Soldato
- Joined
- 19 Feb 2007
- Posts
- 15,307
- Location
- London
You could have just said "i doubt it" 
-
Competitor rules
Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.
Rumors of the 4900XT
- Thread starter dom6918
- Start date
Soldato
- Joined
- 29 May 2005
- Posts
- 5,622
- Location
- West London
As far as I see its only an SPs increase and not cores... which ATI badly* needs anyhow to keep ahead of nVidia.
* Might be a little exagerated
First all your PhysX propoganda, and now something like this, it was Nvidia who had to play catch up with ATi to pip its X2 and to reduce their prices.
Do you live in a cave in Peru or something? You seem to paint pictures of PhysX etc that seem to only exist in your head.
Associate
- Joined
- 11 Oct 2007
- Posts
- 1,287
Actually they have a good logic behind them, and are based on leaked sources as well as previous history.
Anyway, yes they are made up now, but i would be very surprised if they are not close to the real thing. Can you give us anything that is not made up?
Man of Honour
- Joined
- 16 May 2005
- Posts
- 31,297
- Location
- Manchester
Nope, but common sense and a very very basic grasp of manufacturing tells me that we won't be seeing 1600sp on the upcoming 40nm cards.
Associate
- Joined
- 11 Oct 2007
- Posts
- 1,287
Why? Common sense was telling us that HD 48xx would be 480 SP, it ended up being pad limited with the GDDR5 controller, they needed to make it bigger and reach approximately 200mm2 die size.
RV740, the successor to 46xx will feature 640sp already at 128-bit GDDR5 with an approximate die size of 100mm2. I wouldn't be surprised with 1600sp, 1280sp are very conservative in my opinion.
Man of Honour
- Joined
- 16 May 2005
- Posts
- 31,297
- Location
- Manchester
I guess we'll just have to wait and see/agree to disagree.
Troll... much?
To correct the record as you seem to have missed the point it was the need for hardware accelerated physics that I was banging on about NOT physx specifically.
ATI is playing a dangerous game with their streaming proc arcitecture so far they have pulled it off with great benefits for consumers but they are dancing on a knife edge there is a very real possibility of them getting left behind on this aspect.
Oh btw nvidia were never playing catch up with the X2 they could have banged out a 200 series "gx2" at anytime they choose to wait til 55nm to reduce power and heat aspects. Its not like X2/gx2 is hard to make you just need 2 boards a bit of circuitry to split the pci-e signal which can be had "off the shelf" and driver support.
Their architecture of numerous SPs just needs higher clock speeds IMO. If you've ever used a RV770 at over 850-900mhz you will know what I'm talking about.
Soldato
- Joined
- 29 May 2005
- Posts
- 5,622
- Location
- West London
Far from a troll, you always point from a theoritical point of a view irrespective of what's actually happening in the market.
In other words, there are no decent physics accelerated games, ATi were more consumer friendly in the sense they brought costs down and Nvidia played catch up with the 295.
Keep going.
It would scale well with higher frequencies but performance is still highly susceptible to the kind of work load your running on there.
Yes in the current climate and I always agreed with that point, so I'm not sure what your point is - you seem to be constantly mis-interpreting me either because your genuinely don't understand my point or you don't like my point.
Soldato
- Joined
- 29 May 2005
- Posts
- 5,622
- Location
- West London
Then stop posting drivel like
As far as I see its only an SPs increase and not cores... which ATI badly* needs anyhow to keep ahead of nVidia.
* Might be a little exagerated
You kept preaching about hardware physics and how ATI needs them...for what? A game which is mediocre at best, Mirror's Edge? Are you going to tell us all that 3d gaming (which has fell flat on its feet before) is important and ATi need to up their ante?
Your completely mis-understanding where my point was coming from...
The OP was comparing upcoming ATI cards against the 295 (with 480sp) and nVidias coming cards which are rumoured to have 384sp (imagine the potential of that in SLI mode) ATI are going to have to keep pushing up their SP count to compete in theoretical shader heavy future titles. No matter where the workload is coming from be it rendering, physics or something else using GPGPU type functionality.
The OP was comparing upcoming ATI cards against the 295 (with 480sp) and nVidias coming cards which are rumoured to have 384sp (imagine the potential of that in SLI mode) ATI are going to have to keep pushing up their SP count to compete in theoretical shader heavy future titles. No matter where the workload is coming from be it rendering, physics or something else using GPGPU type functionality.
exactly - read the original post again - I was reacting to the way the person who started the thread was making a big thing of the "core" increases like it was a suprise and throwing in a little flavor of my own because I don't believe that ATI's SP arc scales as well with GPGPU type applications which in the future will become much more of an issue.
The stream processors work differently for each card....
More SP's will help, as if you add more SP's this means you get extra performance, the reason for this is because there are more than before, which means more performance.
Adding more SP will increase the performance, that's for sure. What I am saying is that adding more is not the performance silver bullet.