Who knows. If they want to keep the geometry advantage which is the main achitectural change, then maybe they stay at 2 GPC-s. And change the shader cluster again
.
NVIDIA GF100 & Friends speculation
- Thread starter Arty
- Start date
Who knows. If they want to keep the geometry advantage which is the main achitectural change, then maybe they stay at 2 GPC-s. And change the shader cluster again
.Who knows. If they want to keep the geometry advantage which is the main achitectural change, then maybe they stay at 2 GPC-s. And change the shader cluster again
Does it really matter for that market segment? I don't think it's worth the extra silicon.
The crap for atom is already GT218. Granted it's not too different from G98...
I think a one SM GF108 (with the other one disabled) might make sense though the rasterization rate will be REALLY low (2 pixels/clock).
Also, for GF108 to have a 128bit bus either there need to be more rasterization capability per SM (I guess unlikely) or less ROPs per memory partition (more likely) - otherwise the ROP capability go from total overkill (GF104 and your presumed GF106) to completely ridiculuos overkill (4 times higher ROP pixel output than rasterization rate!!!). I don't necessarily think a 64bit GF108 would suck - paired with GDDR5 that still looks very decent imho (so I guess it'll depend on memory pricing if that's viable). Some low-end version with only 1 cluster wouldn't really need more than 64bit ddr3 I guess too (but please no ddr2 as some cards still use today)...
The datapath between each SM and ROPs is limited to 2 pixels per clock.
Yes that's what I had in mind, not rasterization rate.
Indeed. As for the 5850, why do they need to drop it?
No idea where people get this idea that the GTX 460 has changed the entire landscape.. it offers similiar (relative) performance as ATI's HD 5850 that has been on the market for what.. 9-10 months
look at it this way:
GTX 460 :$200 - $250
HD5850: $280-325
price comparison of 5850 to 460: 30-40%
performance of 5850 to 460: 30-45% Avg
Again no reason for ATI to lower 5850 price as the performance and price scale accordingly, something you don't often see as you go higher.
No idea? Well let me share my viewpoint.
My 9800gt broke down a almost 3 months ago, and i'v been waiting for the 5850 to fall down to 240~250€ to get a new substitute (the 5830 is no decent replacement price/perf), so far every shop/site near my area has 5850's with prices ranging from 280~390€ + shipping costs and i'v been thinking to hold back hopping NVidia weight would push AMD/ATI prices down or if AMD/ATI launched its hd6xxxx series at the end of the year for the 5850 prices to come down, the later wont happen so quickly, and so despite my grunt feelings for nvidia products quality and its deceiving practices, their recent 460 is starting to seem an acceptable replacement at 250€ with room to overclock well into an 5850 overall/average performance, with its tesselation efficiency being another strong point over the 5850.
So in my situation the 460gtx did indeed change the landscape, if amd/ati keeps the prices at the ranges they are, demand will definitly dwindle sooner than you or they think.
My 9800gt broke down a almost 3 months ago, and i'v been waiting for the 5850 to fall down to 240~250€ to get a new substitute (the 5830 is no decent replacement price/perf), so far every shop/site near my area has 5850's with prices ranging from 280~390€ + shipping costs and i'v been thinking to hold back hopping NVidia weight would push AMD/ATI prices down or if AMD/ATI launched its hd6xxxx series at the end of the year for the 5850 prices to come down, the later wont happen so quickly, and so despite my grunt feelings for nvidia products quality and its deceiving practices, their recent 460 is starting to seem an acceptable replacement at 250€ with room to overclock well into an 5850 overall/average performance, with its tesselation efficiency being another strong point over the 5850.
So in my situation the 460gtx did indeed change the landscape, if amd/ati keeps the prices at the ranges they are, demand will definitly dwindle sooner than you or they think.
That is your case. If you say it isn't, then I'm not following your math.
250€ desired price target
280€ current price
280€ price 3 months ago
280€ - 250€ = 30€.
So 3 months ago you'd have paid 30€ more than your desired price target, which breaks down to a mere 10€ a month for earlier satisfaction.
250€ desired price target
280€ current price
280€ price 3 months ago
280€ - 250€ = 30€.
So 3 months ago you'd have paid 30€ more than your desired price target, which breaks down to a mere 10€ a month for earlier satisfaction.
3 months ago i only had 200€ of budget saved and i might be saving for other things.
Also see it as a life philosophical decision based on several aspects including financial ones of what is enough to satisfy me in PC gaming/entertainment.
You see, for me spending more than 250€ be it 300 or 400+ for earlier satisfaction on a piece of hardware wich the price may rise temporarily and more importantly most new features will be lacking in performance just as the 250€ mid range hardware 2 or 3 years later is not worth the price difference.
During that time i'll keep saving a little on the side to see if the sw&hw progressed far enough to upgrade. If my previous 9800gt g92 1GB hadn't broke down i'd still be satisfied for another 2 years, maybe even 3.
Also see it as a life philosophical decision based on several aspects including financial ones of what is enough to satisfy me in PC gaming/entertainment.
You see, for me spending more than 250€ be it 300 or 400+ for earlier satisfaction on a piece of hardware wich the price may rise temporarily and more importantly most new features will be lacking in performance just as the 250€ mid range hardware 2 or 3 years later is not worth the price difference.
During that time i'll keep saving a little on the side to see if the sw&hw progressed far enough to upgrade. If my previous 9800gt g92 1GB hadn't broke down i'd still be satisfied for another 2 years, maybe even 3.
Last edited by a moderator:
GeForce GTX450 -- native 192-bit interface?
With 3.6 GHz GDDR5 clocks it will reach 86.4 GB/s. With 128bit it would reach only 57.6 GB/s and that would be 20 GB/s slower than 5700 radeons
.
NathansFortune
Regular
Hmm...
I think GF104 pretty much blew any chance of people believing Charlie. Even his PSP2/Tegra hatefest was a mess of opinion presented as fact.
192bit sounds like a good compromise for GF106, but it is entirely possible that it will be two products like GF104 covering more than one price point, so it could be 192bit and 128bit leaving 92bit and 64bit for the Notebook and Ion variants with GF108.
iMacmatician
Regular
My guesses are 192 SP and 192-bit for GF106, and 96 SP and 128-bit for GF108. I think multiple products with multiple bus widths are definitely possible too.
Similar threads
- Deleted member 2197
- Architecture and Products
