NVIDIA Kepler speculation thread

Discussion in 'Architecture and Products' started by Kaotik, Sep 21, 2010.

Tags:
  1. Kaotik

    Kaotik Drunk Member
    Legend

    Joined:
    Apr 16, 2003
    Messages:
    10,045
    Likes Received:
    4,260
    Location:
    Finland
    Wait what? Last time I checked, PCIE 3.0 was still sitting at 300W
     
  2. iMacmatician

    Regular

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2010
    Messages:
    794
    Likes Received:
    219
    "Flagship chip" is my guess.
     
  3. homerdog

    homerdog donator of the year
    Legend Veteran Subscriber

    Joined:
    Jul 25, 2008
    Messages:
    6,294
    Likes Received:
    1,075
    Location:
    still camping with a mauler
    So the 384bit card is not the flagship? I see this as being not likely at all.
     
  4. DegustatoR

    Veteran

    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2002
    Messages:
    2,828
    Likes Received:
    2,673
    Location:
    msk.ru/spb.ru
    Why? If their flagship is meant for Teslas more than GeForces this time around then it's pretty likely.
     
  5. homerdog

    homerdog donator of the year
    Legend Veteran Subscriber

    Joined:
    Jul 25, 2008
    Messages:
    6,294
    Likes Received:
    1,075
    Location:
    still camping with a mauler
    Feels like too many parts at the very high end.

    More likely the high end part is 512bit and its cut-down version has a 384bit bus. Though in that case the castrated version would probably have a 448bit bus. Some confusion there.

    So you would end up with 512, 448, 384, 320, 256, 192 (going on past history), 128bit and whatever is lower than that. Seems like overkill.

    But if there is a 512bit Tesla part, I suppose it isn't too unlikely that they'd release it in some form as a enthusiast gaming GPU.

    In any case I won't take the 512bit rumor seriously until it is at least double confirmed.
     
    #565 homerdog, Nov 26, 2011
    Last edited by a moderator: Nov 26, 2011
  6. UniversalTruth

    Veteran

    Joined:
    Sep 5, 2010
    Messages:
    1,747
    Likes Received:
    22
    I thought the dual-GPU GK110 would be their flagship card. Of course, here one can assume that GK110 will be faster than GK112, exactly the opposite of what the graph shows. But it is also logical to expect a dual-GPU card to be faster than GK112. ;)
    Something like:

    GK110 = GTX 690
    GK112 = GTX 685
    GK104 = GTX 680/670
    GK106 = GTS 650/660
    GK107 = GT 630/640


    Yeah, because now the situation is less complicated. /sarcasm
    You alone can list how many versions of GTX560s alone are out there present at the moment. 4? 5? :grin:



    Or...
    There is another possibility. GK110 is the one with 512-bit MI, and GK112 is the dual-GPU. In this case the graph might not be accurate with the expected launch time frames. Also, in this case, the codenames may be wrong...
     
    #566 UniversalTruth, Nov 26, 2011
    Last edited by a moderator: Nov 26, 2011
  7. trinibwoy

    trinibwoy Meh
    Legend

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2004
    Messages:
    11,676
    Likes Received:
    2,595
    Location:
    New York
    nVidia has never given a chip codename to graphics cards. Why do people keep believing these stupid rumours every generation?
     
  8. CarstenS

    Legend Veteran Subscriber

    Joined:
    May 31, 2002
    Messages:
    5,656
    Likes Received:
    3,661
    Location:
    Germany
    Silly season is dead ahead, this is DOUBLE CONFIRMED!
     
  9. Sunrise

    Regular

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2002
    Messages:
    306
    Likes Received:
    21
    What´s most important is in the text. The graph might give you a false impression, because GK110 is barely above the GTX580.
    NVIDIA wants to avoid another GF100. However, since it´s a completely new architecture on a new process and there are some further changes ;) this is still up in the air.
     
  10. Kaotik

    Kaotik Drunk Member
    Legend

    Joined:
    Apr 16, 2003
    Messages:
    10,045
    Likes Received:
    4,260
    Location:
    Finland
    6 if you count the ones being released now/shortly

    GTX 560 (OEM)
    GTX 560
    GTX 560 192bit
    GTX 560 Ti (OEM)
    GTX 560 Ti
    GTX 560 Ti 448
     
  11. DuckThor Evil

    Legend Veteran

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2004
    Messages:
    5,961
    Likes Received:
    1,020
    Location:
    Finland
    Haha nice ones :)
     
  12. DegustatoR

    Veteran

    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2002
    Messages:
    2,828
    Likes Received:
    2,673
    Location:
    msk.ru/spb.ru
    I'm not saying that I believe it ;) I'm just saying that 512-bit bus may well come back one day for the high end.
     
  13. denev2004

    Newcomer

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2010
    Messages:
    143
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    China
    I can't understand if they use 512bit....That's not really that useful.
    Why don't NV think of a higher memory frequency?
     
  14. rpg.314

    Veteran

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2008
    Messages:
    4,298
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    /
    That depends on whether or not they can clock up their PHYs. At the ~6GHz, it isn't pretty.
     
  15. Alexko

    Veteran Subscriber

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2009
    Messages:
    4,532
    Likes Received:
    957
    Plus, power-wise, a wider bus with relatively lower-clocked RAM tends to be more advantageous; unless it gets too wide and leakage starts to counteract the gains from the lower-clocked RAM, I guess.

    But for a given bandwidth around 240~300GB/s, 512 bits is probably more power-efficient than 384.
     
  16. TKK

    TKK
    Newcomer

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2010
    Messages:
    148
    Likes Received:
    0
    Additionally, unless the uncore-arch changed drastically over Fermi, 512 bit would also mean 33% more L2 cache, 33% more ROPs, and 33% larger maximum frame-buffer.
     
  17. CarstenS

    Legend Veteran Subscriber

    Joined:
    May 31, 2002
    Messages:
    5,656
    Likes Received:
    3,661
    Location:
    Germany
    This! (my bold)
     
  18. homerdog

    homerdog donator of the year
    Legend Veteran Subscriber

    Joined:
    Jul 25, 2008
    Messages:
    6,294
    Likes Received:
    1,075
    Location:
    still camping with a mauler
    They can already get 3GB on a 384bit bus. Will they need more than that?
     
  19. TKK

    TKK
    Newcomer

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2010
    Messages:
    148
    Likes Received:
    0
    You're probably thinking in gaming terms ;)

    The high-end Teslas and Quadros have 6 GB, so there seems to be some demand for as-large-as-possible framebuffers in HPC/workstation space. A 512 bit interface would increase that to 8 GB.
     
  20. homerdog

    homerdog donator of the year
    Legend Veteran Subscriber

    Joined:
    Jul 25, 2008
    Messages:
    6,294
    Likes Received:
    1,075
    Location:
    still camping with a mauler
    Yeah I'm definitely thinking in gaming terms. Gotta expand my mind :cool:
     
Loading...

Share This Page

  • About Us

    Beyond3D has been around for over a decade and prides itself on being the best place on the web for in-depth, technically-driven discussion and analysis of 3D graphics hardware. If you love pixels and transistors, you've come to the right place!

    Beyond3D is proudly published by GPU Tools Ltd.
Loading...