Where are the GT200 mainstream GPUs?

GT216: 192-bit GDDR3: 32xTMU/128xSP/12xROP in order to keep-up with GTS250:
  • TMUs are say 25% better per clock, so 738*64/1.25/32=1180MHz - 60% increase
  • ROPs are same performance per clock, so 738*16/12=984MHz - 33% increase
Jawed
 
Arun said:
The chip called 'GT206' was canned, it was a 8 TMU discrete GPU mostly replacing G98. There were no other 65/55nm derivatives because 40nm was supposed to be available earlier than this. Is that a good enough reply? :)
Click to expand...
The Elsa slides clearly indicated GT206 being high performance part, I would assume the "GT206" is indeed GT200b like suspected a long time ago
 
Jawed said:
Haven't you heard, RV740 is taking over that slot!
Click to expand...
I think there is still room for the RV730, although it of course depends on wafer costs & yields for 55nm and 40nm processes.
RV740 XT might replace the HD 4850. It will compete mainly against GeForce 9800 GT.
RV740 Pro can take on the GeForce 9600 GT, which is faster than RV730.
In time, RV730 will be EOL'd and maybe superceded by an RV740 salvage part, but that time is still months away IMHO. I also think nVidia 40nm parts are months away since they reportedly have a fat nVentory of 55nm chips.
 
Lukfi said:
I think there is still room for the RV730, although it of course depends on wafer costs & yields for 55nm and 40nm processes.
RV740 XT might replace the HD 4850. It will compete mainly against GeForce 9800 GT.
Click to expand...
Taking over 4850 slot requires it to compete against 9800GTX+ aka GTS250, not 9800GT
 
Pantagruel's Friend said:
Still, it looks faster or at least not slower under Vista than under XP on a 4870. Compared to the 9600GT losing half the fps, looks like there's truth behind the rumors.
Click to expand...

I wonder if it's also leveraging DX10.1 rather than just 10.0. In that case, it's possible that even GT200 might not be able to keep up with 4870 in Vista.

Or it could just be Nvidia doesn't care about this possible title and aren't helping them optimize for their arch. Who knows.

Regards,
SB
 
I am slowly getting into PC DIY and if my research is correct, the GT2xx also have really good power management. Idle draws are low. This is a factor that has held me back from acquiring the HD48xx family. I know they are VFM but the power draw is not very good.

I wish AMD new HD49xx can improve on power usage or else i have to continue praying for the GT200 mainstream GPU. I mean who games 24/7?
 
FUDie said:
A computer that's turned off uses no power.

-FUDie
Click to expand...

But it's also quite useless if you want to look something up on the internet or be notified when a mail comes in or sit and watch soccer while the wife's occupying the living room tv set or... and the list goes on.

But OTOH HD 4850 meanwhile has quite a good power characteristic in idle mode - only HD 4870 is still lacking a bit.
 
CarstenS said:
But it's also quite useless if you want to look something up on the internet or be notified when a mail comes in or sit and watch soccer while the wife's occupying the living room tv set or... and the list goes on.
Click to expand...
So all of this means your computer must be on 24/7? That was my point to the earlier poster.

-FUDie
 
That depends, but the more it is on and not in full throttle gaming mode, the more important a good idle mode becomes.
 
CarstenS said:
That depends, but the more it is on and not in full throttle gaming mode, the more important a good idle mode becomes.
Click to expand...
Or your could turn it around and say, the more full-time gaming you do, the more power-efficient the 4870 becomes compared to the competition's high-end products ;)

-FUDie
 
CarstenS said:
Even if you disregard the powerhog called furmark, a look at the graphics card's power consumption in Crysis Warhead tells another story.
Click to expand...
Last time I checked, Furmark was running significantly faster on the 4870 compared to the 280... is it any real surprise that the 4870 uses more power there? Obviously, Furmark isn't the "power virus" for the 280. Of course, most sites only publish the power consumption numbers, not the actual performance.

Here are some results for Furmark (1280x1024 no AA):
4870 - 96 fps
280 - 71 fps

This was with stock clocks for both boards.

I can't speak for Crysis Warhead performance I have not looked at it.

-FUDie
 
FUDie said:
A computer that's turned off uses no power.

-FUDie
Click to expand...

Except that while I generally use a computer 10-14 hours a day depending on how much work I need to get done, it's actually only gaming about 1-3 hours a day.

So, yes, idle power is quite important to some of us (note I have a 4870 and no not happy about the idle power).

I suppose I could just buy another computer for non-gaming but that would be a huge waste of money for two computers when one should do the job just fine.

Regards,
SB
 
Jawed said:
It's quite old and there's been no other hint of this.
Click to expand...

Seemingly by accident awhile back fudzilla stumbled across the first 3 40nm chips:
GT210 - 40nm G98
GT220 - 40nm G96
GT225 - 40nm G92/192bit
(Above is very confusing with the code names GT21X vr-zone leaked)
They are going to be mainly OEM and mobile parts, don't know that there will be much at all in the way of new features. Looks very much like the recent 65nm->55nm shrinks, seen it as referred to twice now as a "cost-down" operation.

Guessing after they have sorted the above out might venture again into the performance segment with some new designs.

Finally have unfounded rumour that the GT214 was a G92 that didnt work cause of too much leakage. They redid from scratch as the GT215.

(Above might all be complete "smoke shell" - if so i congratulate them, it was very well performed ;))
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

A
Are there flaws in Sony's PS3 strategy?
2
Replies
35
Views
9K
Acert93
A
Back
Top