• Guest, The rules for the P & N subforum have been updated to prohibit "ad hominem" or personal attacks against other posters. See the full details in the post "Politics and News Rules & Guidelines."

Fermi/GF100/GF104 clarification...more delays?

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Lonbjerg

Diamond Member
Dec 6, 2009
4,419
0
0
Lonbjerg I see you like talking . Lets see what your true worth is. Go retrieve the correct post I am referring to . Once you read it . You to may have the capacity to comprehend what was written so long ago. I am not aware of any company that has succeded in trying to do what nv tried to do . certainly No fabless company has.
This was not what I was waiting for?
Before I "indulge" your distraction, care to deliver as you promised?
 

Soleron

Senior member
May 10, 2009
337
0
71
Charlie is (on the forum) still saying Oak Ridge did drop Fermi. Eventually they will have either built a supercomputer with Fermi or it will be obvious they haven't. So it is verifiable.

Charlie isn't perfect, but who else was willing to say Fermi would be late, hot and underperforming (last two pending confirmation) at the time? Fudzilla and others are sometimes right because they spam every possible viewpoint and spec list. Charlie has been consistently saying Nvidia has problems with getting big new chips to work - he was right about GT200, about 40nm GT212 (where's that then) and now Fermi.
 

yh125d

Diamond Member
Dec 23, 2006
6,907
0
76
I am against fud-sites, no GPU manufactors...thas is my only bias.
But did you look at his site at the time?
From your posts in this thread you seem just as biased as charlie is against NV


Yes I did look at his site and there were only those two ads. Just looked again and only the flyspy. I still don't understand how people get off saying it looks like an AMD ad-page when there are rarely if ever any AMD ads on it.


Or did that fact "slip" you mind?
What "fact"? You referenced no "facts". What are you talking about here?





Also, you're generalizing things into two categories - truth backed up by facts, and utter crap pulled out of someones ass with no rhyme or reason.

But there's a middle ground you're missing - this is where guys like charlie get their stuff - predicting possible outcomes based on logic/things known at the time. There's nothing wrong with speculating what MAY happen when done so using logic and deduction
 

Lonbjerg

Diamond Member
Dec 6, 2009
4,419
0
0
Its here . I am sure other members are aware of it . You go retrieve show us your skills.
Nice fallacy.
But excpected.
So for all your bosting about high I.Q and near photographic memory...and despite your own words:

Nemesis1 said:
Your correct and you probably won't get it until I retrieve that thread and show you the very simple logic I based it off of. That most in the industry would agree with.
; you now cling to fallcies and wan't to turn the tables around?

Typical troll, all FUD and nothing to show...you sir don't impress me and are the type of person that does no good and all harm.
 

akugami

Diamond Member
Feb 14, 2005
4,644
82
91
I thought we already went through this with Wreckage insisting Charlie is a liar. Charlie (and his ilk) are rumor mongers and by nature they are going to be wrong more often than right. They take tiny pieces of information and then try to piece it together. Sometimes spinning things wholesale. Again, more often than not they are wrong but that doesn't mean they don't have contacts or don't get a few juicy tidbits.

With Charlie, he even went through his thought process and outlined why he came to the conclusion of what the likely dates for Fermi is in a recent article. Is there a lot of speculation? Of course, but as I pointed out earlier it's no different than what some people at very large analytical companies like IDC do. It's just Charlie uses more speculation and latches on to more rumors than what someone at IDC would be willing to do.

There is no question from Charlie's articles that he is biased against nVidia. Just don't take that bias to mean he doesn't at least get some information that is factual and correct.
 

Lonbjerg

Diamond Member
Dec 6, 2009
4,419
0
0
From your posts in this thread you seem just as biased as charlie is against NV


Yes I did look at his site and there were only those two ads. Just looked again and only the flyspy. I still don't understand how people get off saying it looks like an AMD ad-page when there are rarely if ever any AMD ads on it.




What "fact"? You referenced no "facts". What are you talking about here?





Also, you're generalizing things into two categories - truth backed up by facts, and utter crap pulled out of someones ass with no rhyme or reason.

But there's a middle ground you're missing - this is where guys like charlie get their stuff - predicting possible outcomes based on logic/things known at the time. There's nothing wrong with speculating what MAY happen when done so using logic and deduction
I guess you didn't read my post with links to Charlie's ramblings...even before the facts where on the table?
He got lucky, because nobody, and I mean nobdy knew that before A2 and A3 respins.
(Meaning that we are down to the "magic crystal-ball" argument..and this link should be played then)



Or you didn't notice that Charlie cleaned up his site, after NVIDA spilled the beans about his affiliation?

And because I dislike Charlie I must be "pro-NVIDIA"?

Nice "logic" there, but you also set yourself up for a nice owngoal there.
Because by that reasoning all that are for Charlie must be "pro-AMD"...or is your circulear logic a one-way street?
 

Lonbjerg

Diamond Member
Dec 6, 2009
4,419
0
0
I thought we already went through this with Wreckage insisting Charlie is a liar. Charlie (and his ilk) are rumor mongers and by nature they are going to be wrong more often than right. They take tiny pieces of information and then try to piece it together. Sometimes spinning things wholesale. Again, more often than not they are wrong but that doesn't mean they don't have contacts or don't get a few juicy tidbits.

With Charlie, he even went through his thought process and outlined why he came to the conclusion of what the likely dates for Fermi is in a recent article. Is there a lot of speculation? Of course, but as I pointed out earlier it's no different than what some people at very large analytical companies like IDC do. It's just Charlie uses more speculation and latches on to more rumors than what someone at IDC would be willing to do.

There is no question from Charlie's articles that he is biased against nVidia. Just don't take that bias to mean he doesn't at least get some information that is factual and correct.
Funny that his first articles didn't mention an A2 respin...or an A3 respin.
Claming a lucky pot-shot guesswork is "knowlegde" is far out, hillarious...but not logic or intelligent at all.
 

Voo

Golden Member
Feb 27, 2009
1,684
0
76
Fermi will be out exactly on March 8th


Hey now if this really comes true, I'm an absolute genius right? Because I got it right, even though no facts back up my claim!

Charlies last post I read about fermi wasn't as bad as the first ones, he argued rather logically what the release date would be depending on several facts that nobody knew (and still knows).
"If this and this happens, the release should be around this time".. that's the best we can hope for at the moment, everything else is just uninteresting, because it's simply guessing.


And just being lucky and getting the date right doesn't make anyone more intelligent, especially if that person isn't even capable of writing one coherent sentence or argue on the known facts. It's not about if you're right or wrong - nvidias anticpated "release date" probably changed several times - it's about how you argue about it. If a fire destroyed TSMCs fab next week everything would be changed - that wouldn't mean that the earlier predictions were made by idiots, just that situations can and do change.
 
Last edited:

nitromullet

Diamond Member
Jan 7, 2004
9,031
36
91
How did a thread that didn't originally contain any semiaccurate.com links become a debate about Charlie?
 

Lonyo

Lifer
Aug 10, 2002
21,939
6
81
How did a thread that didn't originally contain any semiaccurate.com links become a debate about Charlie?
Because the mods aren't able/willing to do their job and ban the members of this forum who don't really contribute.
 

Lonbjerg

Diamond Member
Dec 6, 2009
4,419
0
0
How did a thread that didn't originally contain any semiaccurate.com links become a debate about Charlie?
Because, as my signature states, fanboys live and die by these rumour-sites...and nobody does anything to stop the FUD from these sites.
 

akugami

Diamond Member
Feb 14, 2005
4,644
82
91
Funny that his first articles didn't mention an A2 respin...or an A3 respin.
Claming a lucky pot-shot guesswork is "knowlegde" is far out, hillarious...but not logic or intelligent at all.
And you know what is even funnier? I think he was the first, at least to my knowledge, who even mentions when the A2 respin took place. His "lucky pot-shot guesswork" has panned out on more than one occasion and the chance of that happening if all he's doing is shooting blindfolded is extremely slim.

The fact that he laid out scenarios on the possible release date of Fermi in one of his recent articles shows that he's actually working through things logically and with at least some information that wasn't widely known before his article. This shows he's using logic and has at least a few sources to information that the common person/investor is not privy to.

Some of your "claims" about Charlie are more in the way of character assassination and not really based on facts. Again, not trying to defend Charlie's attitude. He is a biased person and anyone who isn't a fanboy can see he has something of an agenda against nVidia. It's just that we should separate his bias from the article and then weigh what is said and decide if it is true or not. He's been right often enough to warrant a look even though he's been wrong more often than right.
 

Nemesis 1

Lifer
Dec 30, 2006
11,366
2
0
Funny that his first articles didn't mention an A2 respin...or an A3 respin.
Claming a lucky pot-shot guesswork is "knowlegde" is far out, hillarious...but not logic or intelligent at all.

Man oh man . If the mods will allow time to have fun with you . This is a post from Sept . NO one new about the 5900 series But I did .

The supposed Huge ASS KIcking post that have plagued this forum for 3 nonths . You know the one were NV says one thing than changes names of the 200 series to 300 series . You been here awhile . You even took part in those post here at AT. So get your own links to the Great NV 300 .

Its funny ATIs R300 was a game changer. NV 5900 stunk place up . Can't wait for ATi 5900 it should kick ass. NV 300 had better be good really good. Or ATI will have turned the tables on the 5900 and 300 series cards for ATI/NV . ATI making a great 5900 and NV making a stinky 300.

Live with it until NV shows something , Nv go to back of BUS .
 

Lonbjerg

Diamond Member
Dec 6, 2009
4,419
0
0
And you know what is even funnier? I think he was the first, at least to my knowledge, who even mentions when the A2 respin took place. His "lucky pot-shot guesswork" has panned out on more than one occasion and the chance of that happening if all he's doing is shooting blindfolded is extremely slim.
And?
He didn't mention A2 or A3 in his first tirades.
Infact A2 and A3 could have not happned at all...woulnd't have changed one bit of his ramblings.

The fact that he laid out scenarios on the possible release date of Fermi in one of his recent articles shows that he's actually working through things logically and with at least some information that wasn't widely known before his article. This shows he's using logic and has at least a few sources to information that the common person/investor is not privy to.
This in no logic to making a lucky guess, not mentioning A2 and A3...that lucky guesswork, not something to admire.

Some of your "claims" about Charlie are more in the way of character assassination and not really based on facts. Again, not trying to defend Charlie's attitude. He is a biased person and anyone who isn't a fanboy can see he has something of an agenda against nVidia. It's just that we should separate his bias from the article and then weigh what is said and decide if it is true or not. He's been right often enough to warrant a look even though he's been wrong more often than right.
Make enough "prediction2 and some will come close..or hit dead on.
That dosn't mean that it is of any value.
Grab a dice...throw it..and use the numbers to make predictions.
That would be just as accurate.
 

Lonbjerg

Diamond Member
Dec 6, 2009
4,419
0
0
Man oh man . If the mods will allow time to have fun with you . This is a post from Sept . NO one new about the 5900 series But I did .

The supposed Huge ASS KIcking post that have plagued this forum for 3 nonths . You know the one were NV says one thing than changes names of the 200 series to 300 series . You been here awhile . You even took part in those post here at AT. So get your own links to the Great NV 300 .

Its funny ATIs R300 was a game changer. NV 5900 stunk place up . Can't wait for ATi 5900 it should kick ass. NV 300 had better be good really good. Or ATI will have turned the tables on the 5900 and 300 series cards for ATI/NV . ATI making a great 5900 and NV making a stinky 300.

Live with it until NV shows something , Nv go to back of BUS .
I am still waiting for you to deliver as you promised.
You try and derail all you want too...but untill you keep your word, that is all I will focus on from you.

Day 1: Nemesis still hasn't keept his word.
 

Outrage

Senior member
Oct 9, 1999
217
0
0
He was "absolutely correct in regards to Fermi's timing" even when NVIDIA didn't know themselfes?
Where do you get that "logic" from?

Lets look at his early ramblings:
http://semiaccurate.com/2009/07/29/miracles-happen-gt300-tapes-out/

Lots of doom and gloom...but no mention of them needing a A3 respin.
Then this:
http://semiaccurate.com/2009/11/02/nvidia-finally-gets-fermi-a2-taped-out/
The A2 respin....excalty the same doom and gloom...but no mention of a A3 respin.

Then this:
http://semiaccurate.com/2009/12/10/fermi-a3-silicon-oven/
The A3 respin.
Nobody, not even NVIDIA, knew back June that it would take a A3 respin to get a product.
uhh, in the firts link he talks about 3 spins....

If they got the first one right we would have had cards in december. A1
If they had to do a respin, the first one, cards in february. A2
If they would need a second respin, cards in Q2. A3

He just wrote a timetable. anyone with some insight could do that.
 

Lonyo

Lifer
Aug 10, 2002
21,939
6
81
uhh, in the firts link he talks about 3 spins....

If they got the first one right we would have had cards in december. A1
If they had to do a respin, the first one, cards in february. A2
If they would need a second respin, cards in Q2. A3

He just wrote a timetable. anyone with some insight could do that.
Yup, he wrote a timetable, and it was then up to NV to let people know which timetable they were having to go with.
When it leaked that they'd done an A3, the March-ish or later prediction became the accurate one.
Charlie only ever spelled out every eventuality, giving a variety of possible situations.
The Digitimes story, the one this thread is about, now tells us that one of those predictions was the correct one (obviously, unless NV had to go for A4 one had to be correct).
He can only be right, since he covered all bases to give people an idea of possible launch dates.

God damn you Charlie for trying to tell us what is happening and the implications of those events! GOD DAMN YOU!
 

yh125d

Diamond Member
Dec 23, 2006
6,907
0
76
I guess you didn't read my post with links to Charlie's ramblings...even before the facts where on the table?
He got lucky, because nobody, and I mean nobdy knew that before A2 and A3 respins.
(Meaning that we are down to the "magic crystal-ball" argument..and this link should be played then)



Or you didn't notice that Charlie cleaned up his site, after NVIDA spilled the beans about his affiliation?

And because I dislike Charlie I must be "pro-NVIDIA"?

Nice "logic" there, but you also set yourself up for a nice owngoal there.
Because by that reasoning all that are for Charlie must be "pro-AMD"...or is your circulear logic a one-way street?
I am aware of charlies ramblings, he takes a few facts, applies his logic and comes up with a possible outcome for future events. He doesn't need to know ahead of time that there will be an A3 to make a fud article predicting that, it's just speculation. The whole point of speculation is that it's done without facts or without all the facts and extrapolating to think of possible outcomes. For example, back in the summer sometime charlie took a couple facts - A: TSMC was having mega 40nm problems, and B: I think it was announced that fermi was going to be even bigger than GT200

People get (understandably) mad at charlie and other writers because they confuse his speculation articles as reporting. Reporting =/= speculation. Anand reports, charlie/others speculate. Keep a clear distinction there and all is resolved. I know charlie has a bad habit of trying to parade his speculations as reporting but it's up to the reader to make that distinction.

No, not all charlie haters are pro-nv in my book, but the way you're arguing against him sounds a lot like some of our resident green team. You sound like wreckage
 

Nemesis 1

Lifer
Dec 30, 2006
11,366
2
0
I am still waiting for you to deliver as you promised.
You try and derail all you want too...but untill you keep your word, that is all I will focus on from you.

Day 1: Nemesis still hasn't keept his word.
OH I will deliver but I am warming up . You claim to be logical . Than use that logic and show what I claimed . For me that is more important. But just to eas ya a little here was my logic I said because Nv was doing A massive Arch change On a Massive die I did reason that it would require 4 or 5 steppings . Now that should help you with that search . Wreakage
 

Nemesis 1

Lifer
Dec 30, 2006
11,366
2
0
I am aware of charlies ramblings, he takes a few facts, applies his logic and comes up with a possible outcome for future events. He doesn't need to know ahead of time that there will be an A3 to make a fud article predicting that, it's just speculation. The whole point of speculation is that it's done without facts or without all the facts and extrapolating to think of possible outcomes. For example, back in the summer sometime charlie took a couple facts - A: TSMC was having mega 40nm problems, and B: I think it was announced that fermi was going to be even bigger than GT200

People get (understandably) mad at charlie and other writers because they confuse his speculation articles as reporting. Reporting =/= speculation. Anand reports, charlie/others speculate. Keep a clear distinction there and all is resolved. I know charlie has a bad habit of trying to parade his speculations as reporting but it's up to the reader to make that distinction.

No, not all charlie haters are pro-nv in my book, but the way you're arguing against him sounds a lot like some of our resident green team. You sound like wreckage
I wrote my post befor I read yours , But ya I think your correct.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY