NVIDIA Kepler speculation thread

Is Kepler going to be the first GPU bearing the fruits of Project Denver or is that honor reserved for Maxwell?
Considering Denver's timeframe it's obviously for Maxwell. There is atleast one mention of this:
The Register said:
While Keane would not say how many ARM cores would be bundled on the Maxwell GPUs, he did confirm that Nvidia would be putting a multicore chip on the GPUs and hinted that it would be considerably more than the two cores used on the Tegra 2 SoCs
But if Kepler will be nextgen console winner, then i think it could or even should be bundled with Denver in SoC
 
Last edited by a moderator:
For Nvidia it could be a good deal, cause it could allow doing game's ports almost without any code changes, which would allow to reduce expenses for devrel and will give opportunities for growth in other areas, however for all others it would be not so well
 
For Nvidia it could be a good deal, cause it could allow doing game's ports almost without any code changes, which would allow to reduce expenses for devrel and will give opportunities for growth in other areas, however for all others it would be not so well
I don't think that Maxwell+Denver parts will hit GeForce/Quadro market. They'll probably use them for Tesla/console markets and GeForce/Quadro will get just Maxwell, without ARM cores integration.

Game porting is much more dependant on API compatibility than on binary h/w compatibility these days.
 
I don't think that Maxwell+Denver parts will hit GeForce/Quadro market. They'll probably use them for Tesla/console markets and GeForce/Quadro will get just Maxwell, without ARM cores integration.
ARM cores should be helpful for Quadro as well, they will break last barriers on the road to completely GPUs based offline rendering solutions

Game porting is much more dependant on API compatibility than on binary h/w compatibility these days.
Key words are "these days", but this could easily change in future. My opinion that decrease of software layer would be one of key directions for next gen XBox, command list generation and some other usually api/driver's stuff in the end could be standardized between the vendors, however looks like SM ISA apparently couldn't be due to fundamental architectural differences
 
I just bought.. a GT240 with gddr5.
because the Fermi equivalent costs more and has slow fillrate, lower bandwith.

I'm eager to see Kepler as well, with 28nm allowing a better < 75W card to be made.
 
It might be already too late for Kepler, but I wonder if NVIDIA will keep their "one size fits all" approach to design. I mean, these huge humongous chips are not the best silicon designs around to make a lofty margins in the desktop arena.

If they keep on this track we'll start talking wafer per chip ratio, not the other way around.

Couldn't they find a way to modulate their designs enough to be able to "easily" remove (at some of) the general purpose from the desktop parts without unbalancing the chip and making padding overuse a must? I know the design of the pipeline stages themselves are altered and thus it's not a simple external/independent block and thus making it hard to remove. But, there might be some ways to re-factor this issue and allow them to produce smaller and leaner desktop part.
 
If they keep on this track we'll start talking wafer per chip ratio, not the other way around.
You are kidding, right? :cool:

Couldn't they find a way to modulate their designs enough to be able to "easily" remove (at some of) the general purpose from the desktop parts without unbalancing the chip and making padding overuse a must? I know the design of the pipeline stages themselves are altered and thus it's not a simple external/independent block and thus making it hard to remove. But, there might be some ways to re-factor this issue and allow them to produce smaller and leaner desktop part.
They did something similar with gf100 vs gf104 and with gf110 vs gf114.
 
9 pages so far on this thread and no REAL speculation on how Kepler will be different from Fermi 1.1 (GF110).

What is known is that Kepler will be on 28nm process and that high speed process at TSMC will be in production at the end of 2011.

I still expect that the high end/HPC Kepler will once again be a very large chip.

So again what Arch changes can we expect in Kepler vs Fermi 1.1 (GF110)
 
I wouldn't be surprised if Kepler is a bunch of Tegras stitched together. Seems like that's all they talk about nowadays. Hard to get very excited about new hardware this year though. Software and games are already lagging behind considerably and that's not gonna change this year.
 
Since when had G7x or even generations before that FP20 PS ALUs?

Erm.. there was an option for either FP16 or FP32 IIRC.. but that doesn't make them less advanced than the Tegra's PSs...
 
Back
Top