-
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.
Nvidia GT200 released in July ?
- Thread starter Devious
- Start date
'Aye, but if the specs are right (i.e. the huge amount of shaders that were described some time last year, not sure on the numbers), then it'll be much more like the jump from the 6 series to the 7 series, while they used the same architecture, it was improved on in a way that showed very noticeable differences.
Edit: On that note, come on you red team, bring out RV770 damn it (or DAAMIT as the case may be).
Edit: On that note, come on you red team, bring out RV770 damn it (or DAAMIT as the case may be).
Caporegime
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 33,188
if they aren't called something like 10800gtx's then its another refresh. Watch for a slightly larger rop or shader number, back to higher bus, maybe even a 512mbit bus and down to 55nm. If its called a 9900 anything then it 100% certainly won't be "next gen".
Nvidia's whole plan since the 3800 was coming at 55nm and very cheap was to move to as small a process as possible as quickly as possible. 65nm sucks, runs hot and nvidia want shot.
My guess, it will be identical bar refresh style higher clocks and 55nm. Anything more and they'd give it a new generation name.
ATi's 55nm 256mbit parts were just so cheap. Even though nvidia had issues with hot running 65nm(remember in theory it should run MUCH less power and cooler than 90nm, and its really not at all, ati had that issue with 65nm too, so skipped it), they couldn't "not" bring out 65nm parts as they had them ready and was the only way to compete with ATi. If they delayed for 55nm and hadn't had anything but a £200gts and a £300gtx, and 3850's were at £100 they would have sold a total of 3 cards over 6 months.
No idea why Nvidia keep naming the new cores as if they were "next gen". They'd usually give a core redone on smaller process a similar name, not pass them off as next gen.
Nvidia's whole plan since the 3800 was coming at 55nm and very cheap was to move to as small a process as possible as quickly as possible. 65nm sucks, runs hot and nvidia want shot.
My guess, it will be identical bar refresh style higher clocks and 55nm. Anything more and they'd give it a new generation name.
ATi's 55nm 256mbit parts were just so cheap. Even though nvidia had issues with hot running 65nm(remember in theory it should run MUCH less power and cooler than 90nm, and its really not at all, ati had that issue with 65nm too, so skipped it), they couldn't "not" bring out 65nm parts as they had them ready and was the only way to compete with ATi. If they delayed for 55nm and hadn't had anything but a £200gts and a £300gtx, and 3850's were at £100 they would have sold a total of 3 cards over 6 months.
No idea why Nvidia keep naming the new cores as if they were "next gen". They'd usually give a core redone on smaller process a similar name, not pass them off as next gen.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 33,188
it can't be a "huge" jump or it wouldn't be called 9900, theres simply no question there. if a company , ANY company can get away with calling something new and massively better they will. If they simply can't get away with calling it a 10800gtx it just can't be that much better. Plus the 9600gt kinda shows shading power is all well and good. but the card needs balance, same rops, way less shaders, similar end result? Needs more texture units and more importantly i think, ROP's, not shaders.
Thats why AMD have had issues, they really might have increased the efficiency and clock speed of the rops, but they've been stuck at 16 for a while and limited texturing units.
Not a shot at you, but I hardly think that nVidia's namescheme is anything to go by these days. I personally wouldn't be surprised if they released their next-gen product as GeForce2 just to screw with us.
Also, the 9600 GT should have only 32 TMUs (provided the G92 shader:tmu ratio holds true for G94). For comparison's sake, the 8800 GTS 512MB (G92) has 64, and the 8800 GTX (G80) has 32, so 32 is hardly a limited number, and somehow I doubt that all that texturing power in the GTS is being used to its full.
So what have we got left? Well the two numbers that the 9600 GT remains consistent with the 8800 GTS - memory bandwidth and pixel fillrate power. So, presumably, a G92 based card with the GTX's 384-bit memory bus and 24 ROPs should be pretty powerful?
If not, maybe the problem is elsewhere? I mean we have all these graphics cards with fairly different specifications, but they all seem to perform within a 20% margin of one-another (except the GX2, of course).
Edit: Also, AMD/ATi cards probably would do with extra shaders, since shader effects aren't all that they do, they also do AA.
Last edited:
What can I say, they bring it upon themselves with the promise of next-gen tech being purely revisions and rebranding of existing tech, or just the old 'let's whack more GPUs on a single card instead of making a superior single GPU solution'.
Of course I'll be waiting for some proper benchmarks before discounting it completely, but from the early news it seems a fair few people are going to be disappointed again, and perhaps even 'jumping ship' as it were, to ATi.
Of course I'll be waiting for some proper benchmarks before discounting it completely, but from the early news it seems a fair few people are going to be disappointed again, and perhaps even 'jumping ship' as it were, to ATi.
Not hatred, but anger and frustration about Nvida's product range. I love the competition between ATI and Nvida, but at the moment Nvida is digging a hole with all these refreshes and 'New names , for nothing new' moto. Its a shame really but what can you do tbh
Not hatred, but anger and frustration about Nvida's product range. I love the competition between ATI and Nvida, but at the moment Nvida is digging a hole with all these refreshes and 'New names , for nothing new' moto. Its a shame really but what can you do tbh
But why blame nvidia? ATI deserve as much if not more blame as they havent forced nvidia to release anything better, and until they do they won't.
Because they're the ones bringing out the thing, not ATi.
At least AMD/ATi actually fixed a few glaring problems going from the 2900 series to the 3800 series. Going from the 8 series to the 9 series, nvidia are doing all of crap all other than changing the cooler and upping the clock by 25 whole MHz.
I wouldn't call the 9800GX2 crap, 9800GTX isnt a bad card either, we havent seen the 9900 based card yet, perhaps there just saving the best till last?
I wouldn't call the 9800GX2 crap, 9800GTX isnt a bad card either, we havent seen the 9900 based card yet, perhaps there just saving the best till last?
I wouldn't say they were bad cards at all, no. I'm just saying they aren't doing a lot better. Okay, very nice, we now have two 8800 GTS's that we can stick down one PCI-E socket. Okay, we have a slightly overclocked 8800 GTS with a slightly cuvier cooler. Lovely.
But almost two years after the 8800 GTX came out, wouldn't it be nice to see what comes next?
About 16 months actually, but yes it be be nice but the lack of competition has slowed everything down.
About 16 months actually, but yes it be be nice but the lack of competition has slowed everything down.
More like 19 months actually
More like 19 months actually
Nope, it was released 08/11/06, 16 months and 23 days ago.
Last edited: