Farcry 2 results: GF100 Vs. GTX285

[T2k]

You think it would be wiser to manufacture two distinct chips for the market? One for HPC and one for the game market? Why then hasnt Nvidia done this? And why do Nvidia margins destroy ATI margins if this is such an unwise business decision? Ill tell you why. Because it is cheaper to build a single GPU and target it via drivers and board specifications than to have two teams design two chips and then run those two chips through an already constrained company like TMSC.

Intel doesnt do what you recommend and neither does AMD on the CPU side. What is so special about GPU's you think it should be done?

This would be a valid argument if Nvidia were able to deliver - but it's 6+ months BEHIND schedule, literally has no meaningful offering in the high-end space since October, nothing in the mid-level since November and now AMD opened a "can of whoop-ass" ((c) JSH) in the entry-level segment as well.

Could they avoid this by bringing out two designs? Of course.
Could they foresee this astronomical fuckup? Not really, their hubris is well-known.

So yes, Nvidia can mostly blame themselves only and their arrogance, nothing else. Design fuckups didn't help to alleviate TSMC's already existing mfr problems...

 

[SirPauly]

Being a supporter of nVidia based on gaming experience potential, simply offer, ATI deserves a lot of credit for creating and executing with the 5xxx series and think it is great as it is creating more competition, innovation for gamers and consumers.

Vile, venom and contempt and the side mentality simply is baiting, petty, insulting and disruptive from either side. A little respect, tolerance, understanding, kindness goes a long way in forums.

 

[T2k]

Being a supporter of nVidia based on gaming experience potential, simply offer, ATI deserves a lot of credit for creating and executing with the 5xxx series and think it is great as it is creating more competition, innovation for gamers and consumers.

Vile, venom and contempt and the side mentality simply is baiting, petty, insulting and disruptive from either side. A little respect, tolerance, understanding, kindness goes a long way in forums.

And, let me add, it's quite obvious that even ATI owners would be better off if Nvidia would come out with a cheap but powerful new offering to counter 5870.

While I found Nvidia's corporate behavior and business tactics more than despicable I'm not my own enemy: a goodd competitor is crucial, it's market 101.

 

[Shilohen]

NV is no charity. If they won't make money they will stop selling.

Not necessarily. Even if, and it's only a if, Fermi end up not competitive from a profitability point of view, nVidia would never admit it, nor admit defeat, so they would most likely sell at loss and absorb that cost hoping that Tesla and/or the next generation make up for it in order to maintain market shares and customer loyalty. Selling at loss can be a valid marketing strategy under some circumstances. Anyway, I agree with Key here, we're end user, customers, we should only care about the price tag that will get attached to it and the performance-feature/price ratio of the product.

 

[tviceman]

did I miss your counter-arguments about the fact that when we compared publicly available numbers it was rather obvious that 360 is a match to a 5870..?

Here's my counter argument:

1. In Anandtech's review of the 5870, the 5870 was 35% faster than the gtx285 @ 1920x1200 4X AA. (62 fps vs. 46)

2. In the video representation starting this thread, the GF100 was 65% faster than the gtx285. (84 vs. 51)

We can assume two things as likely being true. One, in the GF100 demonstration both PC's were likely the same sans the video cards and two, the PC in the GF100 demonstration is not the same as Anandtech's PC used to do the 5870 benchmark. So we don't know for certain yet how the GF100 in the video would perform in Anand's rig. HOWEVER - if the GF100 scaling vs. the GTX285 is the same or similar when put into Anand's rig, and there is no reason to think it won't be similar, it will clearly be faster than the 5870.

Dunno, even if it's true I'm not particularly blown away by this - remember, Crysis and Far Cry 2 are the archetype of TWIMTBP games, always performed much better on Nvidia cards than other games when compared to their ATI counterparts.

But regardless you're already crying foul because you think TWIMTBP is penalizing radeon cards in Far Cry 2. So, if you could be so kind, name me 3 common game benchmarks that you think will be both fair and representative of both vendors so that we can argue about the significance of those results when released.

 

[T2k]

I agree. they will never retreat, that would crush their stock prices, remember - look at theri track records WRT HairForceFX... you bet they already have a team working on its successor: they brought BlowFX out very late (they had no choice), only to get crushed by the alredy reigning king the 9700 Pro but they aggressively spinned everything and maintained the fake facade for the investors while they were busy fixing their outdated design - and it worked out well: after very scarce availability it was pulled and forgotten as soon as 5900 arrived few months later.

 

[Genx87]

This would be a valid argument if Nvidia were able to deliver - but it's 6+ months BEHIND schedule, literally has no meaningful offering in the high-end space since October, nothing in the mid-level since November and now AMD opened a "can of whoop-ass" ((c) JSH) in the entry-level segment as well.

Could they avoid this by bringing out two designs? Of course.
Could they foresee this astronomical fuckup? Not really, their hubris is well-known.

So yes, Nvidia can mostly blame themselves only and their arrogance, nothing else. Design fuckups didn't help to alleviate TSMC's already existing mfr problems...

Are you trying to make the argument if Nvidia went with an HPC and a gaming GPU they wouldnt be behind schedule? Because if you are then why do you make it sound like there is a possibility two designs wouldnt have alleviated their current problem? And what does arrogance have to do with a single large GPU encompassing the GPGPU and gaming market vs two smaller designs?

In fact reading your response I am not sure if you were really addressing what I was saying at all. And instead trolling so you could yap about Nvidia being behind schedule. Which brings us back to the other thread where you dont read the thread and instead choose to troll.

 

[T2k]

Are you trying to make the argument if Nvidia went with an HPC and a gaming GPU they wouldnt be behind schedule? Because if you are then why do you make it sound like there is a possibility two designs wouldnt have alleviated their current problem? And what does arrogance have to do with a single large GPU encompassing the GPGPU and gaming market vs two smaller designs?

Ummm how about the fact that they ignored certain already-known problems, thinking they could do better, let alone ignoring TSMC's struggle ramping up their mfr...? And you can go on and on...

 

[SlowSpyder]

This would be a valid argument if Nvidia were able to deliver - but it's 6+ months BEHIND schedule, literally has no meaningful offering in the high-end space since October, nothing in the mid-level since November and now AMD opened a "can of whoop-ass" ((c) JSH) in the entry-level segment as well.

Could they avoid this by bringing out two designs? Of course.
Could they foresee this astronomical fuckup? Not really, their hubris is well-known.

So yes, Nvidia can mostly blame themselves only and their arrogance, nothing else. Design fuckups didn't help to alleviate TSMC's already existing mfr problems...

I think the reason Nvidia is so behind AMD is more of a question of execution of their strategy, not that the strategy is bad. Nvidia wants to build a big, powerful part than scale it down as well as use older parts to address lower markets.

AMD builds a part that fits a space below the highest end and makes an x2 part for their highest end. I really don't know that one way is better than the other so much as they're just different.

Of course AMD just looks really good right now having gotten their very decent and complete parts out well before Nvidia. I think it probably saves Nvidia money and time overall to have a single part that can compete in the gaming market and the HPC market vs. having to put resources in to building two very different chips. I don't know, that's just my guess. I think we'll just have to wait until Fermi information becomes more available and reliable to see if Nvidia's approach works and will continue to work in the future or not.

 

[T2k]

I think the reason Nvidia is so behind AMD is more of a question of execution of their strategy, not that the strategy is bad. Nvidia wants to build a big, powerful part than scale it down as well as use older parts to address lower markets.

AMD builds a part that fits a space below the highest end and makes an x2 part for their highest end. I really don't know that one way is better than the other so much as they're just different.

Of course AMD just looks really good right now having gotten their very decent and complete parts out well before Nvidia. I think it probably saves Nvidia money and time overall to have a single part that can compete in the gaming market and the HPC market vs. having to put resources in to building two very different chips. I don't know, that's just my guess. I think we'll just have to wait until Fermi information becomes more available and reliable to see if Nvidia's approach works and will continue to work in the future or not.

DUnno but I'm having problems imagining Fermi to be transformed into a passive-cooled yet powerful HTPC card...

 

[Genx87]

Ummm how about the fact that they ignored certain already-known problems, thinking they could do better, let alone ignoring TSMC's struggle ramping up their mfr...? And you can go on and on...

What known problems are those? And how does having two different designs overcome that?

 

[evolucion8]

This is where you are misguided. It takes 4-5 years to make a new GPU, it only takes a year or so to modify a GPU design. Nvidia has not designed a new GPU from ground up since the 6xxx series. They have made tweaks and modifications on each new process. This is similar to ATI and how a real new design GPU since R420. Some people say that the R600 was a complete redesign but it has too many similarities to that of R420. Yes additions like unified shader, hardware tessellation and so fourth constitute as major enhancements but I would not consider that a complete overhaul.

Fermi to my knowledge, is by far the most variant of all GPU's we have seen in a few years. That is why Nvidia could not have created a smaller faster variant then ATI as the R&D went into Fermi.

The 8800 series didn't had anything similar to the 7900 series besides of it's TMU design (Not sure about this), but the R600 only shared similaries with the X1k series with their ringbus memory controller which its later iteration was fully implemented for reads and writes and their Command Queue processor which was heavily tweaked for DX10 support and a Vec5 design, the X1K and below were only scalar GPU's.

While he was a bit on the extreme side, he is more or less correct in this case.

The benchmark floating around of the 360 (assuming that is what it is) was done on the small farm map, not at all the same kind of test most review sites show for FC2. The sites that list the test as the same map show numbers for the 5870 almost identical to what we saw in those leaks. (PC perspective shows 83.5 for the 5870 in that map.. though keep in mind they also peg the 285 at 60+fps for the same map) Though who knows if this was an overclocked card, or a relatively slow engineering sample.

As you said we can't know for sure for some time.. try a bit less hypocrisy next time before you decry someone's spin with spin..

But Far Cry 2 didn't show big difference in performance between the GTX 285 and the HD 5870 because that game isn't challenging enough, plus is very CPU dependent, in other games the HD 5870 is almost twice faster, that's why it's only an hair behind the GTX 295 in many scenarios which is no slouch itself. The raw power of a card can't be judged by a single game because due to the nature of difference between both architectures, one game may favor another or a certain game will not challenge enough the GPU's so little difference can be seen, heck even the GTS 250 performs very close to the GTX 260+ in Far Cry 2. So probably Fermi may perform better than expected, or may be not at all, just a matter of time.

 

[BFG10K]

T2K, you've been reported for trolling up yet another nVidia thread, and for a potential mod call-out against Keys.

I've recommended a temp ban of a week to the administration so you can go outside and smell the roses or something. You've been warned repeatedly in the past about this sort of behavior, but you just don't seem to get it.

Super Moderator BFG10K.

 

[Janooo]

Not necessarily. Even if, and it's only a if, Fermi end up not competitive from a profitability point of view, nVidia would never admit it, nor admit defeat, so they would most likely sell at loss and absorb that cost hoping that Tesla and/or the next generation make up for it in order to maintain market shares and customer loyalty. Selling at loss can be a valid marketing strategy under some circumstances. Anyway, I agree with Key here, we're end user, customers, we should only care about the price tag that will get attached to it and the performance-feature/price ratio of the product.

Selling at loss won't fly for too long. 200 didn't make much money if any. If Fermi follows in the same path then I am not sure what would come next.
Maybe a small chip like AMD has.

 

[DrPizza]

A pile of irrelevant, off topic, and personal attack posts have been removed to help get this thread back on topic. Others have been edited to remove some of the personal attacks & other garbage. -Admin DrPizza

 

[Borealis7]

if the 8800GTX debuted at 600$, and still sold very well, then anything is possible.
there's a lot of money floating around waiting to be spent on the latest bling.
in any case, nVidia have a reputation for performance, and they will deliver. Thing is, they bring a "performance" weapon to a "Price/Performance" war.

 

[thilanliyan]

if the 8800GTX debuted at 600$, and still sold very well, then anything is possible.

It sold for that much because it destroyed anything else that was out. It doesn't seem as if it will be such a comprehensive win this time for nV so it may not sell as well.

 

[RussianSensation]

if the 8800GTX debuted at 600$, and still sold very well, then anything is possible.

GTX280 also debuted at $650! But consider that only 12 months later you could pick up a 4890 and GTX 275 for $175-180 after rebates with similar performance. This goes to show that buying a $600 graphics card at launch is the biggest waste of $. Those who could afford to spend $600 on 8800GTX would have also spent $700 on it too. If GTX 380 is 30% faster than 5870 but costs $599, I am pretty sure most people will still choose the 5870 for price/performance or add another $100 and get the 5970 (if you are already spending $600 on a graphics card, might as well spend $700 and get the best).

I think the most interesting part will be the GTX 360, since it has to deliver better performance at a similar price to 5870, or same performance at a lower price. It's simply not enough for NV to have cards with equal performance because ATI will certainly have refresh cards ready for Spring '10.

 

[tviceman]

GTX280 also debuted at $650! But consider that only 12 months later you could pick up a 4890 and GTX 275 for $175-180 after rebates with similar performance. This goes to show that buying a $600 graphics card at launch is the biggest waste of $. Those who could afford to spend $600 on 8800GTX would have also spent $700 on it too. If GTX 380 is 30% faster than 5870 but costs $599, I am pretty sure most people will still choose the 5870 for price/performance or add another $100 and get the 5970 (if you are already spending $600 on a graphics card, might as well spend $700 and get the best).

The info is starting so (slowly) seep out. This post alludes to a GTX380's MSRP around $520-550 and about equal to gtx285 SLI on performance.

http://www.bjorn3d.com/forum/showpost.php?p=215717&postcount=8

That would put the gtx360 probably at $399 where the 5870 starting prices currently are at, and if the Far Cry 2 benchmark is any indication, the gtx360 ~ 65% better than a gtx285.

I guess we'll find out how true this info is soon enough!

 

[nosfe]

sounds about right though i expect it to be a touch slower than SLI GTX285 and then beat it after a couple of months/driver updates

 

[thilanliyan]

I am definitely excited to see what nV brings to the table though...maybe a GTX360 is in the cards for me if the price is right.

 

[T2k]

I stand by my predictions: GTX360 will be a match to my 5870 and while GTX380 will be faster it won't come close to beating a 5970 - which will be bad news for everyone especially NV...

Damn, I really hoped for a sub-$500 5970 by March - Trifire, buh-bye!

 

[tviceman]

I stand by my predictions: GTX360 will be a match to my 5870 and while GTX380 will be faster it won't come close to beating a 5970 - which will be bad news for everyone especially NV...

Damn, I really hoped for a sub-$500 5970 by March - Trifire, buh-bye!

I do think the gf100 will command slightly higher prices and without a doubt AMD is going to respond with price drops.

Speaking strictly on performance, though, your predictions are a little vague but I think you will be proven wrong. I think the gtx360 (or whatever the second best gf100 card will be named) will outperform a 5870 noticeably (lets say 8% or more) in most benchmarks that are GPU limited.

But if your prediction is accurate, it wouldn't really mean bad news for any of us consumers - especially on the 5970 front. The 5970 is 2 x 2.15 billion transistors, the GF100 is around 3.2 billion transistors. So *shouldn't* the 5970 beat a high end GF100? It's obvious nvidia isn't going to be making as much money per gf100 because AMD has released a great set of high end cards. This will just mean nvidia will work to get their refresher out faster, which should be a leaner, meaner, more cost efficient fermi. Ahh but anyways, lets just wait and see.

 

[T2k]

I do think the gf100 will command slightly higher prices and without a doubt AMD is going to respond with price drops.

AMD didn't raise the price, demand outstripping supplies and etailers did. Unless GTX360 kills 5870 AMD won't lower the MSRPs, only these current exorbitant markups will disappear (they already started winding down.) Remember: officially 5870 is $390 and $5850 is $290 and these are after the November $10 bump AMD did.

Speaking strictly on performance, though, your predictions are a little vague but I think you will be proven wrong. I think the gtx360 (or whatever the second best gf100 card will be named) will outperform a 5870 noticeably (lets say 8% or more) in most benchmarks that are GPU limited.

Let me clarify what I expect: my 5870 and GTX360 will trade blows (new DX11 tessellation is one thing where Fermis should be better) but even if I'm too optimistic for ATI I don't expect GT360 to be overall faster as much as you expect it - especially if I factor in the upcoming CATALYST gains (these gains take up several months to appear)... again, GTX360 will be a match for my 5870 but will come at a higher price, I think.

But if your prediction is accurate, it wouldn't really mean bad news for any of us consumers - especially on the 5970 front. The 5970 is 2 x 2.15 billion transistors, the GF100 is around 3.2 billion transistors. So *shouldn't* the 5970 beat a high end GF100? It's obvious nvidia isn't going to be making as much money per gf100 because AMD has released a great set of high end cards. This will just mean nvidia will work to get their refresher out faster, which should be a leaner, meaner, more cost efficient fermi. Ahh but anyways, lets just wait and see.

Fair enough. I just wanted to get a Hemlock for cheap, that's all.
If I get a 5970 for $550 that's $100-150 savings from today but in the meantime I'd lose $100 on my 5870 ($410) so I should've just bought the 5970 right back when it started shipping in December...

 

[nosfe]

Let me clarify what I expect: my 5870 and GTX360 will trade blows (new DX11 tessellation is one thing where Fermis should be better) but even if I'm too optimistic for ATI I don't expect GT360 to be overall faster as much as you expect it - especially if I factor in the upcoming CATALYST gains (these gains take up several months to appear)... again, GTX360 will be a match for my 5870 but will come at a higher price, I think.

doubtful, that's not how nvidia works, they like to have the faster cards, even if they cost more (to buy). Nvidia knows exactly how fast the 5870 is so it'll be easy for them to make a part that'll be faster. I predict the GTX360 will beat the 5870, not by much but it'll be faster and it will force AMD to lower their prices.