NVIDIA may announce NV 40 tomorrow
- Thread starter Wunderchu
- Start date
I was pretty impressed with the Are You Ready campaign, it was some Grade A marketing which was in a way let down by the product that it was trying to sell.
I think Nvidia's PR department is great at marketing, it's just a shame that it seems to be doing more than just that nowadays.
I think Nvidia's PR department is great at marketing, it's just a shame that it seems to be doing more than just that nowadays.
StealthHawk
Regular
Uttar said:
What about availability
Am I correct in assuming that NV40 will be in stores by March?Woooohooooo!!!Uttar said:Plus, I still need to do the GPU:RW 3.0. script. Pretty darn ambitious one at that. If you think GPU:RW 2.0. was nifty, which it wasn't IMO anyway, you ain't seen anything yet.
I won't be administrating GPU:RW 3.0. - Volt will. The idea is a multi-user system though, so there CAN be contributors - evantually people like Fudo should have access to the script and be able to add their own stories. The reliability system is vote-based.
Few coding has been done yet though
Uttar
Definitely this week's best news! 8)
BTW, NVIDIA still loves GPU:RW as much as they ever did
I proposed them ( = BB ) to give commenting abilities ( as all contributors to the script, although their comments would be highlighted if they wish so ) on all things posted at GPU:RW. They would of course not be forced to do so.
Their response is they don't comment on future products
Hey, it's their choice - I find it a bad decision because this type of ability would make them capable of quickly dismissing anti-NV rumors - but of course, if they don't do so in a very logical or professionnal way, it could be negative for them. But that'd be their fault - if they used it correctly and just from time to time, I'm convinced it could have been a nice feature.
The real reason I was intrigued by whether they'd accept is they actually told a few times they're gonna do a similar thing, as did Derek Perez a few months ago at Driver Heaven:
They got as little community interaction today as they had before. And this refusal, while very justifiable IMO, is yet another great example of how much they're really bluffing, sometimes even speaking 100% for themselves, and not for the company.
Uttar
I proposed them ( = BB ) to give commenting abilities ( as all contributors to the script, although their comments would be highlighted if they wish so ) on all things posted at GPU:RW. They would of course not be forced to do so.
Their response is they don't comment on future products
Hey, it's their choice - I find it a bad decision because this type of ability would make them capable of quickly dismissing anti-NV rumors - but of course, if they don't do so in a very logical or professionnal way, it could be negative for them. But that'd be their fault - if they used it correctly and just from time to time, I'm convinced it could have been a nice feature.
The real reason I was intrigued by whether they'd accept is they actually told a few times they're gonna do a similar thing, as did Derek Perez a few months ago at Driver Heaven:
They got as little community interaction today as they had before. And this refusal, while very justifiable IMO, is yet another great example of how much they're really bluffing, sometimes even speaking 100% for themselves, and not for the company.
Uttar
Mintmaster
Veteran
Uttar said:
I have to say this impressed me a lot. When you first came to these boards, you just seemed to be someone who read some stuff about GPUs but never really understood them, and tried to act smarter than you really were.
Boy was I wrong! You quickly taught your way to being one of the most knowledgeable and respected members of any forum. As you start your exit from the 3D graphics community, you will slowly be missed by all.
I guess I should have said this in your farewell thread, but better late than never!
I actually had that feeling all the time. I mean, not to diss Uttar's work as a rumor machine, which I very much appreciate(d), but whenever he started to talk tech, a certain rumbling was noted in my stomach.Mintmaster said:
But then again, what do I know about GPUs? Nothing.
cu
incurable
rwolf said:Uttar said:I don't think the NV40 is what Dave thinks it is - but I could be wrong, of course
You mean the fact that it is a sound card and not a GPU.
Exactly! How did you guess that, anyway? :?
Actually, it IS a GPU, but the added 25M transistors in August/September added audio and network capabilities.
It's NVIDIA's way to say to Intel: "Hey, we don't need a license to sell this stuff on your system in a non-standalone way, you know!"
( if you quote me on that, you're an idiot
)This explains that 8)incurable said:
Seriously though, I admit that until recently, I had quite a lot of technical misconceptions. And I most likely still got quite a few. That pipeline article was a prime example of pure technical BS, one that even Kyle couldn't have managed
Uttar
Yeah, I remember that lie too.Uttar said:
I don't think nVidia can participate in the community until they quit making themselves so uncredible and despised in the community...which they just don't seem to care to do.
digitalwanderer said:I don't think nVidia can participate in the community until they quit making themselves so uncredible and despised in the community...which they just don't seem to care to do.
Yep, and I just don't get their logic.
They should either not tell they're gonna do that, or say it and do it; refusing to do it afterwards just damages their reputation further.
Uttar
Megadrive1988
Veteran
NV40: 240~260 million transistors
R420: 200-220 million transistors
R420: 200-220 million transistors
Megadrive1988
Veteran
hey I am only doubling the transistor count, which has been happening from
R100-to-R200-to-R300 and from GF2-to-GF3/4-to-GFFX
R100-to-R200-to-R300 and from GF2-to-GF3/4-to-GFFX
Megadrive1988 said:hey I am only doubling the transistor count, which has been happening from
R100-to-R200-to-R300 and from GF2-to-GF3/4-to-GFFX
If hardware would only be that simple. Why not just multiply all other specifications times 2x then?
I have severe doubts that in order to keep the cost at reasonable levels, pushing beyond 200M@13nm is currently even feasable; let alone that it's actually necessary.
