• 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.

Why can’t Nvidia supply Kepler/GK104/GTX680? TSMC is blameless, Kepler is a self-infl

Soldato
Joined
7 May 2006
Posts
12,183
Location
London, Ealing
Nvidia has been busily blaming TSMC for their many supposed failings on 28nm, but SemiAccurate has learned what is really going on. The short story is that the finger pointing around the Kepler launch problems should be at Nvidia, not TSMC.

You might recall that all TSMC 28nm customers are complaining about tight wafer starts, but other than one little ‘whoopsie’ that still hasn’t been adequately explained, all now seems well in Hsinchu. Customers, other than Nvidia, don’t seem to be complaining about yields, quite the contrary, most are quite direct in stating that they don’t have a problem with 28nm yields. Please be aware that yields are not directly related to wafer start availability. By their own admission, Nvidia is having yield problems, and big ones at that. Any wafer start shortages are problems on top of the horrendous yields.

Their flagship GK104/GTX680 GPU has been shipping for a month or so, and availability is still non-existent, completely sold out at any credible retailer. Moreover SemiAccurate sources say that the initial shipments of GTX680s did not hit 1000 worldwide, and to date, less than 10,000 have been shipped in total. Compare and contrast that to AMD’s Tahiti/HD7970/HD7950 chips which had an initial shipment of over 10,000 units, a second shipment before launch, and many more shipments to date. This is in spite of AMD producing a larger chip on a process in a much more immature state at time of shipment. The two smaller GPUs, Pitcairn and Cape Verde with different mask sets from Tahiti, have shipped proportionately greater volumes on top of that, AMD is unquestionably not having problems with yield.

Still, non-existent supply is a symptom, not an explanation, and Nvidia keeps insisting that the shortages are a perception problem, not a supply issue. This however is directly contradicted by both their statements and the leaks from green haired moles. The one key piece of the puzzle that SemiAccurate moles recently managed to confirm was that the problem is indeed Nvidia’s fault, it is a design problem.

This was confirmed when another source and said Nvidia is looking to redo their masks. He didn’t know where in the process things stood, but did say a base layer change is likely, basically the worst case scenario. If Nvidia has to redo this, it is a two quarter process before yields improve, so Q3 best case for yield improvements if they started things this year. SemiAccurate does not currently know where in the decision making process things currently stand though, and Nvidia may just tough it out until the GK114 update makes it a moot point.

As things stand, several questions remain open. When was the defect found? How bad are yields? Does it affect the other 28nm die, the GK106/GK107? Can Nvidia supply OEMs the mobile GPUs they promised? Can they make any Kepler part profitably at this point? One thing you can say for sure is that the problems Nvidia is having on 28nm are self-inflicted, TSMC is absolutely 100% blame free in this instance.S|A
semiaccurate.com/2012/05/01/why-cant-nvidia-supply-keplergk104gtx680/

That may explain a few things with perception of stock selling out between the brands and why.
 
Would transistor density be an issue as Kepler's is far better so a small defect for AMD would be a larger issue for Nvidia?
 
semiaccurate.com/2012/05/01/why-cant-nvidia-supply-keplergk104gtx680/

That may explain a few things with perception of stock selling out between the brands and why.

A good read but I tend to disagree. I have looked at several e-tailers and have seen stock in most of them across the world (mainly looked at here/europe and USA TBH.
 
Hold on didn't Gibbo say that they had over 100 units in stock on the day they went live, that would have been 10% of the worldwide launch stock for just this one company, I don't think so somehow. That article smacks of Charlie...ness
 
Would transistor density be an issue as Kepler's is far better so a small defect for AMD would be a larger issue for Nvidia?

Itself, no, if Nvidia designed something with too tight a transistor density while ignoring design rules and made something that has worse yields, its still Nvidia's fault. I actually can't remember what the transistor density is like on the 7870 vs 680gtx but the 7970 is a VERY different design to the 680gtx, different features all effect transistor density, more/less cache, gpgpu, memory controller, rops, shaders, everything has a different design/layout and different density.

Density, layout, all things that go hand in hand with making a chip for a specific process, you HAVE to make a chip for a process and if you do it wrong and get **** yields, that would be Nvidia's fault.

The fairly obvious fact is, as stated in the article, Nvidia is once again blaming TSMC, while no one else is having problems.

As for saying he's wrong because you can go on a website and find a 680gtx, doesn't mean much. Look at the 680gtx list on here, the vast majority or on pre-order, 22 listed(I'm excluding watercooled ones) 6 are in stock, 2 have over 10 pieces in stock. Most of them are only in stock as they are vastly higher priced than comparable models, so people are waiting for a £430 card vs buying the same thing for £470. The watercooling models I excluded for the same reason, extremely poor value and extremely limited choice of watercooling, the vast majority want to buy a normal card and add watercooling they want to it.

7970, all but one card in stock, the vast majority with over 10 in stock, same goes worldwide on just about every site and its sold massively massively more.


But here is the main thing, Nvidia are going on about lack of wafers, the number of wafers AMD has added for something like the 7770 will be probably 50 times the number of wafers AMD did for the 7970, and those are in plenty of stock, and the 7870 would have more wafers than the 7970, and those are in plenty of stock everywhere and all selling very very well.

The 680gtx needs (with a proper yield) a very very small number of wafers. We're talking about a very low volume part, 100k cards should be ridiculously easy to make, a 7770 is something that will sell in the millions, the 7970 something well under 500k. Capacity will be a problem if you are making an entire range, top to bottom, Nvidia aren't they are talking about the lowest volume, small number of wafers, and can't get enough out.
 
Whilst you make valid points DM and I am not disagreeing with you but surely it is NVIDIA's best interest to get out as many 680's as possible from day 1?

It seems daft to me that they are selling well and yet shortages are stopping NVIDIA's pockets from bulging?
 
Itself, no, if Nvidia designed something with too tight a transistor density while ignoring design rules and made something that has worse yields, its still Nvidia's fault. I actually can't remember what the transistor density is like on the 7870 vs 680gtx but the 7970 is a VERY different design to the 680gtx, different features all effect transistor density, more/less cache, gpgpu, memory controller, rops, shaders, everything has a different design/layout and different density.

Density, layout, all things that go hand in hand with making a chip for a specific process, you HAVE to make a chip for a process and if you do it wrong and get **** yields, that would be Nvidia's fault.

The fairly obvious fact is, as stated in the article, Nvidia is once again blaming TSMC, while no one else is having problems.

As for saying he's wrong because you can go on a website and find a 680gtx, doesn't mean much. Look at the 680gtx list on here, the vast majority or on pre-order, 22 listed(I'm excluding watercooled ones) 6 are in stock, 2 have over 10 pieces in stock. Most of them are only in stock as they are vastly higher priced than comparable models, so people are waiting for a £430 card vs buying the same thing for £470. The watercooling models I excluded for the same reason, extremely poor value and extremely limited choice of watercooling, the vast majority want to buy a normal card and add watercooling they want to it.

7970, all but one card in stock, the vast majority with over 10 in stock, same goes worldwide on just about every site and its sold massively massively more.


But here is the main thing, Nvidia are going on about lack of wafers, the number of wafers AMD has added for something like the 7770 will be probably 50 times the number of wafers AMD did for the 7970, and those are in plenty of stock, and the 7870 would have more wafers than the 7970, and those are in plenty of stock everywhere and all selling very very well.

The 680gtx needs (with a proper yield) a very very small number of wafers. We're talking about a very low volume part, 100k cards should be ridiculously easy to make, a 7770 is something that will sell in the millions, the 7970 something well under 500k. Capacity will be a problem if you are making an entire range, top to bottom, Nvidia aren't they are talking about the lowest volume, small number of wafers, and can't get enough out.


Care to share your claim on sales figures or is it your opinion.
 
A good read but I tend to disagree. I have looked at several e-tailers and have seen stock in most of them across the world (mainly looked at here/europe and USA TBH.

I can tell you that the US has hardly no stock - it sells out as soon as its avilable. People buy em up.
 
I can tell you that the US has hardly no stock - it sells out as soon as its avilable. People buy em up.

Fair point, I just looked earlier and found stock from several e-tailers. Can't be bothered rechecking as I don't realy care TBH.
 
supply and demand, there is currently more demand than supply meaning that those that are in stock tend to be at a higher price than those not in stock but accepting pre-orders, for the retailers they get the best of both worlds by selling some cards at inflated prices but also capturing sales (and money in their bank accounts earning interest) from buyers willing to preorder and wait

high demand doesn't necessarily indicate excessive lack of supply, as mentoined above, OCUK have had hundreds of these cards go through their books which if the numbers mentioned above were true means that OCUK have sold a very high percentage of the worldwide supply of the cards, which I find hard to believe

even in the US its not difficult to find some etailers with stock, but yes it is at a higher price, but even then they are still selling at those prices
 
Hold on didn't Gibbo say that they had over 100 units in stock on the day they went live, that would have been 10% of the worldwide launch stock for just this one company, I don't think so somehow. That article smacks of Charlie...ness

Charlie Demerjian, I remember his rantings on The Inquirer.
 
Last edited:
The same article also said there were only 1000 units at lunch for the GTX 680, which seems like total bull.

Anyway Charlie has been know for having a hate hard on for nVidia for a few years now
 
The same article also said there were only 1000 units at lunch for the GTX 680, which seems like total bull.

Anyway Charlie has been know for having a hate hard on for nVidia for a few years now

Americans are known for thinking theirs is the only market that matters.
 
Back
Top Bottom