bros. said:
I tell you what, if this is true, a year from now we are all going to be sitting around still talking about Nvidia cheating on games and benchmarks in order to boost their scores against a 12x1 R420.

No, it's an 8 extreme pipeline R420...and now I'm wondering if that "extreme" bit might not mean they're going to be using their VS units as pipes too....and I think Baron was saying something about 4 VS units, so wouldn't that tie in nicely with the "12 pipeline" rumor? ;) (Although I thought the R420 was going to have 8 VS units, but I have no idea why I thought that.)
 
Damnit Dig, I suggested that privately to Uttar, MuFu, and PaulS weeks ago. The reaction was basically, "It's possible, sure, but it won't happen."
 
Ailuros, that's, errr, IMO, wrong :p
More like:
4*(4*1)+4*(4*0)

It doesn't have a 4*(2*2) mode; unless you're in 8x MSAA mode, of course - but according to that same idea, the R300 ix 8x1/4x2 too ;)
And yes, I agree this numbering Bs is getting boring.

Uttar
 
Back
Top