Hellbinder
Banned
Will this chip be based off of the actual nv30? or... is it just a nother naming scheme perpotrated by *the man* to rename a GF3/4 based chip. Similar to the *Cough* GF *4*-GO..... 
Nv31M...
- Thread starter Hellbinder
- Start date
The NV* labels are internal code names. Customers don't buy products labeled with "NV" labels, they buy things called "GeForce".
You seem fixated on nVidia naming practices, why isn't the Radeon 9000 named Radeon 8800 or 8900 or something? Where's the logic in ATI's naming scheme? If the first digit presented the DirectX version, no problem, but ATI's naming scheme seems to be confusing as well unless you read the fine print/specs on the box.
Can we drop this crap on these boards? Marketing isn't worth comparing.
You seem fixated on nVidia naming practices, why isn't the Radeon 9000 named Radeon 8800 or 8900 or something? Where's the logic in ATI's naming scheme? If the first digit presented the DirectX version, no problem, but ATI's naming scheme seems to be confusing as well unless you read the fine print/specs on the box.
Can we drop this crap on these boards? Marketing isn't worth comparing.
Hellbinder
Banned
Demo you are *Way* overreacting to my post.... Stop assuming the worst. I am not trying to compare this stuff to Nvidia/Ati anything. Just answer the question.
Can we keep *your* crap off these boards? All you do is attack people which is far worse.
Can we keep *your* crap off these boards? All you do is attack people which is far worse.
First of all, no one here can answer your question, since no one here knows or can divulge anything about these chips.
Secondly, as I told you, the NV codenames are irrelevent. NVidia could make a TNT-level PDA chip and call it the NV60. Consumers don't buy any products using these labels.
Third, what exactly is the point of your message? You are a known relentless ATI supporter/anti-NV poster. You play sly, but the cutesy tone in your post seems to belie an attempt to score points. If you really wanted to simply ask what NV core the NV31 will be derived from, you could have simply asked it, without trying to get in a jab at NVidia.
All I do is attack people ------ who are causing trouble and who are wrong.
Secondly, as I told you, the NV codenames are irrelevent. NVidia could make a TNT-level PDA chip and call it the NV60. Consumers don't buy any products using these labels.
Third, what exactly is the point of your message? You are a known relentless ATI supporter/anti-NV poster. You play sly, but the cutesy tone in your post seems to belie an attempt to score points. If you really wanted to simply ask what NV core the NV31 will be derived from, you could have simply asked it, without trying to get in a jab at NVidia.
All I do is attack people ------ who are causing trouble and who are wrong.
I just have to say that the poll results so far (3-2 in favor of marketting scheme) really show the bias of this board.
The fact remains that the NVxx naming scheme has always been accurate in describing how the graphics cards are programmed for:
NV1x = T&L, bump mapping, CEM
NV2x = DX8 programmability
NV3x = DX9 programmability
If you'll note, the "disappointments" of the past, such as the GeForce4 MX, showed their true position simply by looking at the NV17 internal code name.
Personally, I'm still in somewhat disbelief that nVidia could have a low-cost, low-power DX9 part out so early, but the code names have never lied in the past, why would they now?
The only question about these cards, assuming that the NV31/M is actually slated to come out "soon", will be performance. Specifically, how many pipelines? Four pixel pipes, two vertex pipes? Two pixel pipes, one vertex pipe? This is what is unknown. If nVidia is indeed currently working on NV31/M processors, then there really is no reason to doubt that they are not going to be low-power, low-cost DX9 parts.
If you don't believe that nVidia can have a low-cost, low-power DX9 part so soon, then believe that the NV31 doesn't exist. Don't believe that it's not actually a DX9 part.
The fact remains that the NVxx naming scheme has always been accurate in describing how the graphics cards are programmed for:
NV1x = T&L, bump mapping, CEM
NV2x = DX8 programmability
NV3x = DX9 programmability
If you'll note, the "disappointments" of the past, such as the GeForce4 MX, showed their true position simply by looking at the NV17 internal code name.
Personally, I'm still in somewhat disbelief that nVidia could have a low-cost, low-power DX9 part out so early, but the code names have never lied in the past, why would they now?
The only question about these cards, assuming that the NV31/M is actually slated to come out "soon", will be performance. Specifically, how many pipelines? Four pixel pipes, two vertex pipes? Two pixel pipes, one vertex pipe? This is what is unknown. If nVidia is indeed currently working on NV31/M processors, then there really is no reason to doubt that they are not going to be low-power, low-cost DX9 parts.
If you don't believe that nVidia can have a low-cost, low-power DX9 part so soon, then believe that the NV31 doesn't exist. Don't believe that it's not actually a DX9 part.
Chalnoth said:
Yes, because five votes is a shockingly large representation of the board.
Its reflects the bias of 3 people, but mainly reflects the lack of interest in the topic.
Chalnoth said:
And I'm sure those three people find your own sytle of rabid fanatisism just as grating. <shrug>
Hold on, the votes at 3 all - we must be neutral!
Hellbinder
Banned
Good grief.. can we forget all this Ati/Nvidia stuff?? i figured that at least someone would find my *perpetrated by the man* reference to an old joke/Saying funny...
Its a Simple question.. Can we leave all this Superfulous *crap* out of the conversation?
is the Nv31 a Dx 9 part or is it going to be a DX8 part.. thats the gist.. ok? Hello, as in your opinion.. Of course no one is going to break NDA..
i swear some of you guys go out of your way to make life difficult.. far more than my occasional rants about Nvidia Ethics.. (and no I am NOT talking about any outright falshood here)
ITS JUST A QUESTION.
Its a Simple question.. Can we leave all this Superfulous *crap* out of the conversation?
is the Nv31 a Dx 9 part or is it going to be a DX8 part.. thats the gist.. ok? Hello, as in your opinion.. Of course no one is going to break NDA..
i swear some of you guys go out of your way to make life difficult.. far more than my occasional rants about Nvidia Ethics.. (and no I am NOT talking about any outright falshood here)
ITS JUST A QUESTION.
Pretty stupid one though! However, if your poll's options and your first post explaining the reason for your poll had simply been (as you said it later) :
... then perhaps this thread would've generated more interesting discusssions. But when you start off with a poll showing sarcasm towards NVIDIA, it makes it pretty difficult to take this poll seriously, as the recent trend for this forum has been to simply degenerate into fanboys mud-slinging.
cellarboy said:ATI <------------------- Unbiased -------------------> Nvidia
Chalnoth, I think you're closer to the right hand side than the middle mate!
Yeah, that's right, I'm biased towards nVidia. It shouldn't matter where my preferences lie. I laid out the facts as they are: there is absolutely no evidence to support the NV31 being anything other than a low cost/low power DX9 part other than, "I doubt we'd have one this soon."
The only logical conclusions are that the NV31 is going to be a DX9 part, or it's not going to exist (at least, not by this coming Spring). To claim that the NV31 will not be a DX9 part is utterly baseless.
Sometimes I actually wonder whether people get the fact that coming to an all vendors forum will mean that there are people with a differing opinion to their own opinion.
