NVIDIA GF100 & Friends speculation

CarstenS said:
Indeed #2! Especially since they've seemingly gone for lower power.
First GF110/100 (?) with only one 6-Pin connector.
Click to expand...
Maybe as a consumer product. There's an old GF100 Quadro 4000 which uses only one 6 pin connector, though it is really cut down...
The GTX 560 OEM definitely looks slower to me than the GTX 560 though, the clock is just too low. Can't say how much though, as the better SMs (potentially higher efficiency, higher shader export) probably help a bit to catch up.
It is interesting the GTX 560 OEM and non-OEM have the same 150W TDP yet one has 2 6-pin and the other only one 6-pin connector. Maybe that just reflects the target market, OEMs don't care for overclocking :).
 
Or it could be a copy-and-paste residue from the retail 560's template. :)

Either way, the OEMs should be way slower from what I gather, since they're also down to about 60ish percent of texel fill compared to their retail brethren and that's still gonna hurt in todays games.
 
CarstenS said:
Either way, the OEMs should be way slower from what I gather, since they're also down to about 60ish percent of texel fill compared to their retail brethren and that's still gonna hurt in todays games.
Click to expand...
It can't hurt that much if you compare GTX 570 vs. GTX 560Ti. Granted a much smaller difference there.
Assuming the lowest suggested GTX 560 clock (810Mhz), the GTX 560 retail has 71% more texture fill rate, 28% more peak alu rate, and despite less rops even 17% more peak ROP rate (not that this would matter). The memory bandwidth is the same. The GTX 560 OEM can only offer a 17% higher shader export rate (and tesselation rate). Not even the raw vertex throughput is is higher (assuming 3 GPC active) or rather only faster by 2%, because the clock is just so low... Even assuming the SMs are more efficient that certainly can't e enough to keep up. Maybe a 20% deficit or so overall - and if the retail GTX 560 really ship with 950Mhz (as indicated by nvidia's clock range) that deficit will certainly grow. The OEM should theoretically be a terrific overclocker, but since it's limited to only one 6-pin it might not work, the VRM might not withstand it neither, and it would almost certainly need a voltage increase to reach really high clocks.
 
With the GTX 560 Ti (448 Core) there will be no less than 4 different versions if GTX 560 on the market - GTX 560, GTX 560 Ti, GTX 560 Ti (OEM) and now, GTX 560 Ti (448 Core) - a new height for GPU nomenclature chaos.
Click to expand...
And now the 192bit version too....
 
Wow, they must really heart the "560" brand. :)

I wonder if this is a push to bring anything new to the market, or maybe intended to compete with the upcoming 7000 radeons?
 
DarthShader said:
Wow, they must really heart the "560" brand. :)

I wonder if this is a push to bring anything new to the market, or maybe intended to compete with the upcoming 7000 radeons?
Click to expand...

I think the GTX 560 Ti (448) is more there to sell more of the defective chips rather than anything else. Might be downclocked enough that it's not really faster than normal 560 Ti anymore even (why not call it 565 otherwise?). I think it would only need to be clocked ~15% lower than GTX 570 to achieve that.
Though interestingly quite a lot of the GTX 560 are apparently now GF110, and from the 6 different cards only one is a full chip configuration.
GTX 560 OEM: GF110, 384SP/552Mhz, 320bit/1600Mhz
GTX 560Ti OEM: GF110, 352SP/732Mhz, 320bit/1900Mhz
GTX 560Ti(448): GF110, 448SP/?Mhz, 320bit/?Mhz
GTX 560-192: GF114, 336SP/810(?)Mhz, 192bit/2000(?)Mhz
GTX 560: GF114, 336SP/810Mhz, 256bit/2000Mhz
GTX 560Ti: GF114, 384SP/822Mhz, 256bit/2000Mhz

That's a lot of weirdo configs...
It is actually not easy to tell how the performance ranking is (at these default clocks). I think the 560 OEM is slowest, then 560-192, 560, 560Ti OEM, 560Ti. The 560Ti(448) would be fastest if the core clock is above ~630Mhz. Of course with core clock at GTX 570 level it would be closer in performance to GTX 570 than GTX 560 Ti but I don't think that's likely.
 
mczak said:
I think the GTX 560 Ti (448) is more there to sell more of the defective chips rather than anything else.
Click to expand...
While that is usualy the most logical explanation, notice at what timepoint this is being announced and that it's almost a year since the chips launched. Did nVidia have so little defective chips that it took longer to build enough stock of them? Or why didn't they launch this part earlier?
 
DarthShader said:
While that is usualy the most logical explanation, notice at what timepoint this is being announced and that it's almost a year since the chips launched. Did nVidia have so little defective chips that it took longer to build enough stock of them? Or why didn't they launch this part earlier?
Click to expand...
Good question. And it's not that they couldn't sell them as other GTX 560 variants (though all OEM, in that segment OEM sales might not be particularly high volume?).
If that were intended to compete with some new chips you'd think though it would have a new name, in particular if it is really faster than the normal GTX 560 Ti (and if it's not faster, well there's not much point trying that as new competitive solution in the first place...).
Could be totally futile attempt trying to get some guesses out of that name, it's not like their naming scheme always made 100% sense before :).
 
updated specs

560448spsrau1m.jpg


GeForce GTX 560 Ti (448 Core) will be officially released November 29, price will be older GeForce GTX 560 Ti with basically the same.
Click to expand...


source
 
So, in essence, the new model will have:
• 17 more GFLOPS (~+5%)
• 7,3 more GPix/s (~+56%)
• 3 more GZix/s (~+11%)
• ~24 more GB/s (~+18%)
• 280 more MBs VRAM (~+25%)
• twice as much setup-rate (4 vs. 2 GPC)
• probably higher DP-GFLOPS (1/8th vs. 1/12th)
but!
• 11,5 GTex/s less (~-22%)

It will be interesting to see the tradeoff working in practice.
 
Surprisingly high clocks - same as GTX 570.
Performance should be closer to GTX 570 than GTX 560 (should be like 15% faster than GTX 560Ti, 6% slower than GTX 570).
I don't get it though why nvidia want to sell that with the GTX 560Ti name. Clearly they don't want to phase out the "old" GTX 560Ti in favor of that, which is imho the only reason this would make sense.
 
mczak said:
Surprisingly high clocks - same as GTX 570.
Performance should be closer to GTX 570 than GTX 560 (should be like 15% faster than GTX 560Ti, 6% slower than GTX 570).
I don't get it though why nvidia want to sell that with the GTX 560Ti name. Clearly they don't want to phase out the "old" GTX 560Ti in favor of that, which is imho the only reason this would make sense.
Click to expand...
Clearly 570LE was going to be less popular than the 560Ti.
 
Even more mysterious is the alleged same price point. If they asked more, it would be obvious they are trying to play foul.

Could be a distracting tactic, an interesting product to make people buy it for Xmas, so they don't feel the need to buy the new AMD chips.

Or they know/anticipate what is coming up as the 7800 series and not having anything to fight it with, they'll beat the tesselation drum again. /end of baseless speculations
 
Regardless of the name, this looks to be the strongest card at its expected price point. Will make a nice Christmas present to myself. :smile:
 
homerdog said:
Regardless of the name, this looks to be the strongest card at its expected price point. Will make a nice Christmas present to myself. :smile:
Click to expand...

Reviews are out.
http://www.anandtech.com/show/5153/nvidias-geforce-gtx-560-ti-w448-cores-gtx570-on-a-budget

Haven't looked for other reviews yet but I really want to see how this OCs compared to a GTX570.
Like I suspected it's MSRP is much closer to $300 than the ~$249 GTX560Ti launch price that was rumored.

Well I have to hand it to Nvidia they picked the perfect time to launch this card. If they only have enough supply for ~2 months they will get these cleared out before AMD's cards hit. Once the 78x0 launches they would not be able to sell these cards at their current price.

Edit- Guess we already have a thread for reviews in another sub-forum...
http://forum.beyond3d.com/showthread.php?p=1601975#post1601975
 
Last edited by a moderator:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

M
Interesting old GPU architecture
Replies
17
Views
3K
Ailuros
Ailuros
T
GPU Stability testing for Nvidia cards - PowerSweep
Replies
0
Views
440
T2098
T
J
Graphic card/CPU configuration for best memory graphics in Flight Simulator 98?
2
Replies
37
Views
5K
homerdog
homerdog
R
HDR settings uniformity is much needed
2 3 4
Replies
68
Views
9K
DavidGraham
D
D
Speculation and Rumors: Nvidia Blackwell ...
45 46 47
Replies
928
Views
103K
Kaotik
Kaotik
Back
Top