2008 with 4870x2 and GTX280.
The 280 was released 4 months or so? before the 4870x2.
If you mean the 285, it was launched a week after the 295 so Nvidia already had the fastest crown back in some way.
NVIDIA GF100 & Friends speculation
- Thread starter Arty
- Start date
The 280 was released 4 months or so? before the 4870x2.
If you mean the 285, it was launched a week after the 295 so Nvidia already had the fastest crown back in some way.
The release of GT280 was mid-june, the 4870x2 came in mid-august. GTX295 was the ces product last year.
Yes, Nvidia will be releasing their flagship card and it wont be going straight to the top of most benchmarks. I cannot remember the last time that happened.
I'm just wondering what the impact of that will be. Will they try to avoid it by paper launching an X2 at the same time? Can they even get a presentable X2 card ready by then?
I'm just wondering what the impact of that will be. Will they try to avoid it by paper launching an X2 at the same time? Can they even get a presentable X2 card ready by then?
Costs include double the amount of video RAM, a PCI-Express-Bridge-Chip, PCB cost and the contracts negotiated with TSMC.
Nothing will happen. Really you can't compare AFR mGPU systems with single-GPUs. You need profiles, you have microstuttering and you have only half of the memory. I hope that even the us magazines will criticize single-card AFR systems.
If they are launching it 1-2 months later as they said, probably yes.
I don't get Dave's comment. So AMD designs architectures based on how they will perform on current apps? That's ironic considering they have had an unsupported tessellator in their chips for a while now. It's doubly ironic considering that measured gains in current apps on Cypress are far below the theoretical improvement over RV770.
Sure enough, improved geometry performance isn't going to shine in current apps because they weren't designed when that level of performance was available. I'm sure Dave's bluffing and I fully expect AMD's next architecture to step up the game in geometry processing as well. If not then I have to wonder if all these years of evangelizing tessellation were just for show.
But if GF100 is 280W (guess?), how can they make a dual card and still make it 300W TDP?
EDIT:
Unless they know Evergreen won't last long enough to be seriously limited in this regard.
EDIT:
Unless they know Evergreen won't last long enough to be seriously limited in this regard.
Question: how do squeeze an elephant into a regular refrigerator?
Answer: you open the fridge, push the elephant inside and close the fridge.
Given that it's likely that they will go for a dual chip GPU I wouldn't be surprised if it's just a notch above Hemlock in terms of performance, just to win the power consum.....errrrr performance crown.
But that would mean virtually cutting the chips' performance in half to still make it under 300 and get a slight advantage over Hemlock. I don't see a point in that. At least from a financial stand point.
Why not? You're selling "shitty" bins for even better margins!
The real enthusiast (I shudder using that word nowadays, seems to imply more idiocy than anything else) would get 2 full/less castrated GF100s instead at a slightly higher margin I'd guess.
Archaeolept
Newcomer
Christ.
________________________
I haven't seen anyone comment on hardware.fr's specs. (based on a 725/700 gpu, 1200mhz mem)
5870 GF100
850.... 2800 Mtriangles
27.2... 22.4 Gpixels
2720 ... 1433 Gflops
68 ..... 44.8 Gtexels
143 .... 214 Bandwidth (Gigs/s)
[note to self: lrn2 format]
http://www.hardware.fr/articles/782-6/nvidia-geforce-gf100-revolution-geometrique.html
do these numbers seem believable? While the triangle rate is awesome (and bandwidth), doesn't this look a little unbalanced for most current games?
Raw numbers don't show your the efficiency of the architectures. And the Gpixels of GF100 is wrong. It should be 33.6 Gpixels.
Nope, based on 700 MHz, Damien's Number is right on the money.
Jawed
Legend
I think that needs verifying.
An increase in triangles definitely increases the DS workload. Can DS keep up with the increase in triangles? Is DS texture-fetch limited?
In other words, which takes longer?: generating extra triangles in TS or interpolating their attributes in DS?
Jawed
DavidGraham
Veteran
I don't think so .. Nvidia clearly tweaked the architecture up to favor setup rate , and tweaked it down against texture fill rate , they clearly saw that texel fill rate is not a limiting factor anymore .
Take a look at HD4890 vs GTX285 , they have 34 vs 48 GiTexel respectively , and yet they are somehow close in performance despite the huge gap in fill rate .
I think the same apply here .
So, GF100 has only 32 ROPs?
Similar threads
