The G92 Architecture Rumours & Speculation Thread

Discussion in 'Architecture and Products' started by Arun, Aug 8, 2007.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. DegustatoR

    Veteran

    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2002
    Messages:
    1,319
    Likes Received:
    23
    Location:
    msk.ru/spb.ru
    I'm guessing that G92 might be something like G71 was to G70 although not a simple die shrink but more like 192 SPs & 256 bit MB @ 65nm -- much faster than G80 at single chip level (but slower or the same at doing AA) but not top end in NV40/G70/G80/R580/R600 kind of sense -- top end spot would be filled with GX2 board using two G92s in SLI.

    (Though I'd personally prefer it to be a new cutting edge top end chip with 256+ SPs and 512 bit MB... Yeah, well...)
     
  2. _xxx_

    Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2004
    Messages:
    5,008
    Likes Received:
    86
    Location:
    Stuttgart, Germany
    Well what you describe sounds rather like G70 to NV40.
     
  3. anaqer

    Veteran

    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2004
    Messages:
    1,287
    Likes Received:
    1
    I would buy that. :shock:
     
  4. no-X

    Veteran

    Joined:
    May 28, 2005
    Messages:
    2,298
    Likes Received:
    247
    Maybe G80->G9x high-end is similar to G70->G71 :)
     
  5. AnarchX

    Veteran

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2007
    Messages:
    1,559
    Likes Received:
    34
    G92 to G80 will be a bit like RV530 to R350... :wink:
     
  6. Domell

    Newcomer

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2004
    Messages:
    247
    Likes Received:
    0
    Yyyy what does it exactly mean????
     
  7. DegustatoR

    Veteran

    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2002
    Messages:
    1,319
    Likes Received:
    23
    Location:
    msk.ru/spb.ru
    Not really. Going from 130nm to 110nm was relatively small shrink and they've opted for more complex chip and not for cost-effectiveness.
    What i'm saying is that _maybe_ they'll try to do both this time because 90nm->65nm allows this -- make a chip that is smaller than G80 and costs less to produce (like G71 was comparing to G70) but at the same time make a chip that is faster than G80 (like G70 was compared to NV40 but margins were more or less the same).
    But it's a wild guess really :)

    Whaat?.. 8-\
    OK i guess that means that G92 isn't high-end chip after all... Or not?
     
    #67 DegustatoR, Aug 16, 2007
    Last edited by a moderator: Aug 16, 2007
  8. INKster

    Veteran

    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2006
    Messages:
    2,110
    Likes Received:
    30
    Location:
    Io, lava pit number 12
    G92 is not yet guaranteed to be the codename for a high-end GPU.
    In essence, he is hinting that maybe it will have similar (as in, modest) performance gains when compared to the 8800 GTX/Ultra as the RV530 (Radeon X1600) did against the R350 (Radeon 9800) because it's supposed to be the performance midrange part of the Geforce 9 series (a role more akin to a 8800 GTS 320MB than a 8600 GTS currently).

    Of course, I'm just guessing here... :wink:
     
  9. ninelven

    Veteran

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2002
    Messages:
    1,702
    Likes Received:
    117
    Well a good midrange card would be news indeed.

    What I'd like to see:
    16rops
    16tmus
    128scalars
    256bit/512MB

    All for $200.
     
  10. Jawed

    Legend

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2004
    Messages:
    10,873
    Likes Received:
    767
    Location:
    London
    • significantly increased ALU:TEX ratio
    • reduced TMU count
    • reduced ROP count
    • significantly higher clock(s) - almost compensating for the reduced TMUs/ROPs
    • all for lots less money
    Jawed
     
  11. INKster

    Veteran

    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2006
    Messages:
    2,110
    Likes Received:
    30
    Location:
    Io, lava pit number 12
    And that is surprising because... ?
    With the exception of the first generation of midrange DX10 cards, all midrange cards tend to outperform the previous top of the line.
    And the RV530 is not one, but two generations ahead of R350 (don't forget the forgettable X700/RV410 in between), for not a lot more performance.

    The RV530 equivalent from Nvidia (G73/7600 GT) was still significantly faster, even with slightly lower image quality.
     
  12. Jawed

    Legend

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2004
    Messages:
    10,873
    Likes Received:
    767
    Location:
    London
    I posted an interpretation. That's all.

    Jawed
     
  13. Megadrive1988

    Veteran

    Joined:
    May 30, 2002
    Messages:
    4,638
    Likes Received:
    148
    maybe the new highend flagship refresh of G80 / GF 8800 is going to be G90 (as was thought a few years ago) and the G92 is an upper mid-range part.

    regardless of what Nvidia calls it now, be it G90 or G92 or G9000 or GeForce 9800, the NV55 is what we're talking about -- Inq mentioned NV55 today.

    G80 / GeForce 8800 = NV50 btw, even though Nvidia hasn't been using the NVxx nomenclature for quite some time now.
     
    #73 Megadrive1988, Aug 17, 2007
    Last edited by a moderator: Aug 17, 2007
  14. DegustatoR

    Veteran

    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2002
    Messages:
    1,319
    Likes Received:
    23
    Location:
    msk.ru/spb.ru
    Well, i doubt that they'll do a midrange DX10.1 part before the high end DX10.1 part. So if G92 isn't high end (and G98 is certainly not) then it looks like we're missing something :)
     
  15. Jawed

    Legend

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2004
    Messages:
    10,873
    Likes Received:
    767
    Location:
    London
    NVidia doesn't go D3D10.1 until Q2 2008?

    Jawed
     
  16. Arun

    Arun Unknown.
    Moderator Legend Veteran

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2002
    Messages:
    5,023
    Likes Received:
    299
    Location:
    UK
    No, G92 is high-end (& D3D10.1).

    However, in its single-chip configuration, it is more high-end in the sense of the 8800 GTS than in the sense of the 8800 GTX or Ultra. I'm thinking in terms of current pricing, fwiw. And some SKUs will most likely sell for less than the current 8800 GTS 320MiB...

    What I just said is an indirect conclusion based on reliable information, but this should really be so obvious that I'm not sure that even matters! :)
     
  17. pjbliverpool

    pjbliverpool B3D Scallywag
    Legend

    Joined:
    May 8, 2005
    Messages:
    7,583
    Likes Received:
    703
    Location:
    Guess...
    So we are potentially talking about a GPU thats very close in overall performance to the 8800GTX, has full DX10.1 support and can cost less than an 8800GTS 320MB?

    Let the good times roll :grin:
     
  18. Aerows

    Regular Newcomer

    Joined:
    Nov 19, 2002
    Messages:
    317
    Likes Received:
    6
    Amen to that! :grin:
     
  19. Arun

    Arun Unknown.
    Moderator Legend Veteran

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2002
    Messages:
    5,023
    Likes Received:
    299
    Location:
    UK
    I said that one SKU would likely have >= 8800 GTX performance, and one SKU would likely cost less than the 8800 GTS 320MB. That's all. I think you are reading too much in what I said! :)
     
  20. XMAN26

    Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2003
    Messages:
    702
    Likes Received:
    1

    If it is a single chip, how are they stating 2x glfops performance over g80(GTX)? Are they also moving to a multichip program?
     
Loading...
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

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...