Nv31M...

[Randell]

Actually, I think they're named after muscle cars, though thoroughbred puts a kink in that theory.

Actually they started with muscle cars but ran into IP issues (on internal codenames, honestly you Yanks are too precious sometimes) so had to convert them to horses. Or so the urban/net myth goes

 

[Ichneumon]

Nv31 better be Dx9... the M10 mobile part from ATI is going to be getting ready about the time Nv31 is finally seeing the light of day, and I expect M10 to be a Dx9 part at least partially. (moreso than the Dx8.1 M9)

 

[Reverend]

Problem is when one or two participants are the amongst the most vocal, with the majority of their posts appearing as no more than acts of stupidity or blind fanatism. It drags this previously-respectable forum down the drain.

Sounds to me like you're suggesting that these vocal participants should not be given much leeway and their voices hushed when they spout their garbage. I take that to be a call to simply have the thread locked, deleted or noise filtered. I'd kill the poll, personally.

John's been doing a much better job of late, that's all I have to say.

 

[Reverend]

Way off topic, but:

Everyone here can be regarded as a moderator, in order to make this forum a place for reasonable discussion (i.e. everyone can voice their opinion if they think someone is being stupid!).

Reverend, are you sure you really mean this?

Quite a few threads have gone to hell because someone just couldn't stand the absurd ignorance anymore had reached the point where they had to say it out loud. I can understand the urge/need to try to stop stupid remarks, but it almost always end in a heated fight, where John R has to lock the thread.

That Ignored button would be way cool. Dave?

An "Ignore This Poster" would be something I'd use (and prefer compared to what I stated) here but I don't think phpBB has that unfortunately.

It is hard sometimes to ignore someone when a person (especially one who represents a website) is personally attacked.

 

[Basic]

Joe:
Since noone has translated the japanese(?) we can't say for sure say what that is. But in the other thread, someone babelfished it to a collection of rumours.

But I can give my guess, just looking at the image.
X-axis is time (no suprise)
Y-axis is transistor count. Notice that all chips are perfectly ordered for transistor count, including those who look out of place wrt DX level (XP4/NV31/NV350(/XPR?)).
The color coding is DX level, and the DX* scale on the left side is typical gate count for that level.

Parhelia and P10 is kind of halfway DX8/9 (at least P10, but Parhelias displacement mapping might be enough for a "somewhat DX9" title) so they've got a shaded color.

I think this is the interpretation that makes most sense.

 

[Joe DeFuria]

Basic...

Nice analysis.

 

[KimB]

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.

Dave, I don't have a problem with people having a different opinion.

I have a problem with people coming to a conclusion/opinion based on no evidence other than they don't like a company.

This is what I see happening here. While the poll is slightly shifting towards what the evidence suggests (NV31=DX9), there's still a large number of people coming to a conclusion based on no evidence other than, "I think nVidia's crappy/evil/bad/the devil (take your pick)."

The only two logical options here are that either the NV31 is a DX9 part, or it doesn't exist. If you don't like nVidia, then your logical choice is that the NV31 doesn't exist. I'm fine with that.

Instead, I see many people going for an answer that is either based on a blinding bias, or a lack of knowledge.

 

[RussSchultz]

Exactly why would the NV31 not existing be a logical choice (over it being DX8).

Both of those options seem pulled from nowhere (except that the little chart has the NV31 in the 'dx8 band' (ignoring the DX9 coloring))

 

[KimB]

Simply because I haven't yet seen official documentation related to the NV31.

And note that there was never an NV21 (or any low-cost NV2x part...).

 

[Randell]

And note that there was never an NV21 (or any low-cost NV2x part...).

but the first with a low cost DX9 part will rack up the OEM orders and now nVidia must surely recognise the mistake in not moving quickly to a sub $100 DX8 part. That could be enough reason to beleive its existance.

 

[KimB]

but the first with a low cost DX9 part will rack up the OEM orders and now nVidia must surely recognise the mistake in not moving quickly to a sub $100 DX8 part. That could be enough reason to beleive its existance.

I agree...especially considering that their GeForce2 MX was, quite possibly, their most-praised product in existence. I know I was expecting a full-DX8 low-cost part by this past Spring, which didn't happen (we got the crappy NV17 instead...).

For many reasons, I feel that releasing a low-cost DX9 part ASAP is just about the best thing nVidia can do.

Hopefully nVidia did learn something from the GF4 MX...not to do something like that ever again!

 

[Randell]

which may be the reliance on 0.13, not for the high end, but to get to a cheaper (smaller size) chip quickly to acheive this, more a long-term gameplan strategy.

 

[Tahir2]

Hopefully nVidia did learn something from the GF4 MX...not to do something like that ever again!

I do not class it as a mistake financially. There are so many systems that boast GF4MX 64MB and it sounds good.. is cheap to sell to the masses and it does play some games very well.

Sound business move if you ask me.
Shrewd business move if you ask others.

 

[KimB]

While I can't disprove your statement, Misae, it seems to me that perhaps nVidia feels that they are now losing market share because other companies are releasing low-cost DX8 parts when they don't have one (the closest to this would be the older GF3 Ti 200). I'm also pretty sure that nVidia upset a number of developers by not producing a low-cost DX8 part.

 

[martrox]

And it's important to have a low cost DX9 solution now because.......???? Guys, we are just now seeing DX8 compliant software. By the time DX9 compliant software is availible in quanity......you will be able to get DX9 compliant cards for under $100.00. High end DX9 cards I understand, and within 6 months you will see midrange DX9 compliant cards, but low end? Get real! In fact, nVidia needs to get some low end DX8 compliant cards out......ATI has em! As far as Nv31 goes....who cares? Lets see NV30, then we can begin to make some educated guesses about NV31.

 

[Randell]

who said we are talking now? I'm talking Spring 2003.

 

[martrox]

And do you think there will be any DX9 software availible by, oh, spring? NOT! Unless you enjoy playing demo's. Spring is 6 months away, and just how many months did it take from the introduction of DX8 cards till you could get low end DX8 cards? A little bit more than 6 months. Don't get me wrong, I'm sure you will see DX9 compliant cards that cost much less than $400.00...... but you won't see them for $100.00 till the DX10 cards are availible.... In fact, there is some question wether you will even be able to buy an nVidia DX9 compliant card BEFORE next spring!

 

[KimB]

No, Matrox, there won't be DX9 software available en masse until DX9 hardware is the lowest-comon denominator.

I'm not expecting true DX9 software to be available by this fall. We still haven't moved to true DX8 software (Not even games like UT2k3 and DOOM3 are going to be completely DX8). I personally feel that the main reason that even the move to DX8 hardware as a minspec isn't visible in the near future is that we haven't had low-end DX8 hardware until very recently...and the Radeon 9000 only barely counts as low-end...

The move to DX9 hardware in the low-end should accelerate the development of DX9 games more quickly. That's why I want it. I don't plan on buying one...I just hope lots of 'em end up in OEM machines.

And btw, as far as this quote is concerned:

but you won't see them for $100.00 till the DX10 cards are availible....

The GeForce2 MX was available a full year before the DX8 cards came out...

 

[Nagorak]

If you find one side more vocal and annoying, it probably just means you're sitting on the other side of the fence. Which is why I find the Nvidiots more annoying, despite the fact the fanATics are just as ridiculous.

Can you please explain the last part "which is why i find the.."
And since you said that, wouldn't that by your own logic make you a ATi f... ?

Didn't think it really requires more explaining. I definitely prefer ATi hardware, however, not to the extreme that I'd consider myself a fanATIc. I'm perfectly willing to buy Nvidia cards and admit they make good products, however when 2 products offer the same performance at the same price point I'll usually go ATi (due primarily to image quality concerns, which admitedly may no longer be an issue).

No one is completely unbiased. But just because you favor one company a little bit, doesn't necessarily make you a fanATIc (or an Nvidiot).

 

[martrox]

Chalnoth, yes but how long had DX7 been out, huh? The bottom line here is this whole thread is pretty stupid. Why even worry about an entry level DX9 card from anyone ATM. Let nVidia come out with a DX8 entry level card......