http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=21409
more fud PR BS imo...
more fud PR BS imo...
there is no NV47, but G70 is on the way
- Thread starter DOGMA1138
- Start date
Where did you pick up that it was a mobile part?
A personal favor _xxx_?DaveBaumann said:
Could you answer Dave with just a, "Yes.
", for me please....he has it coming. G? Gigapixel? Mobile TBDR? Ohoho!
Megadrive1988
Veteran
question is, is G70 just Nvidia's next card to combat ATi's R520 Fudo, or is G70 the codename for Nvidia's next-generation technology that will power videocards farther down the road, and Playstation3 ?
digitalwanderer said:A personal favor _xxx_?DaveBaumann said:
Could you answer Dave with just a, "Yes.
Nah, 'yes' doesn't work there. I'd go with "You'll just have to accept that sometimes when I'm commenting on these matters that I know more than I can say."
Megadrive1988 said:
There are multiple device ID's for it already, indicating several SKU's, which means that its probably close to release.
I beg to differ, 'yes' works best when it doesn't fit at all.geo said:Nah, 'yes' doesn't work there. I'd go with "You'll just have to accept that sometimes when I'm commenting on these matters that I know more than I can say."
How many device IDs are there? And how many different mobility models do they generally run? (I thought the "G" stood for "graphics" myself)
Just a random and 100% speculative thought, but in case this isn't a desktop part, it would fit perfectly with the release schedule of the NVIDIA nForce for Intel processors. I wasn't aware of it having integrated graphics, but I'd love to be surprised.
It would make sense for the number to be 70 too, considering it's likely there already is a NV60 in development (although at very preliminary stages ofc). Although obviously that would indicate a totally different architecture than desktop parts; that'd make sense from the point of view that work on the Intel nForce began around NV35's release, when NVIDIA's desktop parts weren't exactly amazing. And a NV4x might have a fair bit of useless transistors for such a design. Still, this theory is a fair bit too far-fetched even from my point of view, so don't listen to me... Although I'm quite intruigued here, really
Uttar
P.S.: The best empty response is "Why do you ask?" imo, although in cases where "yes" is not appropriate, it's a pretty damn good contender as Dig said.
It would make sense for the number to be 70 too, considering it's likely there already is a NV60 in development (although at very preliminary stages ofc). Although obviously that would indicate a totally different architecture than desktop parts; that'd make sense from the point of view that work on the Intel nForce began around NV35's release, when NVIDIA's desktop parts weren't exactly amazing. And a NV4x might have a fair bit of useless transistors for such a design. Still, this theory is a fair bit too far-fetched even from my point of view, so don't listen to me... Although I'm quite intruigued here, really
Uttar
P.S.: The best empty response is "Why do you ask?" imo, although in cases where "yes" is not appropriate, it's a pretty damn good contender as Dig said.
Uttar said:
That only works if the questioner hasn't got a response for it.
Richteralan
Regular
Holy!
It's fun to see people think G70 as a mobile part.......everywhere
It's fun to see people think G70 as a mobile part.......everywhere
No, the question is, what are G71 and G72 as well. 8)
Oh, and IMO, "G" stands for Generation, as in Generation 7.
Oh, and IMO, "G" stands for Generation, as in Generation 7.
Similar threads
