-
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.
So ladies and gents, was fermi a fail after all?
- Thread starter deusexlumina
- Start date
Looking at the amount of **** up's Nvidia's management made since the start of the Fermi sarga, I cant help but feel ATI would have whipped Fermi into better shape than Nvidia have managed to do.
The failure has been on so many levels that Nvida not only lost credibility from the technical failings but also the business aspects and you need to really look at the company to see how the failure has worked its way through the company down to the products.
The failure has been on so many levels that Nvida not only lost credibility from the technical failings but also the business aspects and you need to really look at the company to see how the failure has worked its way through the company down to the products.
So why was the 2900 such a failure eh?
Soldato
- Joined
- 28 May 2007
- Posts
- 10,222
The main reason was tsmc forced amd to build it on 80nm when it was designed for 65nm. We will never know what a 65nm 2900xt could have done as the card was never made.
Associate
- Joined
- 28 Apr 2007
- Posts
- 494
I'd argue what made the 2900XT a failure was simply very poor design choices such as the 512bit bus and internal ring bus which hugely bloated the die size and gave the chip around double the bandwidth it actually required.
Then there was also the change in the way AA was applied in the chip which lead to an atrocious performance drop when AA was enabled in game for 99% of titles.
Fortunately these issues were rectified systematically over the next couple of generations (3 series and 4 series).
Then there was also the change in the way AA was applied in the chip which lead to an atrocious performance drop when AA was enabled in game for 99% of titles.
Fortunately these issues were rectified systematically over the next couple of generations (3 series and 4 series).
Don't ask stupid questions you know the answers to. Thats not what I said. Your memory and ability to read seem to be failing as badly...
Soldato
- Joined
- 28 May 2007
- Posts
- 10,222
Fermi was designed for 40nm. I know you say it was not but most people including me think it was and to back it up the gtx580 is the full fermi design and does a good job on 40nm. It seems nvidia bit of more than they could chew when designing fermi and were not helped by a dodgy tsmc 40nm process and paid the price by losing market share to amd. If nvidia had pulled of a gtx580 when the gtx480 was released nvidia would have been praised but the gamble of going for something so big and powerful never paid off.
Amd on the other hand with the 2900xt paid also but it was more down to tsmc not bringing the correct process on time. Nv had the 40nm process but could not work with it.
Last edited:
As they say proof is in the pudding, and its not like ATI did so well when their back was to the wall...
Fermi was not designed for 40nm - I don't know what if any process it was designed for but it wasn't originally intended for a GeForce design, their back was to the wall with the failure of the 200 series 40nm move and AMD putting the pressure on also I think its difficult to accurately make a distinction between the TSMC failings in regards to the 2900 and GF100.
Granted the exact details of the different situations are a little different but the fact remains under similiar circumstances ATI didn't do so hot either so jiggers comment is ludicrous at best.
Soldato
- Joined
- 28 May 2007
- Posts
- 10,222
I think the one thing that can be said is both designs are the biggest in each company's history and thats where the problem lay with each design as there really was nowhere to go when things went wrong bar cutting the design and specs to fit.
IMO theuve kept it ever since. Admittedly i wasnt really interested in the graphics card market at that time!
Amd dominated the dx11 market and the only reason that nv are selling those fermi chips now at such a high ratE is because they are dirt cheap for their power. Its kinda like an american muscle car vs toyota. Toyota will sell loads and be high tech and support the new tech whilst the muscle car will be noisy and fast
Loving the car theory
I would also like to add that 'Muscle cars' have character and are much more reliable
Loving the car theory
I would also like to add that 'Muscle cars' have character and are much more reliable
muscle cars are also much more likely to blow up and take everything you love with them
Pretty sure it was toyota's that did that?muscle cars are also much more likely to blow up and take everything you love with them
That'd make sense if they had a massive advantage, but they don't.
Wow, do you work for Nvidia?
Last edited: