Post your breaking NV30 news links here!
- Thread starter pocketmoon_
- Start date
Me too. Non programmable FSAA is disappointing for sure.
Plus, IMO, the Cooling solution looks like a 'hack' just to get the clock rate as high as possible. Even though its 0.13 micron, this is going to be one damn hot chip.
Plus, IMO, the Cooling solution looks like a 'hack' just to get the clock rate as high as possible. Even though its 0.13 micron, this is going to be one damn hot chip.
maskrider said:
I agree.
Looks like nv30 will not be on my list of possible gfx cards for a spring upgrade. I was dissappointed at the 8500s lack of decent quality AA after what was initially said about SV and I really can't believe that nvidia would stick with their old AA modes in the nv30, especially after they have been saying about higher quality pixels not more of them, obviously they were only thinking pixel/vertex shaders at that point. Maybe they're hoping that people will only look at benchmark scores.
Joe DeFuria
Legend
No, it's not.
At least with UT2K3, Anand actually had the program to run himself, as well as the hardware to test it on. Neither is the case here.
I'm confused at this point about the 8X as well - the guy I was talking to confirmed to me that GF FX still only has 4 z units per pipe, so exactly how they are achieving 8X I'm not 100% sure.
Oh, yeah, Ansio is stil 8X as well.
Welll, one of the previews listed gamma correction concerning AA. This is a significant improvement. ATI seems to have pretty good results with this, what else was wanted? EDIT: Ah, Rotated Grid I guess? Is it clear that this isn't offered?
What it looks like is it will offer an enhancement over ATI FSAA (8x) and it will be interesting to see how visible the difference is, and also an addition that ATI can conceivably match according to what they've said (6XS)...but it remains to be seen if they ever will. (*pokes* OpenGL Guy)
I'm interested to see how the fillrate figures work out (it sounds like they include color compression in the calculation, but perhaps I'm misunderstanding).
Also, what does "two textures per texture unit mean" (words from one of the previews I think)?
What it looks like is it will offer an enhancement over ATI FSAA (8x) and it will be interesting to see how visible the difference is, and also an addition that ATI can conceivably match according to what they've said (6XS)...but it remains to be seen if they ever will. (*pokes* OpenGL Guy)
I'm interested to see how the fillrate figures work out (it sounds like they include color compression in the calculation, but perhaps I'm misunderstanding).
Also, what does "two textures per texture unit mean" (words from one of the previews I think)?
Nebuchadnezzar
Legend
I thing that still is a mystery to me :
For what the heck are those 125M trannies???
Since it's olny a 8x1 design, where are they used??? In the shaders???
For what the heck are those 125M trannies???
Since it's olny a 8x1 design, where are they used??? In the shaders???
well, one question!
How fast would be the R300 with this cooling :
according to tomshardware.com
PS.: according to c't the highest AA-mode is 8x OGMS for OpenGL and 6xS(?) for DX. So no improvement compared to the GF4. Even the 4xMode of the R300 should look as good as the 8xmode of the NV30.
How fast would be the R300 with this cooling :
according to tomshardware.com
Even with this cooling-solution the air, coming out of the board is hot!
PS.: according to c't the highest AA-mode is 8x OGMS for OpenGL and 6xS(?) for DX. So no improvement compared to the GF4. Even the 4xMode of the R300 should look as good as the 8xmode of the NV30.
Nebuchadnezzar
Legend
So mister Alexsok, can you tell us more?
EDIT: Outdated; damn you guys post 4 post in 10 seconds, too fast for me
EDIT: Outdated; damn you guys post 4 post in 10 seconds, too fast for me
Dreadnought
Newcomer
Its been mentioned already in this thread - but I was most struck by the seeming lack of power of the Nv30 vertex shader.
Based of the normalisations from Toms:
NVIDIA GeForceFX (500MHz): 0,7 Mverts / clock
ATI Radeon 9700 PRO (325 MHz): 1 Mverts / clock
Considering all we'd seen pushed by Nv about efficiency over power, and a de-emphasising of bandwidth - The 1 thing I really expected to see was a v strong showing from the vertex shader.
Based of the normalisations from Toms:
NVIDIA GeForceFX (500MHz): 0,7 Mverts / clock
ATI Radeon 9700 PRO (325 MHz): 1 Mverts / clock
Considering all we'd seen pushed by Nv about efficiency over power, and a de-emphasising of bandwidth - The 1 thing I really expected to see was a v strong showing from the vertex shader.
Similar threads
