NV48 is NV40 refresh?
- Thread starter DSC
- Start date
Joe DeFuria
Legend
Robbitop said:
This is true, but there's all kinds of indications / rumors to that effect.
Thinking logically....why would nVidia tape out two extrememly similar chips (NV40 - NV45) from the same foundry at about the same time?
yeah 2 chips in the same foundry. But there is no indication for me to TSMC. The 2nd Chip realizes PCI-E.
A foundry change is very expensive and costs a lot of time. I do not believe that NV is going to do that again.
Last year there was an official comment on that very early. If NV48 would be manufactured by TSMC there would be a comment.
btw: the CEO of IBM said sth about the yields on NV40. He mentioned that the yields constantly improves. That was their first time manufacturing VPUs. There will be no reason for a change.
A foundry change is very expensive and costs a lot of time. I do not believe that NV is going to do that again.
Last year there was an official comment on that very early. If NV48 would be manufactured by TSMC there would be a comment.
btw: the CEO of IBM said sth about the yields on NV40. He mentioned that the yields constantly improves. That was their first time manufacturing VPUs. There will be no reason for a change.
Joe DeFuria
Legend
Robbitop said:
No, the 2nd chip uses AGP, just like the first one. It requires a bridge for the PCI-E interface.
BTW there is also comment about IBM having limited capacity for nVidia's chips...
but if NV40 = 45 and both are manufactured @IBM this would say sth about TSMC. There is no logical connection between.
Capacity: NV40 is high End. High End does not need much capacity because the market for high end is very very small. Its just for proving the performance of the whole NV4x series and for a few geeks like us X-D
Capacity: NV40 is high End. High End does not need much capacity because the market for high end is very very small. Its just for proving the performance of the whole NV4x series and for a few geeks like us X-D
Call it speculation if you want to, but I have the feeling that if NVIDIA wanted to, the NV45 could had been announced already.
I don't really care where each has been fabbed anyway, but I doubt that the NV45 was layed out for low-k 130nm initially. We'll find out soon anyway.
I'll start caring about PCI-E when the first PCI-E mainboards appear. Personally I'm not really interested for now in a major upgrade, unless the trade-offs will literally mean a huge difference.
I don't really care where each has been fabbed anyway, but I doubt that the NV45 was layed out for low-k 130nm initially. We'll find out soon anyway.
I'll start caring about PCI-E when the first PCI-E mainboards appear. Personally I'm not really interested for now in a major upgrade, unless the trade-offs will literally mean a huge difference.
Joe DeFuria
Legend
Robbitop said:
Source? (Or just your personal guess?)
Joe DeFuria
Legend
Evildeus said:
please share.
Joe DeFuria
Legend
Evildeus said:
Of course, that same article states that "nVidia has already shifted orders to TSMC."
Someone was trying to convince me just the other day that nVidia is the reason that TSMC is all booked-up, they're going to either be doing low-k or .11 gas-something for nVidia.Joe DeFuria said:
Source can be reliable, but also can just dick around with me to try and get me to post up things to make me look like an idiot...I leave it to you to judge.
