Nvidia GT300 core: Speculation

Status
Not open for further replies.
Arty said:
http://www.semiaccurate.com/2009/06/22/ati-have-4-dx11-cards-october/

Charlie says July 1 is the earliest for the tape out of GT300, November for the first spin and February '10 (most likely according to Charlie) is when there will be a real launch.
Click to expand...

That site is an ATI fan site and nothing more.

Read this for a really good laugh. He gets busted out and then threatens bannng, then backs off. And they guy trying to get him to defend his claims was talking about GPU launches, not every single thing Charlie ever said about NV which charlie wanted him to look up. ANd his bump gate article, was proven to only be half right.

http://www.semiaccurate.com/forums/showthread.php?t=101
 
With all the Evergreens avaiable aplenty in early October at the latest and a borked and broken GT300 only availble in spring '10 that would seem like Charlie's wildest dreams coming true. :) Another round of G80 vs. R600 with switched roles.

Man, the guy must have lost a lot of money on NV-stocks or his girl to one of it's employees.
 
XMAN26 said:
That site is an ATI fan site and nothing more.

Read this for a really good laugh. He gets busted out and then threatens bannng, then backs off. And they guy trying to get him to defend his claims was talking about GPU launches, not every single thing Charlie ever said about NV which charlie wanted him to look up. ANd his bump gate article, was proven to only be half right.

http://www.semiaccurate.com/forums/showthread.php?t=101
Click to expand...

ROFL :LOL:
 
XMAN26 said:
That site is an ATI fan site and nothing more.

Read this for a really good laugh. He gets busted out and then threatens bannng, then backs off. And they guy trying to get him to defend his claims was talking about GPU launches, not every single thing Charlie ever said about NV which charlie wanted him to look up. ANd his bump gate article, was proven to only be half right.

http://www.semiaccurate.com/forums/showthread.php?t=101
Click to expand...
If you believe Inq, SA, BSN or any other rumor site to not be slanted, then you are naive. Point here is that I'm putting Charlie's bits down here in the forum so that he doesnt backtrack or pull the story.

Nice try by the poster who tries to "bust" him. "ROFL"
 
Arty said:
If you believe Inq, SA, BSN or any other rumor site to not be slanted, then you are naive. Point here is that I'm putting Charlie's bits down here in the forum so that he doesnt backtrack or pull the story.

Nice try by the poster who tries to "bust" him. "ROFL"
Click to expand...

Given the fact he provided link after link of where and when charlie was wrong with previous launches, I'd say he busted his ass out damn good, not tried to.

Then there is the whole bumpgate thing where he said all G84/86/92/94 and 96 GPUs were affected and it turned out to only be he was half right with G84/86 as it was the mobil part only. Totally wrong on the G9X parts and completely missed chipsets. Yeah, Charlie is walking book of credibility alright.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Wait. Charlie is no longer at the inquirer? HALLE-fricken-LUJUAH!!!

I can finally go backto reading that site in relative safety of not having my mind pummelled by another one of his bordeline insane rants.
 
pjbliverpool said:
Wait. Charlie is no longer at the inquirer? HALLE-fricken-LUJUAH!!!

I can finally go backto reading that site in relative safety of not having my mind pummelled by another one of his bordeline insane rants.
Click to expand...


Nah, others have taken his place, although with not quiet the forked tongue of reporting.

But yeah, it is much nicer to read now. Wonder if he quit or was fired? I'm hoping fired.
 
XMAN26 said:
Then there is the whole bumpgate thing where he said all G84/86/92/94 and 96 GPUs were affected and it turned out to only be he was half right with G84/86 as it was the mobil part only. Totally wrong on the G9X parts and completely missed chipsets. Yeah, Charlie is walking book of credibility alright.
Click to expand...

I think you have not been reading his articles.

G84/86 were the ones confirmed upfront to be defective, G94/96 were confirmed by apple to be defective and the chipset MCP79 chips were confirmed to be good.

That's what was in his electron microscope article he showed pics and stats of the non Lead based MCP79 bumps and the lead based G96 bumps. It's okay to burn Charlie down when He's wrong, but that Electron Microscope article even has plenty of evidence to back him up and the nV mails in there to show that they are lying.

Somewhere later down the line it was confirmed that nV switched everything to Eutectic (it took them 3 to 4 months after the discovery and release of the press statement.)

Credit where credit's due.
 
neliz said:
I think you have not been reading his articles.

G84/86 were the ones confirmed upfront to be defective, G94/96 were confirmed by apple to be defective and the chipset MCP79 chips were confirmed to be good.

That's what was in his electron microscope article he showed pics and stats of the non Lead based MCP79 bumps and the lead based G96 bumps. It's okay to burn Charlie down when He's wrong, but that Electron Microscope article even has plenty of evidence to back him up and the nV mails in there to show that they are lying.

Somewhere later down the line it was confirmed that nV switched everything to Eutectic (it took them 3 to 4 months after the discovery and release of the press statement.)

Credit where credit's due.
Click to expand...

In his original article and every article after that, he continued to say desktop parts were affected aswell which was not true at all. And your right, the G94/96Ms, not desktop parts, were affects aswell and I missed that. Still doesn't excuss him for saying all parts were bad based on those chips when it wasn't the case.

Even the sun shines on a monkeys ass every now and then. But he gets more wrong than he gets right contrary to his assertions.
 
XMAN26 said:
Nah, others have taken his place, although with not quiet the forked tongue of reporting.

But yeah, it is much nicer to read now. Wonder if he quit or was fired? I'm hoping fired.
Click to expand...

Word is that he had a "falling out" with others at the INQ and felt he wasn't "making" enough...
Dunno how accurate that comment was but it is the only thing I have heard on the situation.
 
XMAN26 said:
Given the fact he provided link after link of where and when charlie was wrong with previous launches, I'd say he busted his ass out damn good, not tried to.
Click to expand...
You can do the same and more for pretty much every other rumor site.


XMAN26 said:
Then there is the whole bumpgate thing where he said all G84/86/92/94 and 96 GPUs were affected and it turned out to only be he was half right with G84/86 as it was the mobil part only. Totally wrong on the G9X parts and completely missed chipsets. Yeah, Charlie is walking book of credibility alright.
Click to expand...
neliz's post is enough.
 
While I'm by far not innocent in this silly Charlie affair, are you guys sure you want to continue debating about the guys character, his career changes or when he's been wrong or right? I was laughing at the link to the forum merely because it sounds downright silly to threaten someone with a ban instead of trying to prove a couple of points.

So let's get back to the point and let me ask a silly question as to what anyone exactly means with "tape out". If any reports weeks ago meant with supposed tape out reports that the silicon is production ready, I'm willing to bet they were wrong.

You can call your own bets whether it's in A0, A1, A2 or even higher silicon revision for all it matters it won't mean though in the end that you or any other wannabe "journalist" really knows for sure what's going on.

Any of them are consistently asking around each other and there's nothing else available but a pile of guesses. Oh yes it's a speculation thread and yes I won't personally shed a tear if A comes before B or if B should trounce A in performance by a high margin or vice versa. It's rather those type of wannabe "journalists" with a known agenda and ulterior motives that will rip their clothes off if NV wins or do a silly "ding dong the witch is dead" dance around a campfire if they lose.

I hope this kind of projective vomiting isn't a newly invented sport.
 
neliz said:
Well .. then have Theo's 30% yield figures for GT300 compare with charlie's 25% for RV740.

http://www.brightsideofnews.com/new...00---geforce-gtx-380-yields-are-sub-3025.aspx

He also mentions that nV is working on a new revision which might actually be based on the same info charlie has that July will see another respin for GT300.
Click to expand...

He claimed a far higher yield figure (without really specifying a number) than 20% for RV740 here: http://www.semiaccurate.com/2009/06/20/why-are-there-no-4770s/

Contrary to popular fantasies, the Nvidia GT300 GPU has not taped out, but the preparations to do so have started, so think July 1 if all goes well.
Click to expand...

http://www.semiaccurate.com/2009/06/22/ati-have-4-dx11-cards-october/

Again can you or anyone finally declare what the hell anyone actually means with "tape out"? The earlier reports from other sites were merely about A1 silicon and that's not production ready silicon in any case.

What was your point again?
 
Ailuros said:
Again can you or anyone finally declare what the hell anyone actually means with "tape out"? The earlier reports from other sites were merely about A1 silicon and that's not production ready silicon in any case.
Click to expand...

Didn't RV670 and/or 770 enter markets on first silicon aka "A1" (was it A10 they call it?)
 
Kaotik said:
Didn't RV670 and/or 770 enter markets on first silicon aka "A1" (was it A10 they call it?)
Click to expand...

If memory serves well NV never has released any GPU on A1 silicon. Anyone would have a hard time convincing me that a hypothetical 495mm2 die (or somewhere in that league anyway) in an as leaky process at the moment as 40nm@TSMC would be production ready at "just" A1.

I don't recall what the revisions of either 670 or 770 were, but I think that the first digit in Axx (as in A10 or A11) stands for silicon revision and the second for metal layer revision but could be also wrong. According to some rumors the shown X11 dies from AMD were supposedly on A10.

LordEC911 said:
RV670 did, A11.
I have never heard any confirmation on RV770, I have always wondered about that.
Click to expand...

Whereby A11 is the equivalent of A2 at NV? (honest question)
 
Ailuros said:
If memory serves well NV never has released any GPU on A1 silicon. Anyone would have a hard time convincing me that a hypothetical 495mm2 die (or somewhere in that league anyway) in an as leaky process at the moment as 40nm@TSMC would be production ready at "just" A1.

I don't recall what the revisions of either 670 or 770 were, but I think that the first digit in Axx (as in A10 or A11) stands for silicon revision and the second for metal layer revision but could be also wrong. According to some rumors the shown X11 dies from AMD were supposedly on A10.



Whereby A11 is the equivalent of A2 at NV? (honest question)
Click to expand...

Hopefully someone with better knowledge on the subject will chime in but I will give my 2cents anyway.

What I heard is that ATi's A11 is the very first chips, there is no A10. R600 supposedly needed 2 spins, A11, A12 and they finally got A13 right. RV670 was supposedly good with their first silicon, A11.

On the other hand, I have heard both ways for Nvidia.
Where there is no A0/B0 and A1/B1 is the first run while others say that the first samples are called A0/B0.
So I don't know what to believe in regards to Nvidia's naming/numbering.

Edit- Seeing that most Nvidia chips are A2/B2, I would have to assume that they do use A1/B1 as their first silicon. From what I gather, needing more than 1 respin usually means a big error/disaster.
G200b is a B3 and R600 was A13, they expect needing at least one respin.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

G
After Effects Rendering PC PrePurchase
Replies
3
Views
2K
Davros
D
Back
Top